Donald Trump’s Rumored EU Ambassador Says He Could Help Bring It Down

[JA]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_588b36a4e4b0230ce61b370e?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's an excellent pick if Trump's goal is to please Russia and infuriate Germany and the majority of EU citizens who'd staunchly object to any American interference in their affairs. The EU, despite its flaws, has helped ensure there have been no wars within its borders and that all its members (and aspiring members) maintain a fairly liberal, democratic state.

NATO is target number one for Russia and America's fringes, yet it has also helped deter Russian interference in Eastern Europe and sheltered small, defenseless countries, like those in the Baltics, from being invaded on trumped up grounds by an enormous, hostile neighbor.

[Torie]

Why does Trump want to bring down the EU?  Sure, one can speculate, but has he said why?  Yes, I know, he loves Brexit, but that is not the same thing as wanting to bring down the EU. The Donald does not seem to realize that hurting economies elsewhere, particularly major ones, also hurts the US economy. The US is not an economic autarky - at least not yet.

[JJC]

Good. Maybe the citizens can once again have their country back, and decide how they want to govern themselves, instead of elitist bureaucrats from foreign lands.

The EU was doomed from the start.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Good. Maybe the citizens can once again have their country back, and decide how they want to govern themselves, instead of elitist bureaucrats from foreign lands.

The EU was doomed from the start.

It's not quite how it works. An overall political direction remains with heads of governments of individual states, operating as the European Council, with largest countries obviously having more saying. If anything, the EU doesn't have its own effective government, policy-making wise.

EU is not a federal entity, though I wish it would be. Its still an international organization. If you're going to claim individual governments in individual states have no power, you have no bloody idea about what you're talking about.

[Person Man]

Why does Trump want to bring down the EU?  Sure, one can speculate, but has he said why?  Yes, I know, he loves Brexit, but that is not the same thing as wanting to bring down the EU. The Donald does not seem to realize that hurting economies elsewhere, particularly major ones, also hurts the US economy. The US is not an economic autarky - at least not yet.

Could it just be that he and his voters just don't like anyone who is different?

[Tirnam]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_588b36a4e4b0230ce61b370e?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's an excellent pick if Trump's goal is to please Russia and infuriate Germany and the majority of EU citizens who'd staunchly object to any American interference in their affairs. The EU, despite its flaws, has helped ensure there have been no wars within its borders and that all its members (and aspiring members) maintain a fairly liberal, democratic state.

NATO is target number one for Russia and America's fringes, yet it has also helped deter Russian interference in Eastern Europe and sheltered small, defenseless countries, like those in the Baltics, from being invaded on trumped up grounds by an enormous, hostile neighbor.

Germany (and all 27 others States) can decide to stop his nomination. Trump will have to find another plan to destroy the EU.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Excellent.

[Mr. Reactionary]

EU = silent assassin of European democracy.

[Cashew]

Excellent.

[America Needs R'hllor]

Absolutely disgusting. I assume Trump and everyone who supports it forgot that Europe was, less than a century ago, a war-ridden region where everyone fought everyone and millions died. The EU brought it peace and prosperity, but maybe Trump wants to see some good ol' war there.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

If the EU accepts this man, they are officially cucks that deserve to be broken up.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Absolutely disgusting. I assume Trump and everyone who supports it forgot that Europe was, less than a century ago, a war-ridden region where everyone fought everyone and millions died. The EU brought it peace and prosperity, but maybe Trump wants to see some good ol' war there.

No, they have us to think of that. Every hundred years or so, they devolve into some savage continental war and the last two times we had to come and mop up the mess. All the EU has served to do was to ensure that Western Europe was an American puppet until the point that the EU leaders actually became more globally respected and influential than our own President under Obama.

[GoTfan]

This would be direct subversion, and if he does, could be considered espionage. What's the penalty for espionage in Europe?

[America Needs R'hllor]

Absolutely disgusting. I assume Trump and everyone who supports it forgot that Europe was, less than a century ago, a war-ridden region where everyone fought everyone and millions died. The EU brought it peace and prosperity, but maybe Trump wants to see some good ol' war there.

No, they have us to think of that. Every hundred years or so, they devolve into some savage continental war and the last two times we had to come and mop up the mess. All the EU has served to do was to ensure that Western Europe was an American puppet until the point that the EU leaders actually became more globally respected and influential than our own President under Obama.

