Trump’s Defense Cuts in Europe Will Backfire

Helix said:

I don't support King Tangface in any way, but it's well past time for the US to replace oil and for Europe to replace NG. This will help us both to tell some asshole countries to get bent. That will be a more effective strategy than perpetually escalating wars and putting new boomy bangers everywhere.

Click to expand...

And while everyone is happily running around in their super Prius putt putts, what will be powering the generating plants? Please don't say solar and windmills.
Btw, when are these electrics going to start paying their share of the gas taxes. You know, the tax that maintains the roads they travel on.

nitroexpress said:

And while everyone is happily running around in their super Prius putt putts, what will be powering the generating plants? Please don't say solar and windmills.
Btw, when are these electrics going to start paying their share of the gas taxes. You know, the tax that maintains the roads they travel on.

Click to expand...

Of course I'll say renewables. They are going to happen. Road taxes will also have to be updated.

Rogue Valley said:

Trump’s Defense Cuts in Europe Will Backfire | Foreign Policy

Rather than distributing military burdens equitably, Washington’s rollbacks weaken both the United States and its allies.

Pence in Poland.



Amen. Trump funding cuts in Europe damage the US military posture there and circuitously strengthen the Kremlin's hand.

Related: U.S. General: NATO's Advantage Over Russia Has 'Eroded'

Click to expand...

That is the point of Trump's entire foreign policy, to weaken the U.S. and it's allies. Guess who benefits...

It is time for some of you to join the 21st Century. The USSR does not exist any more and Russia is not militarily or economically capable of invading and occupying Europe.

The 21st Century has other bad guys. Terrorism, Iran, North Korea, China. The smart COC does not waste his resources fighting a fight that is already won. He moves those resources to more pressing areas.

BahamaBob said:

It is time for some of you to join the 21st Century. The USSR does not exist any more and Russia is not militarily or economically capable of invading and occupying Europe.

Click to expand...

Oh and...









You obviously have little or no knowledge of basic European geography, power projection, geopolitics or brinkmanship, thinking one must be able to invade and/or occupy Europe to threaten it.

The 21st Century has other bad guys. Terrorism, Iran, North Korea, China.

Click to expand...

China, maybe. Terrorism is terrorism. But Iran? North KOREA!? Lmaolmaolmaolmao

If a country refuses to spend enough money to keep a serious military, they shouldn't expect the US to come bail them out when things get bad.
Years ago, New Zealand stopped putting money into their military. When the US complained, New Zealand said that we could ignore long-standing treaties
and let them deal with any troubles that cropped up.

Rogue Valley said:

Trump’s Defense Cuts in Europe Will Backfire | Foreign Policy

Rather than distributing military burdens equitably, Washington’s rollbacks weaken both the United States and its allies.

Pence in Poland.



Amen. Trump funding cuts in Europe damage the US military posture there and circuitously strengthen the Kremlin's hand.

Related: U.S. General: NATO's Advantage Over Russia Has 'Eroded'

Click to expand...

It was also recently in the news that he cut funding and aid to Afghanistan. My immediate reaction was that he did it, because he couldn’t get a peace deal.

Trump looks for ways to punish people for not doing what he wants. Trump runs the White House like every single thing is about him and his ego. He doesn’t really care about the rest of the world, and he is too simple minded to see how his decisions could have terrible ramifications down the road

SheWolf said:

Trump runs the White House

Click to expand...

The problem is, whatever Trump does, the left goes against, even if it is good for the country. Too much partisan politics.

The left has been saying we need to reduce the defense budget for years. Well, here's a way to do it.

gino said:

The problem is, whatever Trump does, the left goes against, even if it is good for the country. Too much partisan politics.

The left has been saying we need to reduce the defense budget for years. Well, here's a way to do it.

Click to expand...

He should work with Democrats on military spending. I think everybody cares about common sense cutting

SheWolf said:

He should work with Democrats on military spending. I think everybody cares about common sense cutting

Click to expand...

First of all, the Democrats control the House. That is where the Budget comes from. I haven't seen them cut anything.

Second, if you think they have common sense, you haven't been watching the Democrat Debates.

BahamaBob said:

First of all, the Democrats control the House. That is where the Budget comes from. I haven't seen them cut anything.

Second, if you think they have common sense, you haven't been watching the Democrat Debates.

Click to expand...

Trump only cares about his wall

Rogue Valley said:

Trump’s Defense Cuts in Europe Will Backfire | Foreign Policy

Rather than distributing military burdens equitably, Washington’s rollbacks weaken both the United States and its allies.

Pence in Poland.



