Trump scolds NATO allies over defense spending

[Erod]

God forbid we require our NATO allies to pay their contractual share of the defense budget.

 

[ludin]

Oh? How was he wrong?

Heck, they all signed the agreement...and some of them won't abide by it. They should.

he wasn't wrong.

According to Nato's 2016 annual report, only five countries met the 2% defence spending target - the US, the UK, Greece, Poland and Estonia.

The alliance hopes that all 28 member-states will reach this target by 2024

he was 100% correct.

 

[Deuce]

God forbid we require our NATO allies to pay their contractual share of the defense budget.

It's not a "contractual share." It's a guideline.

I say forget the whole thing, it's long past time America stops being the world's police.

 

[ludin]

It's a fact. Donald Trump thought it was a legal obligation, you're arguing about a moral obligation.

Donald Trump may very well decide to weaken NATO. It is, after all, what Putin would want.

actually it is an agreed to commitment by members of NATO.

According to Nato's 2016 annual report, only five countries met the 2% defence spending target - the US, the UK, Greece, Poland and Estonia.

The alliance hopes that all 28 member-states will reach this target by 2024

 

[Erod]

It's not a "contractual share." It's a guideline.

I say forget the whole thing, it's long past time America stops being the world's police.

So if we don't, how long until World War III against China, Russia, or both?

Europe would be easy fodder for them without the U.S.

 

[Deuce]

actually it is an agreed to commitment by members of NATO.

According to Nato's 2016 annual report, only five countries met the 2% defence spending target - the US, the UK, Greece, Poland and Estonia.

The alliance hopes that all 28 member-states will reach this target by 2024

It's a guideline, he thought it was a contract.

 

[Deuce]

So if we don't, how long until World War III against China, Russia, or both?

Europe would be easy fodder for them without the U.S.

Russia and China are not going to invade Europe. There's no scenario in which they benefit from the outcome.

 

[eohrnberger]

God forbid we require our NATO allies to pay their contractual share of the defense budget.

Agreed.

It's now embarrassing and demeaning to hold your partners that willingly entered into a deal to the terms of the deal???

No wonder some fail at business and economics so badly.

 

[Deuce]

Agreed.

It's now embarrassing and demeaning to hold your partners that willingly entered into a deal to the terms of the deal???

No wonder some fail at business and economics so badly.

Maybe if we slide back down to the 2% target, they'll be forced to pick up the slack.

 

[Aberration]

I say we **** can NATO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tigerace117]

Huh?? I said nothing about "Trump supporters". Did you misunderstand my words?



Doesn't matter how "old" they are. Their actions are child-like.



He didn't give anyone the location. You don't really understand how our submarine force works, do you? You should read this interview and get educated:

Geopolitical Operative: "Idiots" at NYT Failed in Their Hit Piece on Trump and Duterte



Actually, you are not "just taking him at his own words". You are taking him at the spin that the Mainstream Media feeds you...and you are ignoring the reality of his words.

For example, do you believe Trump said, "“Germans are very bad, very bad.”? You probably do because Der Spiegel, Germany's Mainstream Media, reported it...and our own Mainstream Media echoed their report. The problem is, though, that's not what he said...at all. They outright spun his words into something totally different. But you...taking Trump "at his own words"...are only taking him at the Mainstream Media's words.

In any case, considering how you seem unable to understand MY clear and concise posts, it probably won't do you any good taking anyone "at their own words".

No, I made a pun because it seems you have to be telepathic to get what Trump."really means".

And shoving your way to the front of the group isn't?

Even giving the general vicinity of a submarine is not a good idea. Yes, our submarines are quieter than anything the Norks or even the Chinese could easily detect, barring a screw up; the problem is that in combat screw ups can happen, and do get people killed.

So what did he "actually say" then? If the Germans supposedly don't understand him?

Ah, you mean me not jumping on the Trump bandwagon because you think I should? Oh well :roll:

 

[Mycroft]

It's a fact. Donald Trump thought it was a legal obligation, you're arguing about a moral obligation.

Donald Trump may very well decide to weaken NATO. It is, after all, what Putin would want.

It's what the American taxpayer should want...instead of being NATO's sugar daddy.

 

[Mycroft]

No, I made a pun because it seems you have to be telepathic to get what Trump."really means".

Okay.

And shoving your way to the front of the group isn't?

He didn't shove anything. He simply took his place...at the front of the group.

Even giving the general vicinity of a submarine is not a good idea. Yes, our submarines are quieter than anything the Norks or even the Chinese could easily detect, barring a screw up; the problem is that in combat screw ups can happen, and do get people killed.

The subs in the "vicinity" are common knowledge. They aren't hiding. The ones that are hiding were not revealed. Trump didn't give anything away. In any case, if combat does break out and those boomers are used...nothing will stop them from doing their job.

So what did he "actually say" then? If the Germans supposedly don't understand him?

He was speaking in the context of trade. Maybe the Mainstream Media didn't mention that, eh? That's why you shouldn't listen to them. You don't get the whole story...just the one they want you to have.

Ah, you mean me not jumping on the Trump bandwagon because you think I should? Oh well :roll:

I don't think you should jump on ANY bandwagon. I don't. For sure, you shouldn't jump on the Mainstream Media's bandwagon. They aren't doing you any favors...and you aren't doing yourself any favors by being their useful idiot.

Think for yourself.

 

[Mycroft]

Maybe if we slide back down to the 2% target, they'll be forced to pick up the slack.

Nah...they'll just spin it to make the US look bad.

I say don't pay a dime...until they pony up. They are STILL going to spin things, but they'll know we won't be their sugar daddy.

 

[eohrnberger]

Maybe if we slide back down to the 2% target, they'll be forced to pick up the slack.

Maybe pull out the troops from NATO countries?

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Russia and China are not going to invade Europe. There's no scenario in which they benefit from the outcome.

Yes and also USA's military spending is 36 % of the worlds military spending and if you combine it with the total spending of EU countries is almost 50 % of the worlds military spending. On top of that you have spending of other allied countries like Japan, South Korea and Australia. While the combined military spending of China and Russia is less then 20 % of the world's military spending. Also the increased military spending of EU and USA will probably only lead to that China and Russia will increase their miliary spending. So the only one benefiting are the miliary industral complexes in USA, EU, China and Russia.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallm...expenditure-in-2016-infographic/#206ae84743f3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_European_Union