Anderson Cooper(CNN) falsely claims NATO members arent expected to pay dues

[Vox]

I am literally watching Anderson Cooper's show right now, so there's no YouTube video up yet to upload.

At the beginning of the show, Anderson Cooper started out with a diatribe about how Trump is lying about NATO countries not paying their fair share. He claimed that "there is no 'pot' that countries are expected to pay into to fund NATO". He continued trying to make the point that NATO members DONT have to pay anything to support the organization.

However, in the very next sentence, he admits that there is an agreement between NATO countries to pay at least 2% of their own GDP to fund Nato, AND that aside from the US(we have been paying 3.5% annually), only Britain has paid anything near 2%(they paid 2.1%), while Germany, France and others are paying 1.2%, 1.35% and 1.8%).

Either this is yet another example of CNN to argue, using deceptive semantics, or they are just hoping that they have sufficiently vilified republicans, that their viewers are willing to swallow whatever nonsense they hear.

The funniest part of the interview was when they had their 'military expert', Col Ralph Peters, push additional propaganda, by vilifying Trump using several personal insults. Its funny, because Peters used to work at Fox, where he ALWAYS ridiculed democrats, especially Obama!

Cooper is one of the most ignorant and loyal tools of the Corporate Overlords that exists.

CNN is the new order of garbage journalism.

 

[Slyfox696]

Your link was an official NATO release from 2014, updated in Sep 2016.

The press release was not updated in 2016, that's absurd. You can't update a press release two years later. Obviously that was the last time the page itself was edited, but that could be for any number of reasons. So, again, you clearly couldn't get that correct.

That being said it doesn't change the fact you posted something provably false when you claimed you didn't quote my link to NATO's website.

My link was an official NATO release from 2018.

That doesn't even make sense. I quoted a historical document, you posted ongoing information. Why do you continuosly post lies and misinformation?

Of course, my question there is merely rhetorical.

Brush up on your English.

That doesn't make sense either, even if everything you posted in this post was correct (which, as I've shown, obviously was not). But I'll give you a pass since I'm guessing English isn't your first language.

 

[Vox]

Oh, I guess I'd seem more moderate if I blindly accepted whatever lies are being pushed at CNN at any specific moment? So, moderation means not thinking for yourself, and maybe supporting the increasingly radical democrats? Maybe if I praised democrats when their policies fail, and perpetually complain about republicans even when their policies work.

Or maybe being a moderate is accepting that, since I'm white, I'm automatically a racist with unending privilege, and therefore should be happy to support open borders, ever-increasing taxes, and attempts at criminalizing speech. Maybe I should prove my moderation by donning a Che Guevara t shirt and whining about how we need to END capitalism and replace it with a socialist democratic(authoritarian) system.

Most of those beliefs, and many more radical ones, are portrayed as 'moderate' by the media these days, and anyone whose 1mm to the center of Nancy Pelosi is characterized as a "right wing extremist".

:mrgreen:

Preach it.......they need a word of reality so badly.

 

[ModerationNow!]

*******Can a moderator please move this to partisan politics? I accidentally posted this thread in the wrong area. When I went to post it, I clicked on the most used links on my smartphone, which at this site is normally the 'partisan politics' area, but just noticed its in the wrong spot. I tried to erase it all and repost it in the correct forum area, but there apparently is a 20 minute limit on editing posts/threads, which makes erasing it impossible from my end.******

 

[Barnacle]

There is no "NATO Fund", right? The 2% is to be spent on one's own military, right?

That's my understanding and appears to be what Cooper is saying. Cooper is correct on the structure of the deal, and Trump is correct that members need to do as agreed.

Yes and no ... read up where the 2 types of funds go:

https://www.nato.int/cps/ie/natohq/topics_67655.htm

 

[Slyfox696]

It sounds like you've got no answer to a legit question. :lamo

No, it's just that the legitimate answer requires you to have an understanding of what the 2% actually is. Until you demonstrate an understanding of that, you won't be able to comprehend my response. So you demonstrate you have an iota of the facts and I'll answer your question.

So why are you ducking the challenge? Why won't you admit what has already been made obvious in this thread? Again, my question is merely rhetorical, for obvious reasons.

