Go anywhere else, and on closer examination you'll find that American law is in fact very relevant, with local governments often bending over backwards to accommodate US legal provisions. Copyright, financial regulation, and international travel are some of the areas where this is usually apparent, but far from the only ones.
Check US Special 301 report, Romania and Bulgaria were on the US naughty list, and had travel warnings issued for them, despite being safer countries than the US and also important NATO members in the region, with the reason given in that report that US entertainment piracy is rampant in the region lol.
The big US movie studios cand leverage the US gov influence to put pressure on other countries to crack down on piracy. That's how strong they are. I remember the good ol' days in Romania when piracy was absolutely rampant that you would see ads in the city about ordering CDs and DVDs with quality pirated content through the mail, then we joined NATO, then suddenly anti-piracy laws became way stricter. You gotta play by Uncle Sams's rules if you join his playpen.
Snowden has to live in Russia, because pretty much all Western countries would put him on the first plane to the USA if he ever tried to enter.
My country extradites even our own citizens to the USA.
To be fair to the US they don't push you out of a window. You get your day in court (although it may take several decades- see Guantanamo bay).
PS: I'm from europe
That thought is the result of decades of successful US propaganda. The people who actually lived through WW2 in Europe thought different. This poll [1] asked: "In your opinion, which nation contributed the most to Hitler's defeat?"
[1] https://www.les-crises.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/sondage...
The USA has military bases all over Europe with people and missiles. That started with WW2. How would they not have huge influence on what we do? No european country has a random military base in Ohio or whatever.
Decades of Holywood propaganda and related American cultural exports. There is a reason the Pentagon gives free access to military equipment to Holywood studios, but only if the military is depicted positively / in a heroic manner.
There is a book called "When Titans Clashed" that may be of interest to you in regards to your statement about "europe has freedom today and not a german dictatorship is the US in WW2."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_oversea... says that Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Singapore (admittedly not European), and the United Kingdom all have military bases in the US.
[1] https://www.ifop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/3025-1-study...
Also USA funded terrorism, mafia, in italy… not something to brag about.
Do you really not see the difference? I don't like the fact that the US has this presence or influence in europe, but it is factual. Why you think stating a fact is braging, I'm not sure.
German soldiers killed on the Eastern Front before the final battles of 1945: 2,742,909.
On the Western Front, the Balkans, Africa, Italy, and Northern Europe: 640,541.
I'm no mathematician, but but it seems like it wouldn't have been possible without Russians killing over 75% of the German soldiers and then marching on Berlin. Could Europe have have handled the other 25% without the US? Maybe. Could the US have handled the other 75% without Russia? I am very skeptical.
>also one of the reasons most of europe has freedom today and not a german dictatorship is the US in WW2
How does that invalidate my argument? What is your alternative explanation for why the US has outsized impact on laws in europe today?
Second, while it is true that US power projection through the military is one of the ways it influences other countries, including in Europe, it isn’t the only way. The US dollar is the most held reserve currency in the world and is the standard for exchange in almost every country, outside of Russia, China, etc., means that most international economic activity passes through US financial institutions. That gives the US a lot of influence, as it means you cannot stray too far afield of US legal norms without risking those trading abilities. When the US pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal and reimposed sanctions, it was the only country doing it, but European trade with Iran also went to almost zero because it was impossible to do business without touching a US bank at some point.
Third, the US bases and military presence in Europe was because of the cold war, not because of anything the US did in WWII. Since WWII wasn’t fought in America, its logistics, manufacturing, etc. were intact, compared to the rubble that was Europe. NATO, basing agreements, the US outsized military spending, etc. were to counter the only other super power, the USSR, and prevent Europe from falling under the iron dome. It was also to prevent the intra-European military competitions and arms races that fueled interstate wars for the previous 1,000 years.
Nowadays europeean countries interventions in Africa are still very similar to proxy wars, despite the EU and all.
That is complete incorrect. The dollar is used as a reserve currency because it is stable, has a large amount of liquidity in its financial market, it has a stable legal and political system, and the large trade deficit the U.S. runs. The dollar accounted for 60% of foreign reserves and the euro is second place, with 20%. They are followed by the Japanese yen and the British pound. Russia and China are totalitarian governments that artificially control their own currency flows, as does India (controlling currency, not totalitarianism). People don’t want to use other currencies as their reserves because they aren’t stable and reliable the way the US is, not because the US makes them. You see it in the runner up currencies, that are all large economies with democratic stable governments and open financial markets. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) are trying to make their own version of the euro, so we will see how well that goes and how trusted that is as a currency.
> Nowadays europeean countries interventions in Africa are still very similar to proxy wars, despite the EU and all.
I said “It was also to prevent the intra-European military competitions and arms races that fueled interstate wars for the previous 1,000 years”. Intra means inside and interstate means between states. Proxy wars in Africa are neither inside Europe nor are they between states, since they are literally proxies. Since the last two intra-European interstate wars were WWI and WWII, I’d say small scale proxy wars are a step in the right direction.
Not the direction you are aiming, but I find Kaliningrad/Königsberg a fascinating example of soviet imperialism.
Only you can decide whether you think this was the Russian flag or not but I suspect you will not be able to simultaneously argue that it was the Soviet flag during WW2 and the Russian flag during communism. If you believe Russia occupied countries such as Ukraine and Belarus and controlled/occupied Poland, Romania etc, then you will have to accept that the Russians did in fact do the most to defeat the Germans.
If you don't believe it was Russia, and rather the USSR, then you will have to accept it was the collective efforts of countries of the USSR (and the occupation by Russia falls into doubt).
You can't have it both ways.
In either case, the Americans played a lesser role in the defeat of the Germans in WW2 and more properly could be credited with defeating the Japanese. This would make sense as the US is more a naval power than a land power.
https://www.rferl.org/a/did-us-lend-lease-aid-tip-the-balanc...