Amen. Trump funding cuts in Europe damage the US military posture there and circuitously strengthen the Kremlin's hand.

Related: U.S. General: NATO's Advantage Over Russia Has 'Eroded'

Click to expand...

$770 million cut? That just a tad over 1% of defense spending. We've lost Europe for sure.

SheWolf said:

Trump only cares about his wall

Click to expand...

So after a poster shows just how wrong your posts are, your only response is change the topic.

Sad really.

gino said:

The problem is, whatever Trump does, the left goes against, even if it is good for the country. Too much partisan politics.

The left has been saying we need to reduce the defense budget for years. Well, here's a way to do it.

Click to expand...

Looks like you're on your way to becoming a card carrying leftist. Can't beat 'em, join 'em kind of thingy.

A leader besides.

Problem is you don't pay enough attention to know what the positions are of the left. All you have is what you've created in your imagination.

Lord Tammerlain said:

Read the post that I quoted in my post



If someone is saying to heck with them in that context, it typically means leave them to fend by themselves does it not?

I agree with that poster, the US should leave Europe and pull out of Nato

Click to expand...

You and Putin-Trump agree on that.

And I don't see much coincidence there.

gino said:

If a country refuses to spend enough money to keep a serious military, they shouldn't expect the US to come bail them out when things get bad.
Years ago, New Zealand stopped putting money into their military. When the US complained, New Zealand said that we could ignore long-standing treaties
and let them deal with any troubles that cropped up.

Click to expand...

New Zealand is currently surrendering to China.

NZ is a great model for Putin-Trump and Rowers. Bad for USA and Australia.

Which is why you're citing it.

braindrain said:

So after a poster shows just how wrong your posts are, your only response is change the topic.

Sad really.

Click to expand...

Wow ****ing seriously dude? You rightards need to quit with the histrionic methed-out circle jerking like seriously you all need to slow down a little bit you're chafing it with how angrily you're masturbating in all of our faces...

BahamaBob said:

It is time for some of you to join the 21st Century. The USSR does not exist any more and Russia is not militarily or economically capable of invading and occupying Europe.

The 21st Century has other bad guys. Terrorism, Iran, North Korea, China. The smart COC does not waste his resources fighting a fight that is already won. He moves those resources to more pressing areas.

Click to expand...

You are actually incorrect, yes the ussr is dead, however since the reform of the russian military in 2008 to today russia is nearly as capable as the whole ussr was in terms of modern warfare. However russia today has as little a reason to invade europe as it did under the ussr, as it would lead to either world war or nuclear war.

What people fail to realize is most of the soviet plans for an all out push were not to take all the land, but rather because they felt their demise imminent and wanted to push their soldiers in a first strike and move them well beyond the main target of american and european nukes and to also eliminate the infrastructure to prevent a military resurgence. In nearly every case where the russians or in the past the ussr are trying to take europe, it is imminent nuclear war and they are trying to make the first move, not some belief they can take and hold europe without nuclear war.

Abbazorkzog said:

Oh and...

You obviously have little or no knowledge of basic European geography, power projection, geopolitics or brinkmanship, thinking one must be able to invade and/or occupy Europe to threaten it.



China, maybe. Terrorism is terrorism. But Iran? North KOREA!? Lmaolmaolmaolmao

Click to expand...

The zapad 2017 scared some countries, but the vostok 2018 really pushed the bar, vostok made nearly every soviet excercise during their peak look tiny by comparison, and it was intentionally chosen to be vostok or east for the biggest event as doing such a massive event in the west might have scared european nations into believing invasion was imminent.

beerftw said:

The zapad 2017 scared some countries, but the vostok 2018 really pushed the bar, vostok made nearly every soviet excercise during their peak look tiny by comparison, and it was intentionally chosen to be vostok or east for the biggest event as doing such a massive event in the west might have scared european nations into believing invasion was imminent.

Click to expand...

I'm all for Europe being more militarily independent from, and more of a military counterpart to, the US, and be able to do so in regard to Russia as well. But until they do so, Russia is a threat. And, imo the US being the sole power with any real military clout besides maybe France does just as much harm to NATO as Russia itself. The best and most obvious conclusion from decades of cooperation you'd think would be a politically and civilly stable Europe Federation with a treaty with the US which it maintained a co-equal role within the West similar to France and Germany, but nooo... nope. This is why we cant have nice things.

