The Danish defence minister also said he sees “no imminent threat” to Denmark’s territorial integrity, despite Trump’s repeated threats to annex Greenland.
On the one hand, I don’t see the point of raising the defence budget just to hand all that money we are actually taking out as loans over to the US. A major point of the whole shebang should be to drive EU-domestic investment and jobs.
On the other hand, WTF Denmark? Anyone Danish here can explain Danish politics and how this guy is not secretly getting off on being cucked by Trump?
“But I think we could do more here in Europe to have a focus on developing new capabilities,” Poulsen said, adding that military investments would make it “so that we are not that dependent on the US”.
Sounds like he’s saying that we’re so deeply dependent on the US for now that a screeching halt to our purchasing of US military equipment would de facto dismantle our defences. But that we should work to get out of that dependency.
No, we are as baffled as you are. Arrogance and stupidity is good general universal explanation for a lot of the shit that government have been doing these past years. The only admirable thing they have been doing is really their staunch and continued economic support of Ukraine.
A major point of the whole shebang should be to drive EU-domestic investment and jobs.
I agree that IF you have to spend money on defense, you might as well do it domestically but that should be an added bonus, not a major point.
Economically speaking, the defense industry is a terrible investment. At best the goods it produces just sit there and are never needed, at worst they are used up. The US military industrial complex is not a healthy, useful or productive industry. Jobs in just about any other industry are more useful for society and/or the economy.
Defense spending should be purely driven by security requirements. Potential jobs created are a nice bonus but should not be part of why you’re doing it.
Maintaining and expanding the railway network however is equally important for Civilian purposes. It is not that the military adds a need that previously didn’t exist. And we get in a very problematic area, if public infrastructure investments are made dependent on having a military purpose too. This creates a hierarchy of needs where the military is put to the forefront, subsequently creating a militarized society.
The US defense spending is different to ours in that it is economically useful. In short, it enforces the petrodollar, thus forcing everyone to buy dollars, thus everyone pays for their inflation.
On the one hand, I don’t see the point of raising the defence budget just to hand all that money we are actually taking out as loans over to the US. A major point of the whole shebang should be to drive EU-domestic investment and jobs.
On the other hand, WTF Denmark? Anyone Danish here can explain Danish politics and how this guy is not secretly getting off on being cucked by Trump?
Sounds like he’s saying that we’re so deeply dependent on the US for now that a screeching halt to our purchasing of US military equipment would de facto dismantle our defences. But that we should work to get out of that dependency.
No, we are as baffled as you are. Arrogance and stupidity is good general universal explanation for a lot of the shit that government have been doing these past years. The only admirable thing they have been doing is really their staunch and continued economic support of Ukraine.
I think it’s just a follow up on the recent NATO meeting where everyone decided to suck Trump’s cock to make him shut up and play along.
Troels Lund Poulsen is the perfect tool for that.
I agree that IF you have to spend money on defense, you might as well do it domestically but that should be an added bonus, not a major point.
Economically speaking, the defense industry is a terrible investment. At best the goods it produces just sit there and are never needed, at worst they are used up. The US military industrial complex is not a healthy, useful or productive industry. Jobs in just about any other industry are more useful for society and/or the economy.
Defense spending should be purely driven by security requirements. Potential jobs created are a nice bonus but should not be part of why you’re doing it.
A lot of the money can and should be spent on dual-use stuff.
For example, the biggest hurdle that prevents the deployment of the armies of Europe to the Eastern flank is the state of the railway network.
Maintaining and expanding the railway network however is equally important for Civilian purposes. It is not that the military adds a need that previously didn’t exist. And we get in a very problematic area, if public infrastructure investments are made dependent on having a military purpose too. This creates a hierarchy of needs where the military is put to the forefront, subsequently creating a militarized society.
Yup, that’s where we’re heading
The US defense spending is different to ours in that it is economically useful. In short, it enforces the petrodollar, thus forcing everyone to buy dollars, thus everyone pays for their inflation.