Oh, I guess I'd seem more moderate if I blindly accepted whatever lies are being pushed at CNN at any specific moment?

Except the only person who didn't tell the truth was you. :shrug:

I have no idea if the OP is correct or incorrect as to what he says Cooper said.

But you do know the position the OP took, based on what he claimed Cooper said, was false. You've already agreed to that.

But based on what he said that Cooper said

What he said Cooper said was based on the 2%, as you well know. So why are you continuing to argue this?

Cooper is one of the most ignorant and loyal tools of the Corporate Overlords that exists.

CNN is the new order of garbage journalism.

And yet, you write that in response to false information. Why?

 

[Barnacle]

The press release was not updated in 2016, that's absurd. You can't update a press release two years later. Obviously that was the last time the page itself was edited, but that could be for any number of reasons. So, again, you clearly couldn't get that correct.

That being said it doesn't change the fact you posted something provably false when you claimed you didn't quote my link to NATO's website.

That doesn't even make sense. I quoted a historical document, you posted ongoing information. Why do you continuosly post lies and misinformation?

Of course, my question there is merely rhetorical.

That doesn't make sense either, even if everything you posted in this post was correct (which, as I've shown, obviously was not). But I'll give you a pass since I'm guessing English isn't your first language.

Whatever you say, sly, I never quoted your link.

 

[Mycroft]

There is no "NATO Fund", right? The 2% is to be spent on one's own military, right?

That's my understanding and appears to be what Cooper is saying. Cooper is correct on the structure of the deal, and Trump is correct that members need to do as agreed.

There IS a "NATO Fund". Here's what it's all about: https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2010-04-22_NATO_Common_Funds_Burdensharing.pdf

However, there is no agreement to contribute 2% of anything by any member nations into that fund. Some nations contribute very little. Some nations contribute a lot.

So Cooper got it totally wrong.

 

[Empirica]

I am literally watching Anderson Cooper's show right now, so there's no YouTube video up yet to upload.

At the beginning of the show, Anderson Cooper started out with a diatribe about how Trump is lying about NATO countries not paying their fair share. He claimed that "there is no 'pot' that countries are expected to pay into to fund NATO". He continued trying to make the point that NATO members DONT have to pay anything to support the organization.

However, in the very next sentence, he admits that there is an agreement between NATO countries to pay at least 2% of their own GDP to fund Nato, AND that aside from the US(we have been paying 3.5% annually), only Britain has paid anything near 2%(they paid 2.1%), while Germany, France and others are paying 1.2%, 1.35% and 1.8%).

Either this is yet another example of CNN to argue, using deceptive semantics, or they are just hoping that they have sufficiently vilified republicans, that their viewers are willing to swallow whatever nonsense they hear.

Left-wing viewers would never think of verifying any of those left-wing media "facts" they swallow.

The funniest part of the interview was when they had their 'military expert', Col Ralph Peters, push additional propaganda, by vilifying Trump using several personal insults. Its funny, because Peters used to work at Fox, where he ALWAYS ridiculed democrats, especially Obama!

Col Peters is obviously a devout capitalist, which doesn't surprise me but he appears to be politically 'neutral', which does.

You don't see much of that among informed people these days; especially among the "fake news" informed people.

It's interesting that you style yourself as a moderate, but never fail to repeat the Trump-approved lines.

Hmmm; might your post be considered a Media approved 'Trump attack line'?! :blink:

 

[rocket88]

Left-wing viewers would never think of verifying any of those left-wing media "facts" they swallow.

Col Peters is obviously a devout capitalist, which doesn't surprise me but he appears to be politically 'neutral', which does.

You don't see much of that among informed people these days; especially the "fake news" informed people.

Hmmm; might your post be considered a Media approved 'Trump attack line'?! :blink:

Yes, I have no capacity for independent thought. Oops, confused myself with you for a second there!

 

[ecofarm]

There IS a "NATO Fund". Here's what it's all about: https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2010-04-22_NATO_Common_Funds_Burdensharing.pdf

However, there is no agreement to contribute 2% of anything by any member nations into that fund. Some nations contribute very little. Some nations contribute a lot.

So Cooper got it totally wrong.

