US defence secretary seeks to hearten Nato relations

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

B.S.

"Many countries (in NATO) owe us a tremendous amount of money for many years back, where they’re delinquent, as far as I’m concerned, because the United States has had to pay for them."

As of 2014, NATO’s collective agreement instructed member countries to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense by 2024...

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/jul/11/donald-trump/trump-falsely-claims-nato-countries-owe-united-sta/

 

 

 

 

Only 7 NATO members hit alliance’s 2 percent GDP defense spending target in 2022

 

BELFAST — Just seven of NATO’s 30 member states met its 2 percent GDP defense spending target in 2022, figures from the alliance’s newly published annual report show, while Russia’s invasion of Ukraine highlighted for many the criticality of future defense spending in Europe.

The US, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and the United Kingdom, all achieved the standard with Croatia and France among those falling just short. Others were further behind.

 

 

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03/only-7-nato-members-hit-alliances-2-percent-gdp-defense-spending-target-in-2022/

Edited April 23, 2023 by Mac Mickmanus

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

B.S

 

Only 7 NATO members hit alliance’s 2 percent GDP defense spending target in 2022

 

BELFAST — Just seven of NATO’s 30 member states met its 2 percent GDP defense spending target in 2022, figures from the alliance’s newly published annual report show, while Russia’s invasion of Ukraine highlighted for many the criticality of future defense spending in Europe.

The US, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and the United Kingdom, all achieved the standard with Croatia and France among those falling just short. Others were further behind.

 

 

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03/only-7-nato-members-hit-alliances-2-percent-gdp-defense-spending-target-in-2022/

.None of the Nato nations were in violation of the agreement despite Trump's claims. Trump's claim was false.

[billd766]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO a negotiated peace deal.

I disagree.

 

IF Trump is re-elected he will try to impose a peace deal on the Ukraine but I don't think NATO, the EU or the UK will permit it.

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

.None of the Nato nations were in violation of the agreement despite Trump's claims. Trump's claim was false.

Trump said "As far as I'm concerned" 

He wasn't claiming a fact .

Anyway, that's enough from me for today about discussing and dissecting Donald's historical words , 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Trump said "As far as I'm concerned" 

He wasn't claiming a fact .

Anyway, that's enough from me for today about discussing and dissecting Donald's historical words , 

Because US presidents have no way to easily know if countries are in breach of NATO rules or not?

[vandeventer]

48 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

No, Russia has already made clear they won't negotiate a withdrawal that doesn't involve keeping occupied territory. Ukraine has made it clear that it wants all its territory back, including Crimea. Failure to send Ukraine advanced weaponry would only result in Russia winning, an intolerable outcome for the west. The onus on preventing ww3 lies entirely with Russia. The provocation argument is Russian propaganda.

Than they are at a stalemate so if the USA supplies Ukraine with the big guns Russia will use theirs and Russia will win. As I said the only thig that will stop Russia is Russian people.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, vandeventer said:

Than they are at a stalemate so if the USA supplies Ukraine with the big guns Russia will use theirs and Russia will win. As I said the only thig that will stop Russia is Russian people.

Russia doesn't have advanced weaponry at its disposal. It only has nuclear and it's not going to use it.

[candide]

7 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What Trump actually said was that the USA "may  not" automatically defend any NATO Countries who didn't financially contribute to supporting NATO .

   Trump was encouraging other Countries to pay towards funding NATO

 

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

<deleted>

"Many countries (in NATO) owe us a tremendous amount of money for many years back, where they’re delinquent, as far as I’m concerned, because the United States has had to pay for them."

As of 2014, NATO’s collective agreement instructed member countries to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense by 2024...

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/jul/11/donald-trump/trump-falsely-claims-nato-countries-owe-united-sta/

 

 

As usual, Trumps statement is misleading. The military budget of each country is not "funding NATO". It's not like a cotisation that other members have to pay if some members don't pay enough. Each country spends for its own defence objectives, with a minimal coordination with NATO.

 

It also doesn't address the core problem. Of course, it is better If members spend more, we all agree on it, but It's not the key issue. The key issue is how spendings are coordinated to optimise the efficiency of NATO as a whole. The total amount spent by European NATO members is far from being ridiculous, and is much higher than say, Russia. However, it is not optimised to avoid duplicated spending etc...

For example, if Spain would increase its budget to buy tanks, and there would be already enough tanks in other countries, this budget increase would be useless.

 

Edit. The 2022 total defense budget of European NATO countries is around $300 billion, in the same order of magnitude as China, and around 4 times Russia's defense budget.

 

Edited April 23, 2023 by candide

[asf6]

It's interesting to see the topic of NATO members defence spending keep coming up. The US were complaining about the same thing 25 years ago!