Abbazorkzog said:

I'm all for Europe being more militarily independent from, and more of a military counterpart to, the US, and be able to do so in regard to Russia as well. But until they do so, Russia is a threat. And, imo the US being the sole power with any real military clout besides maybe France does just as much harm to NATO as Russia itself. The best and most obvious conclusion from decades of cooperation you'd think would be a politically and civilly stable Europe Federation with a treaty with the US which it maintained a co-equal role within the West similar to France and Germany, but nooo... nope. This is why we cant have nice things.

Click to expand...

Germany still needs to be pestered on their defence, other nations are lacking, some don't have the defense money, others don't want to spend the money, while germany has almost no functional military left. After the nato obligation in afghanistan, germany let their equipment go to hell, they are lucky if they can even get a few jets in the air or ships in the water, or keep their tanks running.

The jet issue for example is a joke, their sensors are failing, but the company who made them no longer makes them, any other nation would have hired engineers and a company to make replacements either the same as the old ones or make them accomplish the same task, but instead germany decided to keep most of their jets grounded and do nothing about it. Their tanks are barely available, not from being destroyed but because they had broken down from extensive use in afghanistan, and the german govt does not want to spend the money.

It is sad when the richest country in europe can't keep a functioning military and yet the poorest bulgaria can. The only areas where they even keep close to almost having acceptable readiness is on their newest equipment like the eurofighter jets, which even then only 30% are airworthy and they just got them.

This is the opportunity that Russia has wanted for so long.

Rogue Valley said:

Amen. Trump funding cuts in Europe damage the US military posture there and circuitously strengthen the Kremlin's hand.

Click to expand...

Funny. People keep screaming that the military takes to much money. But when the President wants to cut something, then they scream he is wrong.

I am all for a strong military, as should be obvious. But Europe needs to do it's part also. I am one of those that thinks that until they start meeting their NATO mandates, it is time to sit back and watch until they get their own act together.

The US pulling most of the weight is not a viable answer anymore. They have had decades of good economic growth and did nothing. Now they need to get off their butts and try to do their own share.

Abbazorkzog said:

And, imo the US being the sole power with any real military clout besides maybe France does just as much harm to NATO as Russia itself.

Click to expand...

And you can not rely upon France.

In 1966 France left NATO, and stayed out for 43 years. They only rejoined 10 years ago, and there are already many in the country demanding that they leave again.

Germany here is the real weak part. Last year, none of their submarines were operational. Less than half of their fighters were operational. They have critical shortages in all areas of material, including weapons, body armor, optics, even ordinance for training.

And earlier this year they cut their military expenditures even more, to about half of what NATO requires.

This is the real problem. France actually is doing a very good job, it is Germany that is the biggest problem.

Abbazorkzog said:

Wow ****ing seriously dude? You rightards need to quit with the histrionic methed-out circle jerking like seriously you all need to slow down a little bit you're chafing it with how angrily you're masturbating in all of our faces...

Click to expand...

Aww I am sorry did I hurt your little feelings. So sorry.
Actually I am not sorry at all because what I said is exactly what she did. If the truth offends you this much then that is your problem

And just for the record I have more left leaning beliefs then right but please continue on embarrassing yourself.

Abbazorkzog said:

You obviously have little or no knowledge of basic European geography, power projection, geopolitics or brinkmanship, thinking one must be able to invade and/or occupy Europe to threaten it.

Click to expand...

Sorry, this image is really not applicable. Because this is based upon a Nuclear War. And at that point, every Conventional Conflict is over, and the war is basically lost by both sides.

In a nuclear war, there are no winners.

And even worse, whoever made that image is a complete idiot.

It only takes a momentary glimpse of this to see that. Just look at some of those missiles:

SS-N-18
SS-N-21
SS-N-23
SS-N-26
SS-N-27
SS-N-30A
SS-N-32

These are about half of those "missile tracks" on that map. And it is a complete fantasy at best, utterly retarded at worst. Now I will explain why.

Now first of all, it helps if you know NATO missile designation codes. I will explain what these are for those that do not know.

SS stands for "Surface to Surface". This is different than say an anti-aircraft missile like the SA-2, which is "Surface to Air". So we can tell by each of those codes that they are intended to be fired from the surface (land, water, or subsurface) at land targets.

And the numbers are just a series or family recognition.

But the "N"? Well, that means Naval. Each and every one of these missiles shown "leaping" out of the center of Russia that has the "N" in the nomenclature is a Naval Missile! In fact, most of them are submarine missiles (the rest are on Cruisers and Destroyers). So why in the hell are they drawn into this scary image like this? It makes absolutely no sense.

Yea, I might take this even the slightest bit seriously, the moment we have the first Moscow Fleet sailing around the city. Until then, this entire image is complete garbage.