Germany Reacts to Trump's UNGA Speech

It's unfortunate that this was the take by EU politicians when everyone's favorite villain, Trump, was telling the EU nations to increase its NATO spending to the 2% guideline and was telling Germany to get off its Russian gas addiction or face the consequences. [1] Well, Germany (and its politicians: shown laughing at Trump in the video) are now paying the consequences of blindly walking into yet another trade deal with yet another autocratic power. [2] You'd think playing host to the horrors of WWII would have taught Germany a lesson or two of the consequences of such powers but no, it's business as usual. [3] The naivety of the EU in global politics would be laughable if it wasn't directly funding the artillery barrages and murder of more than a hundred children now by Russia. [1] [VIDEO] [2] [LINK] [3] [LINK]

Reminds me of the German UN delegates smugly laughing at Trump when he said that dependence on Russian oil is a bad thing: [VIDEO]

>Government leaders at every level invested real money, time, and effort in building actual infrastructure. These are the same leaders who, when Trump at the UN warned four years ago that Germany is endangering itself by increasing dependence on Russia, laughed on camera (< [VIDEO] >). Germany is now facing the consequences of the greatest mistake its leaders have made in 80 years, an existential threat to the German (and thus European) economy and even nation-state. You know this . Yet you instead lecture the USA—home of Tesla—on how ACKSHUALLY it need to build more e-infrastructure. The mind boggles.

>Half of these idiots have resigned or are close to resignation due to an energy and food crisis that they have single-handedly created by the "free world" the last decade. They will just resign and live of their pensions while the rest of Europe is slipping into poverty. Such as German foreign minister Heiko Maas, who when Trump at the UN warned four years ago that his country is endangering itself by increasing dependence on Russia, laughed with other German envoys < [VIDEO] >. He is now enjoying a quiet retirement in Saarland.

Let's name names. Trump, the abovementioned president, at the UN in 2018 warns that Germany is endangering itself by increasing dependence on Russia. German envoys laugh < [VIDEO] >, including foreign minister Heiko Maas, today enjoying a quiet retirement back home in Saarland.

>“Ninety-nine per cent of the text of the articles of association is about climate and environmental protection, but 99 per cent of the money comes directly from Nord Stream II AG, which belongs to Gazprom.” >“It’s quite a curious foundation. It is a puppet construction,” said Sascha Müller-Kraenner, head of Environmental Action Germany, a green charity, which is challenging the legality of the organisation both in the German courts and with the European Commission. [LINK] and German politicians from pretty much every single party have been taking bribes from Russia for years. Their energy policy of simultaneously shutting down coal but not spinning up any nuclear made them reliant on Russian natural gas, which they've been warned about by the US for years and are now paying the price for from 2019 - [LINK] and a video from 2018 of Germany's UN delegation quite literally laughing at the suggestion they'd be reliant on Russia for energy if they proceeded with Nordstream 2. Some good schadenfreude here- [VIDEO]

Not just ignored. Trump at the UN warns that Germany is endangering itself by increasing dependence on Russia. [German envoys laugh.]( [VIDEO] ). Among the comedians is Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, now enjoying a quiet retirement back home in Saarland. (The YouTube comments are hilarious.)

>He was saying the USA should leave NATO. Ah yes, the other line that people pull when questioned on this topic. First, Trump did not say that the US should leave NATO. He publicly insisted/cajoled/prodded with that signature Trump charm and style that Germany and other NATO members who don't meet the 2% of GDP spending requirement—and showed zero inclination of actually meeting the 2026 deadline (itself pushed back repeatedly after first being set in 2006)—needed to do so. >In our day and age you should be arrested as traitor for saying that. Beyond the strange notion that an American should be "arrested as a traitor" for his words, a "traitor" to whom? Who benefits more from NATO membership, the US or Germany? Who benefits more, the US or Belgium? The US or Norway? The US or Italy? Would a Russian conquest of all of Ukraine endanger US security? Not really. It is Poland that would have Russian troops on hundreds more miles of its borders. It is Poland and the Baltic states that now face the risk being cut off from the rest of NATO at the Suwalki Gap. The funny thing is that Poland and the Baltics do meet the 2% spending requirement, and have so for years. It is the likes of the far wealthier Germany, Belgium, Norway, Italy that do not. When you say that a US president should have been "arrested as a traitor" for questioning the value ("obsolete", I believe he said) of a military alliance in which the US funded 69% of total military spending while the wealthiest other member