[ozimoron]

8 hours ago, asf6 said:

It's interesting to see the topic of NATO members defence spending keep coming up. The US were complaining about the same thing 25 years ago!

25 years ago it wasn't needed because the USSR collapsed. There was no longer a viable enemy and Russia was making friendly overtures. Pretty soon we will be back in the same place.

[vandeventer]

11 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Russia doesn't have advanced weaponry at its disposal. It only has nuclear and it's not going to use it.

This could be what's coming next?

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/will-putin-use-chemical-weapons-in-ukraine/

[Phoenix Rising]

6 hours ago, vandeventer said:

This could be what's coming next?

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/will-putin-use-chemical-weapons-in-ukraine/

Highly unlikely. The world wide outrage will be epic and even China will be forced to renounce Russia. Game over.

[GroveHillWanderer]

23 hours ago, metisdead said:

Trump’s NATO criticism is ‘valid,’ Europe isn’t spending enough on defense, UK ex-minister says

 

 

KEY POINTS

• President Donald Trump is pushing other countries within the NATO military alliance to contribute more to their defense spending
• In 2017, the U.S. spent (at current exchange rates) an estimated $685.9 billion on defense
• Trump has criticized other NATO members for not spending enough on defense

Read more here:  https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/11/trumps-nato-criticism-is-valid-europe-isnt-spending-enough-on-def.html

Except that what he's talking about is not actually NATO spending, it's simply the money each country spends on their own defence budgets.

 

NATO has very little collective budget spending (it comes to only 0.3% of total Allied defence spending) and all NATO members contribute to the collective funding of NATO using an agreed cost-share formula derived from the Gross National Income of member countries.

[GroveHillWanderer]

17 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Only 7 NATO members hit alliance’s 2 percent GDP defense spending target in 2022

 

BELFAST — Just seven of NATO’s 30 member states met its 2 percent GDP defense spending target in 2022, figures from the alliance’s newly published annual report show, while Russia’s invasion of Ukraine highlighted for many the criticality of future defense spending in Europe.

The US, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and the United Kingdom, all achieved the standard with Croatia and France among those falling just short. Others were further behind.

 

 

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03/only-7-nato-members-hit-alliances-2-percent-gdp-defense-spending-target-in-2022/

It doesn't matter how much or how little each NATO country spends on their defence budget, none of it is owed to the US. Trump never seems to have understood how NATO funding works.

[Mac Mickmanus]

3 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

It doesn't matter how much or how little each NATO country spends on their defence budget, none of it is owed to the US. Trump never seems to have understood how NATO funding works.

Although Trump didn't literally say that NATO Country owes the USA money , I don't really have the patience to explain (again) what he meant 

[Phoenix Rising]

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Although Trump didn't literally say that NATO Country owes the USA money , I don't really have the patience to explain (again) what he meant 

So how are you able to better interpret what trump said than others? I mean, the guy can't string together a series of coherent sentences if his life depended on it. Watching his speeches quickly reveals that it's just word vomit sprinkled with MAGA dog whistles.

[ozimoron]

14 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

It doesn't matter how much or how little each NATO country spends on their defence budget, none of it is owed to the US. Trump never seems to have understood how NATO funding works.

He couldn't understand that tariffs on Chinese goods don't cost the Chinese a brass razoo either.

[Mac Mickmanus]

3 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

So how are you able to better interpret what trump said than others? I mean, the guy can't string together a series of coherent sentences if his life depended on it. Watching his speeches quickly reveals that it's just word vomit sprinkled with MAGA dog whistles.

I listen to what people say and try to understand what they mean , rather than just looking for an angle to be critical of them 

[ozimoron]

15 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Although Trump didn't literally say that NATO Country owes the USA money , I don't really have the patience to explain (again) what he meant 

I will then. He meant that if he doesn't pull the US out of NATO Putin will release the tapes. Trump most definitely was acting in support of Putin just as he did when he told the world he trusted Putin more than his own intelligence chiefs.

[Mac Mickmanus]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

He couldn't understand that tariffs on Chinese goods don't cost the Chinese a brass razoo either.

The price of Chinese goods will increase and consumers wont be attracted by the low prices of Chinese goods and they will buy USA made products instead . 

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I will then. He meant that if he doesn't pull the US out of NATO Putin will release the tapes. 

Trump didn't pull the USA out of NATO and which tapes did Putin release ?

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The price of Chinese goods will increase and consumers wont be attracted by the low prices of Chinese goods and they will buy USA made products instead . 

Except that those goods aren't made in the US and it would take ages to ramp up production.

 

It did actually reduce the trade deficit with China, it was the only thing Trump did that was right.

 

 

[GroveHillWanderer]

27 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Although Trump didn't literally say that NATO Country owes the USA money , I don't really have the patience to explain (again) what he meant 

Yes he literally said that. Not once but repeatedly.