That's some very big credit you give America. You didn't "mop up the mess", in fact, you only joined after direct aggression in WW2. Britain and the Soviet Union had a big part, no less than the United States and probably more.
From personal interaction with people living there, post-Soviet countries like Lithuania really benefited from the European Union and it helped them get up from their feet. It gave them stability and security, and yes, prevents these big continential wars by slowly soothing old enmities. Europe needs this Union. In fact, I support more of these kinds of unions happening in war-ridden areas, especailly in Africa. Also, the European Union was the only western power who could rival the United States as an economic power.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Absolutely disgusting. I assume Trump and everyone who supports it forgot that Europe was, less than a century ago, a war-ridden region where everyone fought everyone and millions died. The EU brought it peace and prosperity, but maybe Trump wants to see some good ol' war there.

No, they have us to think of that. Every hundred years or so, they devolve into some savage continental war and the last two times we had to come and mop up the mess. All the EU has served to do was to ensure that Western Europe was an American puppet until the point that the EU leaders actually became more globally respected and influential than our own President under Obama.

That's some very big credit you give America. You didn't "mop up the mess", in fact, you only joined after direct aggression in WW2. Britain and the Soviet Union had a big part, no less than the United States and probably more.
From personal interaction with people living there, post-Soviet countries like Lithuania really benefited from the European Union and it helped them get up from their feet. It gave them stability and security, and yes, prevents these big continential wars by slowly soothing old enmities. Europe needs this Union. In fact, I support more of these kinds of unions happening in war-ridden areas, especailly in Africa. Also, the European Union was the only western power who could rival the United States as an economic power.

Well, I'm a firm believer that we shouldn't have intervened in Europe at all had Hitler not declared war on us after Pearl Harbor, so to hear this attitude only makes my position more gratifying. The EU is crumbling of course, and a big part of that is because it hasn't actually healed any divides. It was intended too. But has it? People are grasping for their sovereignty at a time when the EU has been aggressively pursuing a clash with Russia, and I don't think this sudden revitalization of nationalism came out of thin air.

We'll see how effective the EU is if Russian tanks are ever on the outskirts of Berlin again in about twenty years. I sure hope that when that happens, our forces are nice and safe in our own hemisphere. Maybe we can spend that money building Lyndon LaRouche's super reservoir to deal with the global water shortages that the UN can't deal with. 

[America Needs R'hllor]

Absolutely disgusting. I assume Trump and everyone who supports it forgot that Europe was, less than a century ago, a war-ridden region where everyone fought everyone and millions died. The EU brought it peace and prosperity, but maybe Trump wants to see some good ol' war there.

No, they have us to think of that. Every hundred years or so, they devolve into some savage continental war and the last two times we had to come and mop up the mess. All the EU has served to do was to ensure that Western Europe was an American puppet until the point that the EU leaders actually became more globally respected and influential than our own President under Obama.

That's some very big credit you give America. You didn't "mop up the mess", in fact, you only joined after direct aggression in WW2. Britain and the Soviet Union had a big part, no less than the United States and probably more.
From personal interaction with people living there, post-Soviet countries like Lithuania really benefited from the European Union and it helped them get up from their feet. It gave them stability and security, and yes, prevents these big continential wars by slowly soothing old enmities. Europe needs this Union. In fact, I support more of these kinds of unions happening in war-ridden areas, especailly in Africa. Also, the European Union was the only western power who could rival the United States as an economic power.

Well, I'm a firm believer that we shouldn't have intervened in Europe at all had Hitler not declared war on us after Pearl Harbor, so to hear this attitude only makes my position more gratifying. The EU is crumbling of course, and a big part of that is because it hasn't actually healed any divides. It was intended too. But has it? People are grasping for their sovereignty at a time when the EU has been aggressively pursuing a clash with Russia, and I don't think this sudden revitalization of nationalism came out of thin air.

We'll see how effective the EU is if Russian tanks are ever on the outskirts of Berlin again in about twenty years. I sure hope that when that happens, our forces are nice and safe in our own hemisphere. Maybe we can spend that money building Lyndon LaRouche's super reservoir to deal with the global water shortages that the UN can't deal with.  

Sure, huddling in your corner of the world and 'dealing with our own problems' sounds nice in theory, but we are living in a global village. If America doesn't project its strength to keep the world balanced, the West will no longer be the leading global powerhouse, and someone will fill the void. The utopic dream you described earlier, where each area has a power with a sphere of influence, won't happen because humans are ambitious and a new superpower is bound to emerge.
You may enjoy the first years of huddling in your corner of the world, but when China or Russia is the new superpowers and all of your allies have collapsed because "I don't want to be the world's policeman", it will come back to bite you. So in short,  If Russian tanks are near Berlin, you can be sure that America will be affected, and not positively. The EU is very important to prevent that, by keeping a united, democratic Europe. I disagree that divisions are not being healed- just look at Germany. There is much more work to be done in eastern and southern Europe, though. This work will not be done if the EU falls.

