The title is a joke, after all, what kind of year did Europeans live?
Although Europeans are only celebrating our Lunar New Year, they have been scared enough by Trump these days.
CNN said: "All of Europe shuddered. ”
I now have serious doubts that in Europe's fairy tales hundreds of years from now, Trump will be portrayed as a beast.
Then on the night of the thirtieth day of the lunar month, the children of Europe need to set off firecrackers to drive away the plague god.
So what exactly did Trump say to scare Europeans like this?
This happened on the evening of February 10, local time in the United States, at a campaign rally in South Carolina.
South Carolina is a very important place because on February 24, the third Republican primary election will be held here.
And it's also the hometown of Haley, Trump's only current rival.
Although Trump is now far ahead and taking South Carolina is not a big problem, he still does not dare to be careless.
After all, if he can win South Carolina in one go, it will be a major blow to Haley's morale, and it is possible that Haley will take the initiative to announce his withdrawal, and he can imagine a second decisive battle with Biden in advance.
The above is the background.
Why spend so much time on this?
Because it has to do with what Trump is going to say next.
Because South Carolina is important, he needs to win over this part of Haley's hometown voters and get them to support him.
But people are not related to you, so they can't vote for you just because you have blonde hair, right?
So Trump had to come up with something real.
So, he shared a story at the campaign rally.
He said that once a European power ** asked him, if we don't pay this money (NATO fees), but we are attacked by Russia, as a NATO ally, will you still protect us?
Trump said that my answer at the time was: Under my leadership, the United States will not protect any country that is in arrears. Are you in arrears? No, I won't protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever they wanted. You have to pay, you have to pay the bills.
To put it simply, Europe, you have to pay, and if you dare to owe money, I will let Putin clean you up!
Trump's sentence "If you dare to owe money, let Russia attack you" on the hot search in the past few days, it came from here.
Many friends are curious: how could Trump say such a thing in a good manner? Isn't this pulling hatred?
You see, after Trump said that, almost everybody was attacking him.
His rival in the party, Haley, said in an interview: "When he doesn't look at the teleprompter, he's insane."
And outside the party, the old enemy Biden came out to criticize:
"Trump's admission that he intends to give Putin the green light to unleash more war and violence, to continue his brutal assault on free Ukraine, and to expand his aggression against the people of Poland and the Baltic states is alarming and dangerous. ”
And then there is NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
"Any hint that our allies will not cooperate with each other will weaken our security as a whole, including the security of the United States, and put American-Americans and European military personnel at greater risk," he said. ”
The translation of this sentence is very simple: now is the time of events, what everyone wants is unity, what are you talking about now? You give us the ladder to remove, and the last thing that hurts is your own safety in the United States!
In addition, European Council President Charles Michel, Polish Interior Minister Kelvinski, and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz all came out to criticize Trump.
And ** over there is not idle.
CNN's comments lamented that Trump's inflammatory remarks against NATO now make the whole of Europe shudder.
The New York Times, on the other hand, came out and said: Trump's remarks are likely to prompt long-term allies of the United States to adopt risk-off strategies, perhaps forming alliances with other major powers.
As everyone knows, the "New York Times" is biased towards the Democratic Party, and some people even say that the "New York Times" is about to become the organ newspaper of the Democratic Party.
So now the New York Times is definitely coming out to attack Trump.
So, who do they mean by "other powers"?
Don't think about it, of course, it's the big country in the East with a mysterious population of more than one billion.
Last year, France's ** Macron came to China, he not only listened to the song "Mountains and Flowing Water", but also signed a large order with us of tens of billions of dollars despite the obstruction of the United States.
After going back, he also said two classic words:
"Europe should not clash over Taiwan and Chinese mainland. ”
"Europe should not become a vassal of the United States. ”
What do Macron mean by these two sentences?
It is to seek an independent development route for Europe, and stop following the ass of the Americans and becoming a vassal of the Americans.
Since we want to develop independently, we must first have good relations with China and cooperate with China economically, so that we can have the capital and confidence to compete with the United States.
But I didn't expect that many people were spraying Macron at that time.
There is even a new word on Twitter, Macron's English name is macron, and they will now add ing to it and become macroning, so as to satirize Macron.
Not only the United States is scolding, but even France and Europe are spraying him.
The meaning is simple: how can you abandon your American dad and run away to fool around with China?
But looking back now, Macron's words at that time were really very reasonable.
What good is it for you Europe to mix behind the ass of the Americans?
You use the United States as an umbrella and a backer.
But people treat you as a burden.
Say two things. First of all, some time ago, Biden organized NATO countries, held a Defender 2024 military exercise, and called on all NATO member states, but in the end, only the United States and those countries in Eastern Europe really made efforts.
After all, Eastern Europe is closer to Russia, and they feel more threatened, so they are naturally very positive.
However, the people in Western Europe were accustomed to being free and loose, especially in Spain, and they did not contribute to their work.
Some time ago, when the Americans were in charge of the Red Sea military operation, Spain also explicitly refused.
After all, Russia is too far away, and the most practical thing at the moment is how to save money.
What, you told me that your lips are dead and your teeth are cold?
I'm sorry, I'm your stomach, even if the teeth are gone, as long as you can still drink porridge, I won't starve. Unless you have the ability to push Russia all the way to the foot of the Pyrenees.
The second thing is that Americans feel that they have suffered too much.
I'm thousands of miles away, I'm bringing American GIs to protect you, and I spend too much money every year, and I don't benefit at all.
That's why the Americans have been thinking about reducing NATO's share of common costs from 22% to 16%.
Because in the eyes of the Americans, their own military presence in Europe is not taking advantage at all, but suffering a big loss.
I'm working hard to protect you, I've become a bodyguard, shouldn't you pay a little more for protection money or something?
In fact, this is the same as the cost shared by the US military stationed in South Korea.
Americans always feel that they have suffered a loss.
"Why take taxpayers' money to protect the irrelevant Europeans, the Koreans? ”
"Yes, yes, what you said is right, Europe is very important, South Korea is very important, but may I ask, does this have anything to do with my monthly salary of 3,000? ”
These two classic rhetorical questions are also used by the Americans themselves.
At least more than half of Americans eat this set.
So, the previous question is easy to answer.
Knowing that saying this would lead to hatred, why did Trump say this?
That's why.
He is trying to enlist the support of these "what does Europe and South Korea have to do with me" Americans.
Trump and Biden are actually two different kinds of people entirely.
Biden is a career politician, and what he cares about most is hegemony.
What he thinks is, I'm the United States, Lao Tzu is the first in the world.
It doesn't matter if I spend a little more money, as long as I can gather my allies, everyone will recognize me as the boss and help me encircle China and Russia together.
Respect me as the co-lord of the world, then I will spend this money.
But Trump, he's a businessman.
The businessman is very shrewd and a refined egoist.
He only thinks about one thing: I want to make money, I want to make a profit, and I want to get all kinds of small advantages for the United States.
So you have to ask me who is more beneficial to China when these two people are put together?
Then of course I support that we understand Mr. Wang Trump.
If he can really dissolve NATO on his own, at least, let NATO countries not be able to connect with each other, be suspicious of each other, and attack each other.
That's the highest feat.
What is the model of the times, all the top ten people in China are arranged for him, and I must be called to go in person when the award is presented, and I will prepare a 2-meter-tall little golden man for him, thank him well.
And as for Biden's gang?
Professional politicians, veteran, cunning, and love to play yin, do you see that after Biden came to power, did he even have more water armies and haters on the Internet?
So, let's choose the king who understands.
Do you say roar or not?