Am perfectly OK with that if this money is spent within the EU, with the goal of making it able to defend itself without the US.
Yes, specially for the weapons manufacturing industry in the US or owned by US companies. While US spending stays at 3.4% or so. Wtf, EU, you lost spine entirely?
I think you’re missing a lot of the context here.
The collective agreement means that 3.5% of GDP will be spent on defense and 1.5% on defense related measures (cybersecurity, infrastructure security etc.). It applies to all countries in the alliance, including the US.
The US already spends around 3.5% on defense according to Reuters and there is no requirement to use US manufacturers over others.
I am not saying increasing defence spending is a good thing, just that you or the headlines have misinterpreted the agreement.
Europe seems to be turning inwards on defense spending. In any case, what would you ask the EU to do instead? Almost every intelligence agency is predicting a major threat from Russia in the next few years.
Which is bollocks. Russia, which can’t even beat Ukraine in first place, is supposed now to attack NATO as well - a nuclear alliance? And even if it tries, what with? T-34, motorcycles and volunteers from Africa? That said, the Orange is pushing for 5% spending more or less because he counts that a big chunk of that will be spent in the US. And EU, goes blindly with that percentage merely to appease him. Do you think that number has some thoughtful meaning? It’s just a number Orange spitted out without context…
