https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/air-force-cancels-e-7-we...

If one takes a longer view of things, the period from WW2 to now is very much an anomaly reflecting relative European weakness in the aftermath of that war's physical and moral destruction. There is no intrinsic reason that the US should take the lead on, say, policy toward Russia. Quite the opposite.

That might explain the current downvotes.

> those who have never been here or taken the time to interact with an American

I think there's a misunderstanding at play here; in the vast majority of cases Europeans see Americans as reliable, cool-headed, friendly people. What they take issue with is the US' imperialist, heavy-handed, ombelico-del-mondo approach.

Incidentally I'm reminded by how common this ignorant view of Europe and Europeans is with Americans, in how they either insist on or unfortunately misunderstand Europe as a single nation with near-homogeneity.

You are not wrong, the european press hugely distorts and manipulates, but this is also textbook pot calling the kettle black: the american press is no better in that regard, and actually quite worse IMO. So this part of your argument is DOA.

> at least those who have never been here or taken the time to interact with an american

Now we're squarely in the domain of the unreasonable. The proportion of americans that have had an experience similar to yours is vanishingly tiny compared to the amount of exposure an average european gets to american culture (and I'm not talking about hollywod here).

What changed is the US President saying things like, he will encourage Putin to invade countries not spending so much on military.

What also changed is the US President threatening members of the EU militarily over greenland for example.

Reliable allies don't really do that.

(you probably do not realize the shock Denmark felt over this, that went deep and the change will not happen over night, but it will happen)

However, I think that many in the US are underestimating the current paradigm shift. Right now, in Europe, leaders and voters need to take decisions while keeping in mind the possibility that the US will invade Canada and Greenland while not reacting if Russia movies to Estonia.

Will it happen? Who the f*k knows? Donald Trump has made declarations very much in this direction. Also, Donald Trump has broken a sufficiently large number of treaties since becoming president that _anything_ should be considered possible.

That being said, as you mention, it's not clear that any of this is in any way related to Europe not buying the E-7.

I don't think that's true. The policy of alliance building and containment of their largest peer and competitor still makes sense. It was how the US ultimately overcame the Soviet Union, and is even more vital given the size and talent in China. A US without an alliance system will not win that competition.

What's much more concerning is that the rational interests of the US as a nation aren't reflected in its policy making any more. The 20th century had its share of domestic issues but the inmates weren't running the asylum as far as foreign politics was concerned which was coherent.

From the fall of the Berlin wall until the Ukraine invasion, the US saw Russia as more of an adversary than Europe saw Russia.

Yes, even after Russia annexed Crimea. In fact, it's only this year that Europe has started to significantly increase defense spending, three years after Russia invaded Ukraine. And, even then the most aggressive increase plans end up short of where spending was during the Cold War.

Every US president after Clinton (and maybe Clinton as well) urged European countries, especially NATO ones, to keep funding defense and they cut instead.

It turns out that the cowboys were right, that there was a bear in the woods, and that "soft power" wasn't power.

Coincidentally it's also why the US and EU are growing further apart.

Authoritarian regimes will inevitably attempt to expand because authoritarian leaders view the existence of people they don't rule as a threat towards their rule and they inevitably desire to grow their control and power over more and more people.

They’ve also engaged in widespread campaigns of asymmetric warfare against other countries. Lots of cyberattacks. Theft of intellectual property - corporate espionage but also copies of designs and hacks of government agencies. Unfair protectionism in their own markets. Lots more to list.

But mostly because the CCP just can’t be trusted with their power, because they’re neither democratic nor support liberal values like free speech. I think there’s a lot to admire about China and Chinese citizens. But their government is ultimately a threat to the world order and the progress of liberalism.