If it comes down to European vs Russian manufacturing capacity for missiles and hi-tech weaponry, etc, I'd put my money on Europe. Europe also has the advantage of seeing 5 years of Russia throwing their best at Ukraine, having their air defenses repeatedly breached by Ukraine, even deep into Russia using slow low-tech drones - they know many of Russia's weaknesses.
That is because contrary to what Russia claims, it is not a war between EU and Russia, but between Ukraine and Russia. EU support is there but still minuscule compared to what EU could do.
Ukraine isn't in the EU and the USA has a duty to help Ukraine but doesn't because they (choose your favourite) [have been compromised by Russia] [are too weak] [can't afford it] [don't have enough weapons left because they used them helping Israel commit genocide] [are scared of losing votes for a pedophile] [all of the above]
The US GBP is 100x large than Iranian one and yet the US cannot open the Strait of Hormuz and even defend own bases in the region from cheap drones (52 aircraft lost, most on the ground). GDP is not the only factor when it comes to military capabilities.
>The US GBP is 100x large than Iranian one and yet the US cannot open the Strait of Hormuz
The US regime has no support from its voters and taxpayers to get deeper into the IRan war because the US is the one who started it, it's not an existential threat for Americans in the US to spend more of their money or die intervening in the middle east.
But for EU what happens in Ukraine is an existential threat and they also didn't provoke the war there, so Europeans are more motivated to support the war against Russia than AMericans are to support military intervention in Iran.
Yemen, one of the poorest countries on earth, closed an important EU trade route for over a year and we couldn't fix it. Defending your land vs protecting your trade interests are different things.