From that:

When burdensharing contributions are negotiated, the alliance reportedly has taken into consideration the United States’ worldwide security responsibilities. For example, the 2003 U.S. contribution to the NSIP budget was 23.8%—not too far above Germany’s 19.8%. But that same year, U.S. GDP was $10.3 trillion, while the combined GDP of the other 18 NATO allies was $8.9 trillion. If NATO common funds assessments were based solely on GDP, the U.S. share that year would have been 53.6% and Germany’s would have been 9.8%.17

That's not what Trump is talking about with 2%.

 

[Slyfox696]

I don't post lies

Whatever you say, sly, I never quoted your link.

Now...if you want to say that the OP quoted Cooper incorrectly, then do so. Provide a video. We can go on from there. At this point, though, everything I've said is correct.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1017206210393722880

Here's the video. You're welcome to watch the whole thing, but you can skip to 1:30 to get what we're discussing. You can clearly see Anderson Cooper was correct and the OP was wrong. Furthermore, Cooper even says at around 2:40 "aside from a token amount to keep the lights on in Brussels", so clearly he addressed that part and his "pot" comment, cited by the OP, referred to the 2%. Cooper was correct.

Will you now admit that?

So Cooper got it totally wrong.

Except he didn't, as you can now see for yourself.

So will you admit you got it wrong or, at the very least, the OP got it wrong which has since caused you to say things which are untrue?

 

[Mycroft]

From that:



That's not what Trump is talking about with 2%.

Trump talked about both.

Maybe that's why Cooper got it all wrong, though as a reporter one would expect him to know what he's talking about.

 

[Barnacle]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1017206210393722880

Here's the video. You're welcome to watch the whole thing, but you can skip to 1:30 to get what we're discussing. You can clearly see Anderson Cooper was correct and the OP was wrong. Furthermore, Cooper even says at around 2:40 "aside from a token amount to keep the lights on in Brussels", so clearly he addressed that part and his "pot" comment, cited by the OP, referred to the 2%. Cooper was correct.

Will you now admit that?

Except he didn't, as you can now see for yourself.

So will you admit you got it wrong or, at the very least, the OP got it wrong which has since caused you to say things which are untrue?

Wake up, sly. I din't quote your link. Your link is part of your statement. My answer was in response to the bolded part in your statement. (Good grief, man.)

 

[Slyfox696]

Maybe that's why Cooper got it all wrong

Except he didn't, as you can see for yourself from the video.

Wake up, sly. I din't quote your link.

I mean, you can keep posting that lie and I can keep posting the proof as long as you'd like.

 

[Barnacle]

Except he didn't, as you can see for yourself from the video.

I mean, you can keep posting that lie and I can keep posting the proof as long as you'd like.

I realize now why you are befuddled ... you never read my link to the 2018 NATO article which states a summary of the 2014 NATO summit:

"... At the Wales Summit in 2014, NATO leaders agreed to reverse the trend of declining defence budgets and decided:

Allies currently meeting the 2% guideline on defence spending will aim to continue to do so;
Allies whose current proportion of GDP spent on defence is below this level will: halt any decline; aim to increase defence expenditure in real terms as GDP grows; and aim to move towards the 2% guideline within a decade with a view to meeting their NATO Capability Targets and filling NATO’s capability shortfalls. ..."

https://www.nato.int/cps/ie/natohq/topics_67655.htm

In other words: the guys who have been spending their share of 2% since 2006 are okay (pat on the shoulder), while the naughty guys get a 10-year span to creep up from what they should have been doing for the last 8 years ...

 

[Slyfox696]

I realize now why you are befuddled

I'm not befuddled, you're just not telling the truth.

The 2% doesn't go to NATO, the 2% refers to defense spending within individual countries. As such, the OP was false, your claim it "was with immediate effect in 2006" is false, as is "NATO was running a deficit because half the countries were "paying" their NATO part on a lot less than 2%" and you still are pushing these falsehoods.

But hey, at least you gave up the lie you didn't quote my NATO link. Now if you'll stop posting the other lies, we'll be good.

 

[Barnacle]

I'm not befuddled, you're just not telling the truth.