[The_Doctor]

The European Union needs reform but it shouldn't be dissolved or annuled. It needs to be basically Constitution Convention'd and reformed into a much more effective and responsive organization (responsive to its individual constituents).

I'd hope that we maintain nuclear warheads at Moscow in the event that the Commies - rrm, I mean the Russians were ever near Berlin.

[America Needs R'hllor]

The European Union needs reform but it shouldn't be dissolved or annuled. It needs to be basically Constitution Convention'd and reformed into a much more effective and responsive organization (responsive to its individual constituents).

I'd hope that we maintain nuclear warheads at Moscow in the event that the Commies - rrm, I mean the Russians were ever near Berlin.

Yeah, I agree with that. And after a revival, it should let Ukraine and Georgia join.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_588b36a4e4b0230ce61b370e?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's an excellent pick if Trump's goal is to please Russia and infuriate Germany and the majority of EU citizens who'd staunchly object to any American interference in their affairs. The EU, despite its flaws, has helped ensure there have been no wars within its borders and that all its members (and aspiring members) maintain a fairly liberal, democratic state.

NATO is target number one for Russia and America's fringes, yet it has also helped deter Russian interference in Eastern Europe and sheltered small, defenseless countries, like those in the Baltics, from being invaded on trumped up grounds by an enormous, hostile neighbor.

-The alternative facts are strong with this one.

[Angel of Death]

If the European Union is supposedly so awful, why does this reality need to be pointed out by those outside of it?

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The EU has maybe less than a decade to go, and certainly doesn't need the US' help to collapse.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Sure, huddling in your corner of the world and 'dealing with our own problems' sounds nice in theory, but we are living in a global village.

No, we live in a global village because we're told we live in a global village. It doesn't have to be a global village and I've yet to see a convincing argument in support of the world order remaining as is. As the world of 2017 proves, the post-war order is not merely outdated. It has failed.

If America doesn't project its strength to keep the world balanced, the West will no longer be the leading global powerhouse, and someone will fill the void. The utopic dream you described earlier, where each area has a power with a sphere of influence, won't happen because humans are ambitious and a new superpower is bound to emerge.

Of course. Why is that necessary a bad thing? The world we live in today will be dramatically different in a millennium. A thousand years ago, the Roman Empire was only still a fairly recent historical power. Empires collapse. That is not something that is inherently wrong.

I fail to see why an empowered Russia is an actual threat. Even if Putin was some type of conqueror in the nature of Napoleon or Hitler, I fail to see how it is even remotely conceivable for Russian tanks to role through Paris once again. Perhaps the EU ought to quit antagonizing Russia. Perhaps if Russia wasn't encircled by the nuclear powers of Europe and Asia they wouldn't feel the need to project power.

You may enjoy the first years of huddling in your corner of the world, but when China or Russia is the new superpowers and all of your allies have collapsed because "I don't want to be the world's policeman", it will come back to bite you. So in short,  If Russian tanks are near Berlin, you can be sure that America will be affected, and not positively.

I'll eat a hat the day comes when it is Europe rescuing America, and not the other way around.

The EU is very important to prevent that, by keeping a united, democratic Europe. I disagree that divisions are not being healed- just look at Germany. There is much more work to be done in eastern and southern Europe, though. This work will not be done if the EU falls.

The EU isn't about "protecting democracy." It is basically a consortium of European powers that have united to exercise their failed policies on a larger scale. Yet, looking at the present situation in Europe on a broad scale, I see literally nothing to be proud about. They can't keep their nations secure. A few nations have been forced to take bailouts from the IMF. They can't keep Putin at bay on their own.

[JA]

The amount of anti-EU propaganda today simply shows how successful the union has really been. How many Germans or Swedes or Italians or Romanians are worried about a war in their countries, save for potential Russian aggression? Do the French and Germans worry about fighting each other? Do the Spanish worry about a new civil war? Do Poles worry about Germans invading? Does America have to concern itself with Europe plunging into another major war? No, because of the peace and stability brought to the continent after WWII by the post-war international order.

Europeans a mere 50 years ago couldn't have fathomed the amount of peace and prosperity their children and grandchildren are experiencing. Imagine a grandparent in Hungary, who can now not worry about the Russians invading, Stalinism being imposed on them, and can Skype their granddaughter who moved to Amsterdam for work. Yes, it does raise legitimate concerns about immigration, cultural identity, the role of the nation state, and bureaucratic incompetence and elitism in Brussels. But those can and should be addressed through reforms, not abandoning the entire institution.

