Well, howdy there, Internet people, it's Bell again.

So today, we're going to talk about the EU defending itself without the U.S.

Because of Trump's isolationist tendencies, there's been a lot of conversation about what happens if the rest of NATO has to defend Europe

without the U.S.

That leads us to a question.

Bell, I've been following the discussions about a possible U.S. NATO split and whether Europe

can take care of itself.

It seems very divided in opinion.

Many say that Europe will be fine.

You even said Europe could be a major power.

But the NATO boss said Europe is dreaming if it thinks it can defend itself without the US.

Then of course other Europeans are saying they can. Can you help explain the opposing positions

and say who is right? So, there aren't really opposing positions on this. I mean, sure,

there are some American nationalists who think nobody can do anything without the U.S.

But that's not a real position.

What's really going on is people using different definitions for the word defend.

If the U.S. and the rest of NATO split, the European and Canadian side of NATO would be a major power, and it would militarily outspend

both Russia and China without increasing beyond the current budget. The only competitor

nation that would outspend it is the U.S. They would be able to fight Russia, which would

be their immediate competitor in a conventional war.

As long as NATO stuck together, a move by Russia against them would be a big enough risk to deter the action.

In other words, they could defend Europe on a base level through conventional deterrence.

...