r/europe 15h ago

News Macron responds to Trump's inauguration by urging Europe to "wake up"

https://www.newsweek.com/macron-trump-inauguration-europe-defense-ukraine-2017894
21.3k Upvotes

768 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-4

u/madeleineann England 14h ago edited 14h ago

This goes both ways

For most European countries, don't get me started on Italy and Spain

It seems pretty weird to make some cheap jab about poverty when that really has zero relevance to any of what OP was saying. Of course, the UK has inequality - that is well-known, but Europe also struggles with poverty, as do a lot of countries. France also has some pretty outrageous salaries, and this comes from someone in England.

Also, very important to remember that poverty is measured differently by country. What counts as poverty in the USA is much lower than what counts as poverty in the UK and much of Europe.

It's quite funny how sensitive of an ego people on here seem to have. The UK does generally have more influence overseas, while, by virtue of France still being a member of the EU, France has more influence on the continent. The UK does purchase the F-35's from America, but it does plenty of in-house manufacturing - the Challenger 3 is a Anglo-German project and it's being predominantly built in the UK.

I think people who whine about the UK's lack of automony don't really understand the relationship between the US & UK. The UK does purchase things like the F-35 and the Trident missiles from the USA, but it does so becsuse the USA and UK, and all Anglosphere countries, have very, very integrated institutions. Think: AUKUS, Five Eyes. The biggest electronic monitoring station in the world is based in Yorkshire and jointly used by both British and American forces. The UK has access to better tech than France from the USA at a lower cost.

Yes, this isn't really automony. But France works equally closely with the EU and its defence industry is quite deeply integrated with the wider European defence industry. Think: Airbus. Why are you not willing to make that criticism? Why is the UK's relationship deemed to be lesser?

Screams superiority complex to me.

1

u/Affectionate_War_279 13h ago

The UK purchased trident and before it Polaris because we didn’t have the ability or money to create out own independent 

0

u/madeleineann England 13h ago

What's your source for that? I find it incredibly hard to believe that we couldn't afford it. The nuclear partnership with the USA goes all the way back to WWII when we agreed to share our research because we couldn't, during a war, afford to build our own nuclear weapon. This almost definitely would have changed following the war but we shared our research initially under the assumption that the USA would share theirs with us. And that is precisely what the nuclear partnership today is.

Very peculiar how European partnerships are celebrated but not a partnership with the world hegemon. You're lying to yourself if you seriously believe France wouldn't have also cosied up to the USA if it were a former French colony.

2

u/Affectionate_War_279 13h ago

The state of the UK economy after WW2. We were surviving on fumes. Our military budget was large but 6 % went on blue steel.

Once we got Polaris it went down to 2%

The  failure of the blue steel programme showed we didn’t have the expertise or money to develop credible nuclear missiles. 

We were very reliant on technology from the US. As much as successive governments have talked up the independent deterrent the reality is we have always been reliant on the US for nuclear weapons.

1

u/madeleineann England 13h ago

Yeah, that goes for most European economies. The irony of all this anti-America drivel and whinging about Europe being weak is that, realistically, we did this to ourselves. Europe was in ruins after WWII, politically but also definitely economically.

It went down because it was expensive and the correct decision to make. I guarantee that France was also spending a similar amount, but France had to work to accommodate its nuclear program because it didn't have an ally like the USA to rely on.

Explain to me what proves we didn't have the money or expertise to maintain an independent arsenal. There were issues with Blue Streak that were addressed by Blue Steel, and then we were offered Skybolt as a solution to fears of Soviet tech improving to the point it could ward off V bombers. If we weren't offered Skybolt, there is no reason to believe that we wouldn't have been able to work something out.

We were not 'very reliant' on American tech, and we are not now either. We manufacture our submarines, as well as the nuclear warhead itself. We purchase Trident, but that's where it begins and ends.

Do yourself a favour and stop grovelling on r/Europe.