You said that China was the threat, not Russia - and that therefore NATO needed to arm up. Most of NATO is in Europe. Why do the Europeans need to "arm up" against China?

Sigh.
You don't think a conflict with China would exclude Europe? You think Europe's economy sits it out?

No, I don't like that Trump is weakening (or abandoning) the U.S. position of leadership in most global institutions and demonstrating itself to be an unreliable and undependable ally at a time when coordinated global effort is needed against the threat of Chinese power.

Uh, huh. Which institutions? The ones that routinely do weird things or act outside of US interests like UNRWA? Or efforts that are intended to bankrupt the west like the Paris Climate Accords?

The problem is that the status quo of the international order has a lot of inertia...absent focus or purpose. Breaking up the status quo is not a bad thing.

The first month of the Administration has been more overtly critical of our allies than our enemies.

The Europeans have been shirking their duties for a generation now. Their economies - stagnant. Their defenses - englected.

Sometimes the status quo is stupid:

politico.eu - Europe ukraine russia war expo NATO gas energy allies trump card policy

Meanwhile, on energy, Europe’s reliance on Russian gas revealed the perils of depending on a single provider. Before the war on Ukraine, over 40 percent of Europe’s natural gas imports came from Russia, which created a critical vulnerability.

Does this seem sane to you? All the livelong day this board brays on about Russia, Russia, Russia. Why aren't any of you calling the europeans out on this? What's wrong with calling this sort of thing out? Nothing, that's what.

Yep - which is why they're delighted that we're retreating from our superpower role and alienating our allies.

You know what they like even more? A europe that depends on Russia for all its energy and one that has zero means to defend itself. Or the will to do so.