Macron to EU colleagues: Stop buying American, buy European

[Walt]

The road there has been very interesting, and we have as of yet not idea how good they are.

It combines the latest in Chobham armor, and the latest German turret tech. Remember our best armor is based on British Chobham armor, and our best turrets are based on German turrets. That is why the turrets Abrams are metric, while the rest of the tank uses English units.

There are always questions with new weapons systems, but the biggest concern I have is they are not buying enough for even one division. The current order is only 148 tanks. I hope they increase that a little.

 

[Diogenes]

Forgetting much of Europe has huge tariffs on American goods.

If the Democrats are right, all Trump has to do is tip the wink to Putin and the Spetsnaz will march through Paris while the Frenchies cry.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Let them hate, so long as they fear.

The trouble for us is that increasingly the world does not....they despise.

 

[Diogenes]

Forgetting much of Europe has huge tariffs on American goods.

The European Union (EU), does apply tariffs on certain U.S. goods, but the scale and impact vary widely by product and sector, and the overall tariff levels are not exceptionally high compared to global standards.

The EU’s average applied tariff rate on non-agricultural goods from the U.S. is around 3-4%, based on trade-weighted data from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and other analyses covering recent years.

For agricultural goods, the average is higher, closer to 8-12%, reflecting the EU’s protection of its farming sector. However, these figures don’t tell the whole story.

Specific U.S. exports face steeper duties: for example, American apparel and textiles encounter tariffs averaging around 12%, while vehicles face a 10% tariff (compared to the U.S. imposing just 2.5% on EU cars).

Meanwhile, many U.S. goods—like certain machinery or tech products—enter the EU with little to no tariff, as over 40% of U.S. non-agricultural exports to the EU were duty-free in 2022, per WTO data.



@Grok

 

[Diogenes]

The French without American military protection:

 

[Hawkeye10]

All through Europe the armories are mostly empty, the troops barely exist, they are poorly trained and poorly armed, and without American help they dont have the logistics to keep them alive even if they did survive past a couple of weeks of battle.....which is unlikely.

 

[Walt]

If the Democrats are right, all Trump has to do is tip the wink to Putin and the Spetsnaz will march through Paris while the Frenchies cry.

The Russians were not able to take Kyiv, and you think they can take Paris?

 

[Diogenes]

The Russians were not able to take Kyiv, and you think they can take Paris?

So you admit that Trump isn't colluding with Putin to conquer Europe, Salty Walty?

 

[Walt]

So you admit that Trump isn't colluding with Putin to conquer Europe, Salty Walty?

No, I said Russia does not have the military assets to take Paris.

 

[Diogenes]

Russia does not have the military assets to take Paris.

What would stop them, Salty Walty?

I'll understand if you don't know, of course.

Russia’s military is formidable, particularly in conventional and nuclear domains. As of early 2025, Russia maintains around 1.32 million active personnel, over 14,000 tanks, and a significant arsenal of artillery and missiles, including hypersonic weapons like the Kinzhal. Its war economy has adapted to sustain operations in Ukraine, producing substantial quantities of munitions despite sanctions. Russia’s nuclear arsenal, with roughly 5,889 warheads, provides a strategic edge.

Militarily, Russia has the raw numbers—more troops, tanks, and missiles— to potentially overwhelm France in a one-on-one conventional fight.


@Grok

 

[Hawkeye10]

What would stop them, Salty Walty?

I'll understand if you don't know, of course.

Russia’s military is formidable, particularly in conventional and nuclear domains. As of early 2025, Russia maintains around 1.32 million active personnel, over 14,000 tanks, and a significant arsenal of artillery and missiles, including hypersonic weapons like the Kinzhal. Its war economy has adapted to sustain operations in Ukraine, producing substantial quantities of munitions despite sanctions. Russia’s nuclear arsenal, with roughly 5,889 warheads, provides a strategic edge.

Militarily, Russia has the raw numbers—more troops, tanks, and missiles— to potentially overwhelm France in a one-on-one conventional fight.


@Grok

Best army on the planet the Russians.

 

[Walt]

What would stop them, Salty Walty?

I'll understand if you don't know, of course.

Russia’s military is formidable, particularly in conventional and nuclear domains. As of early 2025, Russia maintains around 1.32 million active personnel, over 14,000 tanks, and a significant arsenal of artillery and missiles, including hypersonic weapons like the Kinzhal. Its war economy has adapted to sustain operations in Ukraine, producing substantial quantities of munitions despite sanctions. Russia’s nuclear arsenal, with roughly 5,889 warheads, provides a strategic edge.

Militarily, Russia has the raw numbers—more troops, tanks, and missiles— to potentially overwhelm France in a one-on-one conventional fight.


