This is all used by the EU for protectionist reasons to try to extract an unfair advantage in the trade negotiations.
Let's see if the EU is as concerned about the environmental impact of all those tanks that they are building.
back
4 comments
EU does not have a choice when it comes to "building tanks". There is expanding Russia and America supporting them while being very hostile to EU.
EU did wanted and tried to cooperate in win-win setup with America, it is America who decided they want to attack former allies.
> Let's see if the EU is as concerned about the environmental impact of all those tanks that they are building.
The alternative is an Anglo-French nuclear strike. The tanks are a lot less environmentally damaging, relatively speaking.
The fact that EU uses it for protectionist reasons does not make it wrong or untrue, though. And frankly, if cost reduction is based on destruction of earth and slavery-like working conditions in cartel-controlled lands, it makes sense to disincentivise these at least, if not boycott completely. The problem with EU doing it for protectionist reasons is that it does not apply similar standards for what is happening inside the EU, eg re:working conditions in strawberry production.
For the military industry part, I completely agree. This applies already to certain war situations that were and keep being encouraged.
Eating avocados is not a necessity. Protecting yourself against a mad dictator invading your neighbours is. Especially if the USA is ruled by an imbecile clown that cannot think further than his belly button.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.