 

Trump keeps saying NATO members owe money to the US — they don’t

 

Here's just one example, from his remarks at the NATO summit in 2018.

 

Quote

" ... many countries owe us a tremendous amount of money for many years back, where they’re delinquent, as far as I’m concerned, because the United States has had to pay for them. So if you go back 10 or 20 years, you’ll just add it all up. It’s massive amounts of money is owed.”

President Trump Says NATO Allies Owe the U.S. Money. He's Wrong

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 minute ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

Yes he literally said that. Not once but repeatedly.

 

Trump keeps saying NATO members owe money to the US — they don’t

 

Here's just one example, from his remarks at the NATO summit in 2018.

 

President Trump Says NATO Allies Owe the U.S. Money. He's Wrong

I have already answered that question a few posts above this one 

[Phoenix Rising]

19 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I listen to what people say and try to understand what they mean , rather than just looking for an angle to be critical of them 

That sounds like a way to interpret something said in a way that fits with your beliefs rather than trying to be a rational listener.

It's like a religious person listening to a preacher. Very MAGA indeed.

[billd766]

7 hours ago, vandeventer said:

This could be what's coming next?

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/will-putin-use-chemical-weapons-in-ukraine/

Alternatively it could not come next.

 

Could, perhaps, maybe.

 

More whataboutery. 

 

quote from the link

 

"But delivering chem-bio weapons is difficult and dangerous even for well-trained professional soldiers. There is little to suggest Russian troops would be successful."

 

There are many variables in using chemical and biological warfare and the biggest problem is the weather.

 

If the wind speed increases or changes direction the weapon is less useful and far ore indiscriminate and you may get it back on yourself.

 

NATO countries also have nuclear, chemical and biological (NBC) weapons and are regularly trained in their use as a defensive weapon.

[candide]

On 4/23/2023 at 6:50 AM, Mac Mickmanus said:

What Trump actually said was that the USA "may  not" automatically defend any NATO Countries who didn't financially contribute to supporting NATO .

   Trump was encouraging other Countries to pay towards funding NATO

 

9 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I have already answered that question a few posts above this one 

You mean this post?

Quote:

"Trump was encouraging other Countries to pay towards funding NATO"

Edited April 24, 2023 by candide

[DaddyWarbucks]

On 4/23/2023 at 1:08 AM, heybruce said:

Trump didn't save NATO.  Putin did, by reminding NATO why it was necessary.

 

On 4/23/2023 at 12:59 PM, MisterTee said:

...to the MIC.

   There, completed it for you.

Spot on.

The concept predated Eisenhower's Jan. 17, 1961 speech by a long time.

First mentioned in Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom in 1944.

A 1947 article in Foreign Affairs by Winfield Refler, also C. Wright Mill's 1956, The Power Elite, to name a few of the cogent warnings that were ignored and led to the ongoing disaster that US foreign policy has been since the Vietnam War.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, DaddyWarbucks said:

 

Spot on.

The concept predated Eisenhower's Jan. 17, 1961 speech by a long time.

First mentioned in Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom in 1944.

A 1947 article in Foreign Affairs by Winfield Refler, also C. Wright Mill's 1956, The Power Elite, to name a few of the cogent warnings that were ignored and led to the ongoing disaster that US foreign policy has been since the Vietnam War.

I'm sure you'd love to derail this topic into an anti-American rant, but try to focus.

 

Can you explain why NATO is unnecessary and should not be maintained and strengthened?

[GroveHillWanderer]

4 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I have already answered that question a few posts above this one 

I've just looked at your "answer." It doesn't hold any water. Your argument is that because on one of the many times he said that other NATO countries owed money to the US, he qualified if by saying, "as far as I'm concerned."

 

That a) doesn't cover all the other times when he said it and didn't add that rider and b) it doesn't alter that fact that he was saying quite clearly, that he considers these other countries owe money to the US.

 

For instance, in 2019 he said:

 

Quote

"Why is it they owe us for this year, but every time a new year comes up, they don't have to pay? It's wrong. It's not right. I could say that you go back 25 years."

Trump threatens to punish Germany over military spending

 

And in 2017:

Quote

“This is not fair to the people and taxpayers of the United States, and many of these nations owe massive amounts of money from past years ..."

Trump directly scolds NATO allies, says they owe 'massive' sums

 

No mention of "as far as I'm concerned" there - nor on all the other times he said other NATO countries owed money to the US.

 

You'll also notice that there are multiple articles about him making this claim repeatedly, and all of them point out that he is saying the countries owe money to the US.

 

So it seems that pretty much everybody except you, that has read Trump's remarks on this subject, knows exactly what he was saying and it's only you holding on to this delusion that he wasn't saying that he actually said.

Edited April 24, 2023 by GroveHillWanderer