@Grok

And yet they were unable to take Kyiv 50 miles from their staging area...

 

[Diogenes]

And yet they were unable to take Kyiv 50 miles from their staging area...

Salty Walty’s claim that Kyiv is less than 50 miles from the Russians’ staging area needs some unpacking, as "staging area" isn’t a fixed term and could mean different things depending on context—especially in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Let’s assume he’s referring to the closest Russian-controlled territory or military positions as of now, March 16, 2025, and check the distances.

Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, sits about 50 miles (80 kilometers) south of the Belarusian border and roughly 125 miles (200 kilometers) southwest of the Russian border near Chernihiv, in a straight line.

As of late 2024, the nearest Russian-held territory to Kyiv is likely in the Donetsk or Luhansk regions, over 400 miles (650 kilometers) southeast, based on front-line maps from sources like the Institute for the Study of War.

Even if we consider the Kursk region—where Ukraine’s been pushing into Russian turf since August 2024—the straight-line distance from Kyiv to Kursk city is about 250 miles (400 kilometers).

The closest Russian border point there, near Sumy, is still around 100 miles (160 kilometers) northeast of Kyiv. Belarus, a Russian ally, might host troops, but even their southern border is 50 miles from Kyiv at its nearest, and no active “staging” for an assault is confirmed there as of now.

Fifty miles is roughly 80 kilometers. None of these distances—whether from current front lines, Russian borders, or potential Belarusian positions—put Kyiv under 50 miles from a plausible Russian staging area today.

Back in 2022, sure, Russian units were that close briefly, but not anymore. Without Salty Walty specifying a date or exact location, the claim doesn’t hold up for 2025 based on where things stand. Kyiv’s not that close to the action right now.



@Grok

 

[Walt]

Salty Walty’s claim that Kyiv is less than 50 miles from the Russians’ staging area needs some unpacking, as "staging area" isn’t a fixed term and could mean different things depending on context—especially in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict.

A human would realize that it meant the Belarus border. Russia was allowed to sit on the border of Ukraine 50 miles away.

I hope that helps you understand what I said.

 

[Diogenes]

A human would realize that it meant the Belarus border. Russia was allowed to sit on the border of Ukraine 50 miles away. I hope that helps you understand what I said.

Grok knows exactly what you said, Salty Walty, because I linked your post.

Y O U said "their staging area", Salty Walty.

My 11 year old niece said you're retarded, and it looks as if Grok concures, Salty Walty.

There is no widely recognized or official source, including Salty Walty, that specifically states "Russia was allowed to sit on the border of Ukraine 50 miles away" from Kyiv as a formalized agreement or condition.

The phrasing suggests a claim that might imply some sort of permission or arrangement, but this does not align with established historical or current geopolitical facts regarding the Russia-Ukraine border situation as of March 17, 2025.

To clarify, the distance from Kyiv to the Russian border varies depending on the direction considered, as Ukraine shares a long border with Russia to the north and east.

The closest point to the Russian border from Kyiv is approximately 100 kilometers (about 62 miles) to the north, near the Belarus-Russia-Ukraine tripoint, though the direct eastern border with Russia is farther, around 400-450 kilometers (250-280 miles) away, depending on the specific location measured.

The idea of Russia being "allowed" to position itself 50 miles (approximately 80 kilometers) from Kyiv would place Russian forces well inside Ukrainian territory, which has never been part of any legal international agreement.

Historically and currently, Russia’s military presence near or across Ukraine’s border has been a point of contention, not permission. For instance:

• Before the full-scale invasion in February 2022, Russia amassed troops along Ukraine’s border, with estimates of 90,000 to 125,000 personnel in late 2021 and early 2022, but this was within Russian territory or occupied areas like Crimea and Donbas, not a sanctioned position 50 miles from Kyiv.
• Since 2014, Russia has controlled parts of eastern Ukraine (Donetsk and Luhansk regions) through separatist proxies and annexed Crimea, but these actions were unilateral and condemned by most of the international community, not "allowed" under any agreement with Ukraine or others.
• During the ongoing war, Russian forces have advanced into Ukrainian territory at various points, but this has been an act of aggression, not a permitted positioning.

The claim might stem from a misinterpretation or exaggeration of military movements, such as the Russian troop buildup near Ukraine’s borders before the 2022 invasion

However, even then, the closest Russian-controlled areas post-retreat were still farther than 50 miles from Kyiv, and no agreement "allowed" Russia to maintain such a position.

Without a specific, verifiable reference from Salty Walty detailing an agreement or event explicitly placing Russia 50 miles from Kyiv with permission, this appears to be an unsubstantiated or misinterpreted claim. No such allowance exists in the context of Russia-Ukraine relations.



