Europe

[daftandbarmy]

A bit of leadership by example among some of Europe's royals.

Queen Maxima of Netherlands joins country’s army as reservist - National | Globalnews.ca

Footage shows the royal swimming in a pool wearing goggles that obscure her vision, as well as abseiling down scaffolding and descending a rock climbing wall.

globalnews.ca

Dutch Queen Máxima training to become army reservist

Expected to be sworn in later this month, the incoming Dutch coalition government has plans to boost the nation's military from some 80,000 to 122,000 personnel. And the Queen wants to help.

www.euronews.com

And here she is earning her beret...

https://twitter.com/x/status/2060379366115119591

 

[Kirkhill]

EU abruptly shelves Kallas-led defense panel after pushback from Berlin, Paris, Rome

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas scrapped plans to launch a high-level advisory group on European defense just hours before its scheduled unveiling.

www.defensenews.com

And it is as if the past never happened

Karl, Lothar and Louis ganging up on Horik.

Treaty of Verdun - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Horik I - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kirkhill]

Northrop Grumman unveils anti-jam version of its artillery guidance kit

Northrop Grumman will build a new version of its GPS-guided artillery kit with added anti-jamming technology, the company announced September 9, aimed at keeping artillery accurate even when an enemy is jamming GPS signals. The new kit, called the PGK

defence-blog.com

Which Europe?

Charlemagne's or Horik's?

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Northrop Grumman unveils anti-jam version of its artillery guidance kit

Northrop Grumman will build a new version of its GPS-guided artillery kit with added anti-jamming technology, the company announced September 9, aimed at keeping artillery accurate even when an enemy is jamming GPS signals. The new kit, called the PGK

defence-blog.com

Which Europe?

Charlemagne's or Horik's?

Out of idle curiosity I followed your link about GPS artillery guidance and I have no idea how it relates to your post.

Do I need to watch a few seasons of Vikings to understand?

 

[Kirkhill]

Out of idle curiosity I followed your link about GPS artillery guidance and I have no idea how it relates to your post.

Do I need to watch a few seasons of Vikings to understand?

Sorry. Angry at myself. Fat fingered that one. Wrong reference

EU envoy says partnership with Canada forming ahead of Carney speech

The European Union's ambassador to Canada says the bloc is crafting a new partnership with Ottawa unlike anything that currently exists.

www.castanet.net

Given the fractured state of Europe these days I was wondering which one we were dealing with: the heirs of Charlemagne in Paris, Berlin and Rome or the heirs of Horik and Cnut in JEF.

Some gaps seem to be just too wide to be healed no matter how much time passes.

 

[childs56]

Sorry. Angry at myself. Fat fingered that one. Wrong reference

EU envoy says partnership with Canada forming ahead of Carney speech

The European Union's ambassador to Canada says the bloc is crafting a new partnership with Ottawa unlike anything that currently exists.

www.castanet.net

Given the fractured state of Europe these days I was wondering which one we were dealing with: the heirs of Charlemagne in Paris, Berlin and Rome or the heirs of Horik and Cnut in JEF.

Some gaps seem to be just too wide to be healed no matter how much time passes.

I wonder how long a deal with Europe will last if
1 The US steps in and threatens them with more tariffs.
2 Europe goes on their green anti tar sands, logging is bad and mining is bad program again hitting Canada in the pocket book.
I think focusing on Asia and having Europe as a secondary is not a bad place to be with the US as the third major trad partner.

 

[YZT580]

I wonder how long a deal with Europe will last if
1 The US steps in and threatens them with more tariffs.
2 Europe goes on their green anti tar sands, logging is bad and mining is bad program again hitting Canada in the pocket book.
I think focusing on Asia and having Europe as a secondary is not a bad place to be with the US as the third major trad partner.

Asia definitely but not China. That is dangerous territory

 

[childs56]

Asia definitely but not China. That is dangerous territory

Everyone else is dealing with China, why not us?
As long as you understand the actual risks you can work around them.

 

[QV]

I wonder how long a deal with Europe will last if
1 The US steps in and threatens them with more tariffs.
2 Europe goes on their green anti tar sands, logging is bad and mining is bad program again hitting Canada in the pocket book.
I think focusing on Asia and having Europe as a secondary is not a bad place to be with the US as the third major trad partner.

It is impossible for Canada to displace US trade with any other nation/group of nations.

 

[Czech_pivo]

It is impossible for Canada to displace US trade with any other nation/group of nations.

Again, define 'displace'.

No one is suggesting, at least I'm certainly not, suggesting that US trade is go to zero or even close to zero. But, moving from 70ish% down to 50ish% or 45ish% would be a prudent thing to do.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Everyone else is dealing with China, why not us?
As long as you understand the actual risks you can work around them.

