(03-05-2019 09:01 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I suppose we can pull data to support whatever argument we need it to support ... yet in terms of goods and services the EU is the largest at 1.2 trillion annually. I don’t think we can walk away from that and not be significantly impacted.

https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europ...pean-union

Who said we are walking away from that? Without the EU, the trade still happens.

(03-05-2019 09:06 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 09:01 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  I suppose we can pull data to support whatever argument we need it to support ... yet in terms of goods and services the EU is the largest at 1.2 trillion annually. I don’t think we can walk away from that and not be significantly impacted.

https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europ...pean-union

Who said we are walking away from that? Without the EU, the trade still happens.

typical leftist... only thinks about the government. Doesn't give a seconds thought to the real people living there.
Yes, even if the EU breaks up, the people in Europe will still need goods. The Trade isnt going anywhere overnight.
But the only thing the leftists care about is large gov entities. Thats why they make grandiose claims like this.
They care more about big gov and consolidated power than they do about people... its that simple.

(03-04-2019 10:13 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(03-04-2019 08:43 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Anything that damages the EU's quest to be a sovereign entity that controls its nations is a good thing.

...it certainly is for the Russians but I don't know how good it actually is for us.

Why? On both points?

(03-05-2019 08:15 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(03-04-2019 11:50 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Perhaps because member nations in the EU are our closest strategic and economic allies, and the Russians have nuclear warheads pointed at American cities.

Our closest strategic allies are Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Poland. In that order.
Our closest economic allies are Mexico and Canada.

(03-04-2019 10:17 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  The EU is our largest trading partner and the NATO members nations that comprise it are bound to us, if we are attacked as we are if they are.

Our largest trading partner is NAFTA. We have the largest peaceful energy transfer in natural gas sales to Mexico in world history. The US has less than 10% of GDP involved in international trade. When you remove NAFTA it is more like 2-4% of GDP. The EuroZone isn't even a blip on the damn radar. The US could shut off all its ports tomorrow and not suffer a full on depression. No other country can say that. We're the least involved military power when it comes to participation in the global system of trade and commerce. Most Americans work for smaller companies. They don't trade internationally much if at all. When you think America playing ball in a global scale ... think of the Fortune 100. Coca-Cola. McDonalds. Exxon. IBM. Microsoft. Red Hat. Ford. GE. Boeing. Those people are hugely outnumbered by small and medium businesses.



If you're getting this EU #1 trading partner thing from an actual source, you should look for the statistical fine print. For example, the US Census data on trade doesn't includes FDI or Services. Kind of like how the government inflation figures don't include food and energy (e.g. - are at best deceitful).

The USA is so big that we don't need as much international trade as small countries.

But I'll correct you on one thing:
Our closest strategic allies are the UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, France, South Korea, and Poland. In that order.

Japan has more military capabilities than the Brits these days, and they're with us 100%. Only reason they're not higher on the list is that they rely on us to help contain China.

The French have closely coordinated with us on Syria, Somolian pirates, and many other operations. Other than us & the Brits, they're the only NATO ally that has the ability to mount independent operations.

The South Koreans and the Poles realize how heavily they rely on us for protection (unlike most of NATO). So they try to contribute to the alliance in any way possible. But there's very little they can do for us due to their small size & their own commitments.

For decades, New Zealand hasn't let our most of navy ships dock in their ports (because our ships are nuclear powered). They cooperate closely with us on intelligence but other than that they view their role similar to Ireland (an ally that is so small that they think their biggest contribution to the alliance is trying to be our conscience).

(03-05-2019 02:43 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The USA is so big that we don't need as much international trade as small countries.
But I'll correct you on one thing:
Our closest strategic allies are the UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, France, South Korea, and Poland. In that order.
Japan has more military capabilities than the Brits these days, and they're with us 100%. Only reason they're not higher on the list is that they rely on us to help contain China.
The French have closely coordinated with us on Syria, Somolian pirates, and many other operations. Other than us & the Brits, they're the only NATO ally that has the ability to mount independent operations.
The South Koreans and the Poles realize how heavily they rely on us for protection (unlike most of NATO). So they try to contribute to the alliance in any way possible. But there's very little they can do for us due to their small size & their own commitments.
For decades, New Zealand hasn't let our most of navy ships dock in their ports (because our ships are nuclear powered). They cooperate closely with us on intelligence but other than that they view their role similar to Ireland (an ally that is so small that they think their biggest contribution to the alliance is trying to be our conscience).

And I'll correct you on one thing. It's not because our ships are nuclear powered (except for submarines and aircraft carriers, none are) but rather because they have the capability to carry nuclear weapons (ASROC, for example) and we as a matter of policy have refused to state whether any particular ship is carrying such weapons at any time.

(03-05-2019 02:43 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 08:15 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(03-04-2019 11:50 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Perhaps because member nations in the EU are our closest strategic and economic allies, and the Russians have nuclear warheads pointed at American cities.

Our closest strategic allies are Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Poland. In that order.
Our closest economic allies are Mexico and Canada.

(03-04-2019 10:17 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  The EU is our largest trading partner and the NATO members nations that comprise it are bound to us, if we are attacked as we are if they are.

Our largest trading partner is NAFTA. We have the largest peaceful energy transfer in natural gas sales to Mexico in world history. The US has less than 10% of GDP involved in international trade. When you remove NAFTA it is more like 2-4% of GDP. The EuroZone isn't even a blip on the damn radar. The US could shut off all its ports tomorrow and not suffer a full on depression. No other country can say that. We're the least involved military power when it comes to participation in the global system of trade and commerce. Most Americans work for smaller companies. They don't trade internationally much if at all. When you think America playing ball in a global scale ... think of the Fortune 100. Coca-Cola. McDonalds. Exxon. IBM. Microsoft. Red Hat. Ford. GE. Boeing. Those people are hugely outnumbered by small and medium businesses.



If you're getting this EU #1 trading partner thing from an actual source, you should look for the statistical fine print. For example, the US Census data on trade doesn't includes FDI or Services. Kind of like how the government inflation figures don't include food and energy (e.g. - are at best deceitful).

The USA is so big that we don't need as much international trade as small countries.

But I'll correct you on one thing:
Our closest strategic allies are the UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, France, South Korea, and Poland. In that order.

Japan has more military capabilities than the Brits these days, and they're with us 100%. Only reason they're not higher on the list is that they rely on us to help contain China.

The French have closely coordinated with us on Syria, Somolian pirates, and many other operations. Other than us & the Brits, they're the only NATO ally that has the ability to mount independent operations.

The South Koreans and the Poles realize how heavily they rely on us for protection (unlike most of NATO). So they try to contribute to the alliance in any way possible. But there's very little they can do for us due to their small size & their own commitments.

For decades, New Zealand hasn't let our most of navy ships dock in their ports (because our ships are nuclear powered). They cooperate closely with us on intelligence but other than that they view their role similar to Ireland (an ally that is so small that they think their biggest contribution to the alliance is trying to be our conscience).

Ireland is officially neutral. They actually have debates on whether they should have an army at all.