And if you mean "diplomatic hostiles" in that the US is angry at the EU for not cooperating with the sanction process against targeted countries or meeting their military obligations so that they qualify to vote in international politics, then I guess you're right.
Come on, really? Any cursory search of news, international wires, and related would clearly show numerous hostile statements and non-cooperation towards EU on numerous previously shared fronts. Not to mention Germany needing to constantly step up in what was previously the US's traditional role as advocate of liberty/justice on an internal stage (ex. recent Russian poisoning).
If you can't find an overwhelming abundance of literature to back up the previous poster's claim, I'll search and update this thread with a representative set.
Venezuela? Iran? All you have seen is a change towards friendliness to Russia. Its not a change in the policy of using sieges without declaring war to starve and kill populations to somehow punish leaders (I refuse the word sanctions because it is a weasel word). That practice is alive and well and worse then ever; the only change is in who its weirded against.
I just linked the State department's actual list of sanctions and their stance on sanctions and you call me wrong and link the daily frick'n beast and "The hates Trump more than cancer Guardian" to refute original sources?
I mean I'm sure their opinions are good representation for how they feel, but should they refute facts as reported by the bureaucrats which actually enforce the sanctions? I mean come on, this is ridiculous levels of gas lighting.
Lol, first I didn't say the UN, which is ridiculous. And second if you think the Philippines has as much say in if China takes over the South China Sea as the US has, then you are under a severe misunderstanding of how the world works.
Also it's ridiculous to think the UN has any real say in these things.
And if you mean "diplomatic hostiles" in that the US is angry at the EU for not cooperating with the sanction process against targeted countries or meeting their military obligations so that they qualify to vote in international politics, then I guess you're right.