>now suffering from the Russian invasion of Ukraine As mantas said, the energy/economic issues Europe faces from the Ukraine War is 100% self-inflicted. First, Poland, the Baltics, and other ex-Warsaw Pact countries have by and large done their best to wean themselves off the Russian oil and gas teat they fed from during the Cold War, even while Germany and other far wealthier countries did their best to suckle ever more from the same teat. Since energy is fungible, the far higher prices they are now having to pay affect the rest of the world, even those like the US and UK that never relied on Russian energy themselves. Second, it's entirely possible that greater European investment in defense might have dissuaded Russia from the February invasion. Or, at the least, be able to contribute now more than the relatively paltry sums and supplies they have so far sent. Again, the ex-Communist countries by and large both met the 2% GDP spending guideline that their far wealthier NATO fellow members have mostly ignored, and are sending as much gear as they can without endangering their own defense. Consider two moments four years ago: 1) Trump and NATO secretary-general and former Norwegian PM Jens Stoltenberg argue on camera (video < [LINK] >, article < [LINK] >) about dependence on Russia. Who turned out to be right? Who turned out to be completely, totally, 100% wrong? 2) Trump at the UN warns that Germany is endangering itself by increasing dependence on Russia. German envoys lau

That never sounded good to anybody with good judgement. Russia is largely self sufficient for basic goods (food, energy), meaning that while their economy takes a hit, it’s a financial problem more than an existential crisis. The same can’t be said for Germany, who have systematically destroyed domestic energy production and now are facing an unprecedented economic catastrophe. Not just a financial problem, but a real economic problem of being able to acquire sufficient quantities of the basic inputs to a contemporary first world economy. Trump famously pointed out the folly of this strategy to a chorus of arrogant snickering from the contingent of German bureaucrats. Not so funny now… [VIDEO]

>Trump blurted that to the Germans around 2019. The press brushed it off as "highly misleading". And the Germans literally laughed in his face: [VIDEO] Pretty hard to watch now. The smugness is palpable.

German delegation’s response at UNGA when Trump says “Germany will become totally dependent on Russian energy if it does not immediately change course.” [VIDEO]

Anyone remember this viral clip of Germany reacting to Trump's UNGA speech about relying on Russian energy? [VIDEO]

If opposing "dictators and warmongers" is so important, why were European NATO members so unprepared for the 2022 war? Poland, the Baltics, and other ex-Warsaw Pact countries by and large did their best to wean themselves off the Russian oil and gas teat they fed from during the Cold War, even while Germany and other far wealthier countries did their best to suckle ever more from the same teat. Since energy is fungible, the far higher prices they are now having to pay affect them and the rest of the world, even those like the US and UK that never relied on Russian energy themselves, but at least Poland and the Baltics tried their best. It's also entirely possible that greater European investment in defense might have dissuaded Russia from the February invasion. Or, at the least, be able to contribute now more than the relatively paltry sums and supplies they have so far sent. Again, the ex-Communist countries by and large both met the 2% GDP spending guideline that their far wealthier NATO fellow members have mostly ignored, and are sending as much gear as they can without endangering their own defense. Sweden and Finland's militaries were and are far better prepared than the average NATO member despite (or, perhaps, because of) not being part of the alliance. Consider two moments five years ago: 1) Trump and NATO secretary-general and former Norwegian PM Jens Stoltenberg argue on camera (video < [LINK] >, article < [LINK] >) about dependence on Russia. Who turned out to be r

> or see a Soros conspiracy behind every criticism of certain idols Idols, Soros conspiracy... And you accuse others of being stupid. A simple idea, shady practices on the part of a platform are not OK if what you want, as you say, is trust. > I have some crypto coins to sell you too. I'm sure you have. You were left holding the bag in the subreddit you've mentioned. > the FSB has fascinating manuals on exactly this topic. Highly recommended reading. Right, they've sent you a copy. You and your government, the idiots who can be seen laughing [1][2] when told they should not depend on Russian energy. "I don't really understand what he means by that ha-ha-ha", tells your genius defense minister. [1]: [VIDEO] [2]: [LINK]

> What senile, old, corrupt and/or stupid politicians decide isn't necessarily the rational choice, and in fact is often the opposite. For example, these smirking German assholes, who I would have enjoyed seeing being interviewed last winter after Russia knocked the dumb smirks off their faces: [VIDEO]

>until they elect a president that throws allies under the bus (I.e. NATO, NAFTA, etc) Based on recent news, Trump has done more for NATO rearmament than any US president in history. Gee, maybe sometimes drastic steps are needed when 20 years of three other presidents doing everything but stand on their heads while begging other NATO members to spend more on their own defense failed. Trump was lambasted by the usual bien-pensant suspects when he told NATO this in 2018 < [LINK] >. He was right when at the UN he warned against Western European dependence on Russian energy, for which the German foreign minister and others laughed at him < [VIDEO] >. And remember, Trump isn't even in office now; he's already done more for Western collective defense than a) the putative current president and b) an actual land war in Europe! >and gives state secrets to enemies Repeat this often enough and maybe it'll come true one day!

EU has had a lot of time to recognize the situation they have been in regarding energy. Sorry, but this will never not be not amusing. Where Trump being a stopped clock warns the UN about relying on foreign energy and the German delegation laughs as they were shutting down their nuclear and increasing reliance on Russia for energy. [VIDEO]