Was it laziness and stupidity, or was it protection money. I thought the deal since WW2 was a US security guarantee, in return for letting the US have our money. A protection racket. Or perhaps it was more like Europe paying tribute to its colonial master.
Anyhow it is clear the protection is not to be relied upon, so it is time to stop paying. It is dangerous making deals with gangsters. It is perhaps more dangerous to change the deal. But when the protection is not there, it is time to build strength.
Well done to France for maintaining its independent nuclear deterrent through this era. Britain made a mistake letting that go
> I thought the deal since WW2 was a US security guarantee, in return for letting the US have our money
No. The Marshall Plan was about rebuilding Europe so it could be a military ally against the Soviet Union. The trade stuff came afterwards.
Was the Marshall plan the only piece of policy between the US and Europe since WW2?
> Was the Marshall plan the only piece of policy between the US and Europe since WW2?
What do you think.
>Britain made a mistake letting that go
https://thebulletin.org/premium/2024-11/united-kingdom-nucle...
It is not clear what point you are trying to make?
That Britain has a nuclear deterrent.
Wait so the US is supposed to provide security at no cost forever? Are you talking about NATO or something else? The only thing I see a problem is all countries paying the same rate to be in NATO.
The cost is us buying their stuff instead of building our own.