> says the guy worried that the us not sending the equipment we procured at great cost over many years destabilizes the security of europe. where is your stockpile? what? the point was that there is no stockpile (for germany by the way in large part because of conditions set for reunification, guess by whom, lol) because we were (stupidly) relying on the us, and the us was getting soft power in return. never did i say we had stockpiles. it's just not free-riding because it's an exchange the us profited from too. where the fuck do you think all the logistics to the middle east is being handled from? > already happened during obama.  you misread that. a pivot by europe away from the us. > then why aren't you aware of these major changes that happened under obama? perhaps it is because your government and press avoided criticizing him? i am aware. i just think your characterization that the us is benevolently defending europe and not getting anything back in return is wrong. as i see it, the us deliberately worked to establish a security infrastructure in europe that would keep us dependent, and now is bitching about the consequences of their own actions.
Germany