>>150907200
>I would bet all of my money that they couldn't defend themselves without US support.
Against who? Russia? They together with their other allies absent the USA absolutely could, no sweat. To get Europe together as a formidable military bloc in its own right? That would take a few years and some belt-tightening, but they could do it. They were slow to recognise that America might suddenly and unilaterally terminate their commitments. Those agreements by the way are one part of the reason the USA is so powerful in the first place, if they do pull out it's a "fuck you, I got mine". Bad policy to be so reliant, I guess, but not reflective of what they could do if they had to, if they weren't on short notice.

>No, it is just pro nation dictatorship
In practice and by common definition it's more than that. Fascists appeal to a myth of national superiority, a necessity of purging the nation of undesirable elements, total economic self-sufficiency, and war or at least violence as a core value. On a personal level it invariably appeals to emotional positions rather than reasoned ones. The problem, from a fascist's perspective, is that the nation is not inherently superior, the undesirable elements tend to include ones that keep the nation afloat in the long term, complete economic self-sufficiency is less beneficial than trade, and they invariably are total shit at war, valuing pomp over policy.

>>150907213
US =/= NATO. NATO would be greatly lessened without the US but they're not identical.