Yeah, so what if they continue to occupy Tibet and treat Uighurs abysmally. People you can work with, though.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

I wonder how long a deal with Europe will last if
1 The US steps in and threatens them with more tariffs.

The EU combined has just as much, if not more economic clout, than the United States.

2 Europe goes on their green anti tar sands, logging is bad and mining is bad program again hitting Canada in the pocket book.

Possible, but I'm thinking the EU is realizing that those days are gone or at the very least put on the backburner for now. When we see what the details of this new European-Canadian relationship actually entails will give us some idea of what the future holds.

I think focusing on Asia and having Europe as a secondary is not a bad place to be with the US as the third major trad partner.

Agree on the Asia focus. Also agree that the US, because of geography and economic ties will still remain a main trading partner, may be not a dominant one as it at present.

Edit: Fix a couple of typos

 

[Kirkhill]

Everyone else is dealing with China, why not us?
As long as you understand the actual risks you can work around them.

Our barge pole isn't long enough.

 

[childs56]

It is impossible for Canada to displace US trade with any other nation/group of nations.

I think it is impossible for the US to displace trade with Canada. Our resources are second to non overall in the world.

What we and other nations have noticed is the US has been the middle man for trade and goods for many years.
I think the world is getting wise to eliminating the middle man. Go to the source to secure longterm products at a fair price.

 

[YZT580]

Everyone else is dealing with China, why not us?
As long as you understand the actual risks you can work around them.

The lemming at the back of the pack said the same thing. What do we get from trading with China? We ship them very few finished products just the raw materials that we buy back as finished goods. I question the profit in shipping raw lumber, for instance, that offers employment for just a few loggers and drivers whilst we have closed almost all of the mills and factories that offered skilled trades for many and buy back particle board based veneer that has a nice finish. Every country that has bought into China's silk road advertising has ended or is starting to regret it dearly. As the song says: you knew darn well I was a snake before you took me in.

 

[Genetk44]

Yeah, so what if they continue to occupy Tibet and treat Uighurs abysmally. People you can work with, though.

They’ve occupied Tibet for about 70 years…..that’s not changing and neither is the Uighur situation any time soon and certainly not by us not trading or doing business with them. We have zero leverage with the CCP government to influence anything major within their internal borders. We just have to be very tactical and strategic in our dealings with them.

 

[Brad Sallows]

They’ve occupied Tibet for about 70 years…..that’s not changing and neither is the Uighur situation any time soon and certainly not by us not trading or doing business with them. We have zero leverage with the CCP government to influence anything major within their internal borders. We just have to be very tactical and strategic in our dealings with them.

So easy to rationalize, isn't it? Conflict between US and Iran has been ongoing for over 45 years. The Cold War lasted almost as long, and has sort of entered a phase II. Obviously it's possible to not tolerate tyranny if you're really committed to it, and not satisfied with pretending the outrage of the day from the Trump administration is the kind of tyranny that has to be strenuously opposed while others march on. Equally obviously it's not all or nothing; various kinds of engagement with the USSR and afterward Russia were tolerated and promoted even despite the continuing provocations and wars. And of course there's the almost universal belief that China not only aspires to acquire Taiwan, but also a noticeable belief among some that China might do it forcibly "real soon now", often - amusingly to me - embedded in a frame that attaches some blame to the US for creating conditions that might tempt Honest China to stop being honest.

China deserves an "elbows up" relationship several orders of magnitude greater than the one some Canadians would like for the US. That would require putting even more effort into trade with other countries. We have all of Europe, the rest of eastern Asia, and the Americas in proximity, not the least of which will always be the US. China bigfoots everyone; it just does it without a front man like Trump, which leads people to misjudge what they're tolerating. Always choose the lesser of two evils.

 

[QV]

Again, define 'displace'.

No one is suggesting, at least I'm certainly not, suggesting that US trade is go to zero or even close to zero. But, moving from 70ish% down to 50ish% or 45ish% would be a prudent thing to do.

That's fair. How many years/decades will that take? Should we stay elbows up until we hit only 50% trade with USA? That would be very painful for us.

There's a lesson in this not being chased with enough enthusiasm in this country. Why isn't the US susceptible to outside pressures like everyone else? Because 85% of their GDP is generated through internal trade. The remaining 15% is spread out around the world. No one country can totally screw the US.

So how are we doing with internal trade barriers? I know there was some hopes and wishes, but shouldn't this be a priority?

I've read (and I'll see if I can find it again) that although about 70% support PMMC's approach to counter tariff, in another question about 68% do not support it if it means job losses and higher costs.... Isn't that an interesting data point....

 

[QV]

The EU combined has just as much, if not more economic clout, than the United States.

Wromg.

The US has a $32T economy. The EU is $23T.

Nominal GDP per capita, USA $94k, EU $51K

Growth and productivity drivers: US around 2.8% recently and EU 1.1%