This after the Danish deal for the EU equivalent of Patriots....
78
nolok1 day ago
+60
I mean the Danes were genuinely expecting a US invasion of their territory just a couple months ago, they would be insane to sign a massive defense deal with them as a reward.
It feels like people are so used to Trump and his idiots BS that we're sort of losing track of just how bad it actually is.
60
totoaster1 day ago
+11
About that... We decided to buy even more F35s last October. We also, for some reason, went ahead with an agreement to allow US military bases on Danish soil for the first time. And yes, US military personnel will be outside Danish jurisdiction.
11
ThrowFar_Far_Away22 hr ago
+1
Denmark is like the worst example, the biggest bootlickers of the US. Even right after Trump threatened Greenland they bought more F-35s and allowed American military bases on their soil for the first time.
1
SU37Yellow21 hr ago
+4
Its a complicated issue. The big problem everyone keeps failing to mention is that except for a few things here and there, American weapons are the best money can buy, and due to the economy of scale, they're often competitively priced to actually cheaper then buying the alternatives. Hell the F-35 has a lower per unit cost then the Gripen while being absurdily more capable (yes the Gripen has a lower maintenance cost, but still)
4
Baulderdash7719 hr ago
+3
The problem with the F35 is the operating cost per hour and the low availability (it’s famously a garage queen). It’s reputably superior while in the air though.
But if the mission readiness rate is 50% vs 85%- you need a larger fleet to keep viability.
3
SU37Yellow18 hr ago
-3
The F-35's availability rate is still better then any of the alternatives. Sweden has yet to successfully fulfill an export order for the Gripen, there's only about 300 Gripens, there's around 600 Typhoons (the other European made fighter), theres about 300 Rafales (the French fighter), there's more F-35s available then all of those combined. And there's no argument the F-35 is better any of the other option. You can be less maintenance intensive all you want, but it doesn't matter when your aircraft gets blown out of the sky by a SAM that the F-35 would have been able to hide from.
-3
DarthGader14 hr ago
2 questions
Who do European countries see themselves at war with?
Do they have the means to achieve air superiority against this hypothetical enemy?
Because if not neither that F35 nor that Grippen is ever flying a sortie.
0
WhisperingHammer14 hr ago
+2
Look at Ulraine. The game is to make it so costly to attack so that you cannot achieve a win.
And the answer nowadays is:
European countries also see USA as a potential aggressor. You know, because they openly say they sre thinking about attacking.
2
DarthGader14 hr ago
+1
.... Are we following the same wars online? Both the Ukraine AND the Iran war show how in house supply chains, quick manufacturing times, low/no foreign component dependency beat wundervaffen systems every time.
Either the danes need to make their own weapons and doctrine (If Denmark goes against Russia they dont have the means to achieve air superiority to let F35s roam the sky)
Or accept they're a vassal to the States, give up Greenland and stop making so much noise.
1
Idiot_Savant_1321 hr ago
One way to deplete America's weapons ***is*** to buy 'em. MIght've been a self-defense move?
0
Prior_Industry13 hr ago
+1
*If* they deliver them. Tbh id rather spend the money developing our own systems now. So many lessons being taught to the EU either via Americas actions and words or from how wars have been conducted around the world. You need self reliance in this space, even if it's slightly less effective and more costly.
1
Idiot_Savant_136 hr ago
+1
No argument - interdependent logistical binds was intended to keep everyone in detente; it didn't.
What it has done is given an entitled few access to specific bottlenecks so they can cut of necessary stuff at any point, via remote control.
It's gonna change, largely due to incompetence in management.
Until it does, watch for people to use the old tricks even when they don't make sense; most folks are just used to talking about problems, not acting up on them.
1
Bishopjones21121 day ago
+95
I’m pretty sure it hegseth on a stage in a room full of American generals and admirals when he said FAFO. Well if this isn’t a sweet little turn of events. So America has fucked around and now they are finding out. From simple things like the EU moving to Linux vice Microsoft, to the myriad of defence procurement solutions being sourced from anywhere but the United States. The generational trust in allies has been broken repeatedly by the United States and its rhetoric. This broken trust is likely never to be repaired, well at least not in the next 20 plus years. I hope one day the people of the United States realize they have created their own problems and will have to deal with it before being invited back to the world stage as peers, because right now they are joke at best, and really for most they are seen as a liability or threat.
95
Prior_Industry1 day ago
+20
It's been a lesson in not become over reliant on a partner. Maybe people forget this in 50 years time, but I cant see things ever being the same in the short term. US ego would not withstand the back tracking they would have to do.
20
panda___papi1 day ago
+8
Diversification makes the country stronger.
8
alexefi1 day ago
+11
I see it going the way russia is going bow. There will be mass propaganda campaigns where it will say europe is bad usa numba one. Elections will get rigged, you will get stuck with dictator for few decades, where your export will rely on pertodollar which slowly keep going away, some booze, and weapons to whoever willing to buy, like africans warlords and other countries that have dictators. Eventually you start selling more of your own oil to keep light on, while oil derivatives inside country would get more expensive.
11
Bishopjones21121 day ago
+7
Hold on now buds. Remember to use “they or them”, not “you”. Because I’m not part of that shit show. I’m Canadian.
7
SirDale16 hr ago
"I hope one day the people of the United States realize they have created their own problems"
That would require a level of introspection not available to a sufficient level of their citizens.
Constantly being fed on a diet of "U.S.A. is the greatest" points a lot of the population's minds in any direction other than self reflection, and honest assessments of the failures of their own country, or of the qualities of others. They have such a narrow view of the world.
My wife's friend was visiting her Australian son and US daughter-in-law in America.
"Would you ever become a US citizen?" they asked.
"God no!"
The room went silent.
We went on a trip to Europe last year and went on a walking tour in a city. Tour guide starts off asking where everyone comes from. "Ireland", "Australia", "France" etc. Got to the Americans and it wasn't the "USA", it was "Texas", "California". 🤦
Another tour group had a family with teenagers. Teenager asked "Do you celebrate the 4th of July?".
0
SupX1 day ago
+36
this will increase the cost of usa defense a lot as before a lot rnd could be offset by selling to many allies now no one will want to buy.....
36
TtotheC811 day ago
+21
Yes, but Trump will simply blame it on us ungrateful Europeans. I mean, it's not like he's ever going to take responsibility for his own f*** ups.
21
ajicrystal1 day ago
+23
The US sells weapons but controls all updates, spares and communication with other systems. Bit by bit non US NATO countries need to build alternates. Its best not to rely on an unreliable country. A declining US is going to get more unpredicatable, frustrated and nastier.
23
Mistral-Fien1 day ago
+9
> A declining US is going to get more unpredicatable, frustrated and nastier.
Just like Russia then. :I
9
ajicrystal1 day ago
+2
I dont see Russia changing its policies, as questionable as they are, every few hours.
2
Alone_Again_221 hr ago
+1
No, they make terrible decisions, and godammit, they stick to them!
1
ajicrystal18 hr ago
+1
lol. you can deal with distasteful rational actors. you cant deal with irrational ones.
1
Rhiney621 hr ago
+3
So reading the article, they were originally going Boeing again with the E7, but Defense spending changed and the program was canceled. So it looks like they aren’t going US because there isn’t a US option, but there originally were.
3
isthereadrwho18 hr ago
+3
It's a more advanced radar, and depending on whose numbers you believe it's 100 to 150 million less per plane. Sign me up b****
28 Comments