While Secretary General, Ismay is also credited as having been the first person to say that the purpose of NATO was "to keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down," a saying that has since become a common way to describe the dynamics of NATO
As opposed to what, the United States of Guatemala? It’s more or less the same story everywhere in the developed world. At least China’s not seeking to replace their extant populations with foreigners.
Really strange seeing people (often gleefully) parrot these talking points, unaware of their own malaise.
I think the United States and a India are much better positioned with respect to demographics, with like a generational lead on Europe and Asia. The U.S. has lots more millennials, with much more balanced sex ratios, than Europe or Asia, at least in proportion. Feel free to fact check me though.
Eventually, a generation or two later, the same phenomenon would hit them as well. But it's difficult to reason about what the world will be like even after it gets Europe and Asia. The world economy and geopolitical community would collapse or something, which could influence demographics in yet further weird ways. :O
> It’s more or less the same story everywhere in the developed world.
I don't think it is all the same story.
Americans don't have enough children to sustain their population, but they can make it up with immigration. So do most developed countries, with rare exceptions (consider Israel)
Compare Australia: same story, but with one fundamental difference: US is experiencing uncontrolled mass immigration over its southern land border, immigration to Australia is much more selective, with strong preference given to people like university graduates.
Uncontrolled, non-selective mass immigration is likely to cause much greater problems than controlled selective mass immigration.
And Australia isn't unique here, I think Canada and New Zealand are closer to Australia than to the US in this regard.
On top of that, there's inflation and the value-added tax, which mean that, once all the extra costs have been covered, only about €50 to €70 billion will be left over to spend on actual hardware. "The longer you have this money sit around somewhere, the longer factors like inflation and interest payments have to eat away at this pile," Loss said.[0]
There has been some criticism from European allies, and within Germany, that so many big orders have been placed in the United States.
Depriving local industry. And of what use is this anyway. Why on earth would Germany need ballistic missile defense etc.
>quickly
Two years in, the entire West still cannot outproduce Russia. Let alone Russia plus friends. For the most part, dependable large orders—necessary for expansion—aren’t coming. Overall, deindustrialization is only accelerating.
Italy just ordered 132 L2s for 2027–2037. Pathetic timeframe. These tanks will be obsolete by then.
>NATO wants America in
There is no NATO without the US. Something could conceivably carry the same name but it would not be the same thing. NATO is and has always been an instrument of American control over Europe.
>angry orange political candidate
Remember when Trump ordered a reduction of the occupation force in Germany (35k then)? Well, Serious People got Very Nervous and the military stalled the order. In fact, the generals were in a state of barely concealed mutiny then. And now there’s 50k.
So, rest assured: Germany will be Kept Down for the foreseeable future.
Two years of proxy war. Two years of stressing the necessity of defeating Russia in Ukraine—or at least denying it victory. Two years of coming to the realization that you can’t just turn money into weapons, it takes an industry. Money that they can’t really spare anyway. Two years of realizing that sanctions work both ways, and only one side came prepared. Two years of trusting the experts.
One and a half years of believing sanctions + weapons + training + the greatest ever kontrastnupol were going to do the trick. They really thought it was going to work.