Europeans and those in the Anglo world today are incredibly spoiled and privileged in ways older generations couldn't have imagined. Yet it's due precisely to this comfort and security that we're willing to pursue such reckless policies as Brexit. People ignorantly believe the EU sponsored framework of peaceful cooperation will continue even after its death. It won't. There'd be no stabilizing mechanism and countries would eventually return to focusing on old ethnic rivalries and nationalistic self-interest that'd result in trade wars, then real wars. These nationalists who're upset with the current world order (and there are many legitimate reasons to be upset with it) are playing a dangerous game that could have very serious consequences.

[America Needs R'hllor]

No, we live in a global village because we're told we live in a global village. It doesn't have to be a global village and I've yet to see a convincing argument in support of the world order remaining as is. As the world of 2017 proves, the post-war order is not merely outdated. It has failed.

Of course it has to be a global village. The internet exists, TV exists, flight exists. And it'll only become more and more of a global village. You can't prevent a US citizen from reading and caring about a genocide in Syria. You can't convince a French citizen not to care about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict he's reading about. Nations can't huddle in their corner anymore, not if they're economically prosperous even to a small degree. You can't change it without magically deleting the internet.

Of course. Why is that necessary a bad thing? The world we live in today will be dramatically different in a millennium. A thousand years ago, the Roman Empire was only still a fairly recent historical power. Empires collapse. That is not something that is inherently wrong.

I fail to see why an empowered Russia is an actual threat. Even if Putin was some type of conqueror in the nature of Napoleon or Hitler, I fail to see how it is even remotely conceivable for Russian tanks to role through Paris once again. Perhaps the EU ought to quit antagonizing Russia. Perhaps if Russia wasn't encircled by the nuclear powers of Europe and Asia they wouldn't feel the need to project power.

Do you believe in democracy? Equal human rights for all, the freedom of speech? If you don't, then our differences are too large to even begin discussing this issue. But I believe  you do. So why is it so hard to see how an authoritative country dominating the world order is negative? Just look at the way the world was while the US is the superpower. Democracy is the norm, and there's a powerful check on every country that decides it wants to expand on its neighbours' behalf. If this check no longer exists... Think of a world where Nazi Germany is the dominant power, just to a much lesser degree. Democracy is no longer the norm, and countries like Russia and China can do whatever they wish to their weak neighbors. And of course empires fall, but you can't willingly allow world dominance to fall into the hands of authoritative scum who deny their citizens almost every human right.

The EU isn't about "protecting democracy." It is basically a consortium of European powers that have united to exercise their failed policies on a larger scale. Yet, looking at the present situation in Europe on a broad scale, I see literally nothing to be proud about. They can't keep their nations secure. A few nations have been forced to take bailouts from the IMF. They can't keep Putin at bay on their own.

Jacobin American said it better than me.

[BlueSwan]

The amount of anti-EU propaganda today simply shows how successful the union has really been. How many Germans or Swedes or Italians or Romanians are worried about a war in their countries, save for potential Russian aggression? Do the French and Germans worry about fighting each other? Do the Spanish worry about a new civil war? Do Poles worry about Germans invading? Does America have to concern itself with Europe plunging into another major war? No, because of the peace and stability brought to the continent after WWII by the post-war international order.

Europeans a mere 50 years ago couldn't have fathomed the amount of peace and prosperity their children and grandchildren are experiencing. Imagine a grandparent in Hungary, who can now not worry about the Russians invading, Stalinism being imposed on them, and can Skype their granddaughter who moved to Amsterdam for work. Yes, it does raise legitimate concerns about immigration, cultural identity, the role of the nation state, and bureaucratic incompetence and elitism in Brussels. But those can and should be addressed through reforms, not abandoning the entire institution.

Europeans and those in the Anglo world today are incredibly spoiled and privileged in ways older generations couldn't have imagined. Yet it's due precisely to this comfort and security that we're willing to pursue such reckless policies as Brexit. People ignorantly believe the EU sponsored framework of peaceful cooperation will continue even after its death. It won't. There'd be no stabilizing mechanism and countries would eventually return to focusing on old ethnic rivalries and nationalistic self-interest that'd result in trade wars, then real wars. These nationalists who're upset with the current world order (and there are many legitimate reasons to be upset with it) are playing a dangerous game that could have very serious consequences.

Precisely.

And the truly unfathomable thing is that the people who are most opposed to the EU are the retirees, who are the ones who should know better. The ones for whom the world wars held the most significant meaning to (even if they aren't quite old enough to actually remember it happening).

The EU breaking down would be an absolute unmitigated disaster.