The 2% doesn't go to NATO, the 2% refers to defense spending within individual countries. As such, the OP was false, your claim it "was with immediate effect in 2006" is false, as is "NATO was running a deficit because half the countries were "paying" their NATO part on a lot less than 2%" and you still are pushing these falsehoods.

But hey, at least you gave up the lie you didn't quote my NATO link. Now if you'll stop posting the other lies, we'll be good.

It's good to see that you admit that you haven't got the foggiest what you're talking about ... and I never lied because I never quoted your obsolete, outdated NATO link.

 

[Slyfox696]

It's good to see that you admit that you haven't got the foggiest what you're talking about

I provided the NATO link which proves me right and you wrong. :shrug:

... and I never lied because I never quoted your obsolete, outdated NATO link.

"I never quoted that thing I quoted!"

 

[Mycroft]

Okay. I watched the video.

This is the reason I don't watch these talking potato heads. Cooper spins everything. He spins Trump's words. He spins the facts about NATO. And then he comes to conclusions based on the spin...not on what Trump said.

For example...Cooper characterizes the operating costs of NATO to be a "token amount to keep the lights on". LOL!! NATO's operating budget is hardly a token amount and it pays for much more than to keep the lights on.

For 2018...

The Civil Budget - €245.8 million

The Military Budget - €1.325 billion

The NATO Security Investment Program - €700 million

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_67655.htm​

That's well over 2 billion Euros.

Now...Trump said that the US has paid what other countries have not paid...that other countries are delinquent in their contributions. I don't know. That may or may not be true. I did a little research, but haven't been able to find out the dollar amount that all member nations actually paid. It is entirely possible that the US HAS covered what other countries have not paid. Cooper doesn't address that issue. He just contends that Trump is flat out wrong and Cooper's expressed, spinning reasoning is faulty.

Bottom line...Cooper may or may not actually know the facts. I don't know one way or the other. But what he said in his monologue is a mish-mash of fact, non-fact, spin and conclusion that is totally worthless for a thinking, reasoning person to consume. My advice: Stay away from anti-Trump talking potato heads.

 

[Barnacle]

It's weird how these lefters are so misinformed.

What is really weird is that because I didn't use the exact, specific terminology to phrase my statement I am accused of lying and being ignorant of how NATO works.

 

[Mycroft]

What is really weird is that because I didn't use the exact, specific terminology to phrase my statement I am accused of lying and being ignorant of how NATO works.

That's how Sly operates.

 

[Barnacle]

Okay. I watched the video.

This is the reason I don't watch these talking potato heads. Cooper spins everything. He spins Trump's words. He spins the facts about NATO. And then he comes to conclusions based on the spin...not on what Trump said.

For example...Cooper characterizes the operating costs of NATO to be a "token amount to keep the lights on". LOL!! NATO's operating budget is hardly a token amount and it pays for much more than to keep the lights on.

For 2018...

The Civil Budget - €245.8 million

The Military Budget - €1.325 billion

The NATO Security Investment Program - €700 million

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_67655.htm​

That's well over 2 billion Euros.

Now...Trump said that the US has paid what other countries have not paid...that other countries are delinquent in their contributions. I don't know. That may or may not be true. I did a little research, but haven't been able to find out the dollar amount that all member nations actually paid. It is entirely possible that the US HAS covered what other countries have not paid. Cooper doesn't address that issue. He just contends that Trump is flat out wrong and Cooper's expressed, spinning reasoning is faulty.

Bottom line...Cooper may or may not actually know the facts. I don't know one way or the other. But what he said in his monologue is a mish-mash of fact, non-fact, spin and conclusion that is totally worthless for a thinking, reasoning person to consume. My advice: Stay away from anti-Trump talking potato heads.

I'm glad you read the article in that link, with all its sub-chapters, and probably understand now how NATO operates and why Trump is determined to make all NATO members cough up the min 2% they all agreed to in 2006.

(The liberal dimwits are really wearing me out.)

 

[Barnacle]

That's how Sly operates.

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind.

 

[Mycroft]

I'm glad you read the article in that link, with all its sub-chapters, and probably understand now how NATO operates and why Trump is determined to make all NATO members cough up the min 2% they all agreed to in 2006.

(The liberal dimwits are really wearing me out.)

I didn't address any "2%"...at least, not in this post.