@Grok

 

[Walt]

There is no widely recognized or official source, including Salty Walty, that specifically states "Russia was allowed to sit on the border of Ukraine 50 miles away" from Kyiv as a formalized agreement or condition.

Here the Russians are moving towards Kyiv from the Belarus border 50 miles from Kyiv.

Capture of Chernobyl - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Diogenes]

Here the Russians are moving towards Kyiv from the Belarus border 50 miles from Kyiv.

Capture of Chernobyl - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

February 2022, and no mention of Russia being "allowed to sit on the border of Ukraine 50 miles away", Salty Walty.

Chernobyl is 81 miles north of Kyiv, Salty Walty.

You failed again, Salty Walty.

My 11 year old niece was right about you , Salty Walty.

 

[Walt]

Chernobyl is 81 miles north of Kyiv, Salty Walty.

Just measured it on the map, and Chernobly is 49.3 miles from the city line, and 57.8 miles from the city center.

It is clear that fag boy is just desperately trying to disrupt meaningful debate.

The fact is that if the Russian could not take Kyiv, which is very close to them, and comparatively lightly defended, they cannot take Paris, which is closer to a thousand miles away(less to the from Kaliningrad, but they would have to cross several NATO countries to get there), and across several NATO countries.

I feel bad to pour cold water on his freaky fantasy about having sex with a bunch of Russians soldiers in Paris.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Macron to EU colleagues: Stop buying American, buy European​

“Those who buy Patriot should be offered the new-generation Franco-Italian SAMP/T. Those who buy the F-35, should be offered the Rafale,” French president says.

Macron to EU colleagues: Stop buying American, buy European

“Those who buy Patriot should be offered the new-generation Franco-Italian SAMP/T. Those who buy the F-35, should be offered the Rafale,” French president says.

www.politico.eu

PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron wants to lead a charm offensive to convince EU countries to stop buying U.S. defense equipment and buy French and European instead.

Macron, who has been calling for years to direct defense spending toward EU products, said he wants to convince other European countries that are currently "buying American" to shift to local options.

"My intention is to go and convince European states that have become accustomed to buying American," he said on Saturday in an interview with several French media including Nice-Matin and Le Parisien.
"Those who buy Patriot should be offered the new-generation Franco-Italian SAMP/T. Those who buy the F-35, should be offered the Rafale. That's the way to increase the rate of production," he said.

Macron's comments come as European NATO members have become even more dependent on U.S. weapons than ever before.

This month, the Netherlands and Belgium confirmed they would still buy American-made F-35 fighter jets, while Portugal is wobbling about replacing its U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets with more modern F-35s because of "the recent position of the United States, in the context of NATO."

Macron said he has asked French defense companies to cut red tape and reduce costs to become a more attractive option, Nice-Matin reported.

The French president also clarified what a possible deployment of European troops to help Ukraine could look like. The goal is to "deploy a few thousand men per nation, at key points, to carry out training programs” and "show our support over the long term," he said.

Macron said that the conditions laid down by Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree on a ceasefire in Ukraine "are unacceptable."
"This would mean a partial invasion of Ukraine and a freeze on the conflict, without offering any security or guarantees for the future," Macron said.

Macron announced for "the coming weeks" a reform of the so-called "Service National Universel" — a voluntary service for people aged between 15 and 17 that includes sporting activities, civic education and a stint at a state organization or nongovernmental organization — "to meet the nation's needs and the priorities we have identified."

The French president, however, ruled out a comeback of compulsory military service.

This helps explain why the WSJ called this "The Dumbest Trade War in History".

Opinion | The Dumbest Trade War in History

Trump will impose 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico for no good reason.

www.wsj.com

The Dumbest Trade War in History​

Trump will impose 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico for no good reason.​

 

[Diogenes]

Just measured it on the map, and Chernobly is 49.3 miles from the city line, and 57.8 miles from the city center.

The distance between Chernobyl and Kyiv is generally cited as around 81-115 miles (134-185 km), depending on the specific path and starting/ending points. For instance, driving from central Kyiv to Chernobyl is often quoted at 83.3 miles (134 km) or up to 115 miles (185 km) when considering the Exclusion Zones' boundaries.

Salty Walty’s claim specifies 49.3 miles to Kyiv's "city line".

Kyiv’s city limits are not a single fixed point but a boundary that varies in distance from the center (roughly 5-10 miles radius, depending on direction).

However, there’s no universally standardized figure for the "city line" distance, as it depends on where one defines Kyiv’s northern edge. The city’s administrative boundary extends irregularly.



@Grok