After summits with Trump, Merkel says Europe must take fate into own hands

[Aforek]

It's true that with a big nut like Trump, many things will change, but it's difficult nowadays to live without USA; but it can be a good opportunity for Europe to live by itself  and  with less american influence 

But I , as a fervent European guy, I am very sorry for American people and the rest of the world, to have a such idiot as president ; but do you think Clinton ( Hillary ) could be better ? 

[OKF]

1 minute ago, Aforek said:

It's true that with a big nut like Trump, many things will change, but it's difficult nowadays to live without USA; but it can be a good opportunity for Europe to live by itself  and  with less american 

influence 

But I , as a fervent European guy, I am very sorry for American people and the rest of the world, to have a such idiot as president ; but do you think Clinton ( Hillary ) could be better ? 

I totally agree. And actually Trump is somehow a mirror of the US society. You think about this for a moment.

[55Jay]

The common refrain has been the US should not be the world's policeman and quit engaging in military adventures.  "Mind your own damn business".  "Fix your own problems at home". 

"US is in decline"  Etc, etc.

 

Trump's overtures to untangle the US should be embraced by the peace loving liberals, and deplored by war mongering conservatives and their MIC. 

 

At any rate, Europe has plenty off extra people milling about, so should be able to field a formidable army to repel adversaries, long as it doesn't exceed 37.5 hours a week or interfere with annual holidays, prayer times or afternoon siestas.   

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, 55Jay said:

The common refrain has been the US should not be the world's policeman and quit engaging in military adventures.  "Mind your own damn business".  "Fix your own problems at home". 

"US is in decline"  Etc, etc.

 

Trump's overtures to untangle the US should be embraced by the peace loving liberals, and deplored by war mongering conservatives and their MIC. 

 

At any rate, Europe has plenty off extra people milling about, so should be able to field a formidable army to repel adversaries, long as it doesn't exceed 37.5 hours a week or interfere with annual holidays, prayer times or afternoon siestas.   

Well, in  an inadvertent way, you've hit on a kind of truth. It's not often acknowledged that the bad economic situation for working class people in the USA makes it easier for the US to recruit soldiers than it is for the Europeans. And the promise of educational benefits - the Europeans have access to better ones without being required to enlist in the armed forces - is another lure for poorer Americans.

[Caps]

I can't understand what all the fuss is about the US can moan all they want, they won't pull out of Europe because as Trump says 'America First', it always has been.  Europe (as is Japan and S Korea on the other side) is the early warning platform for the US and if they removed all their assets from Europe they wouldn't have that.  Maybe Europe should tell Trump he has six months to pull all his troops and equipment out and see where that goes.  

So for once I can agree with some of the Yanks on here and let Europe sort its self out and go home. 

 

[habanero]

2 hours ago, darksidedog said:

Just yesterday Donald was telling those dumb enough to believe him that his trip was a success. Merkel is clearly not in his fan base and recognises him for what he is, a danger to world peace. America is clearly no longer seen as the leader of the free world and in fact under Trump seems to want to renege on many of its commitments and promises. I pray that the US people will wake up and start to see what they have set in motion. Reasonable people, with the ability to think cannot pretend any longer that everything is OK.

I wish some people would make up their minds. All I keep hearing is;  the United States should tend to it's own affairs. 

Now is Europe's chance to show the world that it can stand on it's own two feet and fend for itself.  So, why the complaints?

 

[55Jay]

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, in  an inadvertent way, you've hit on a kind of truth. It's not often acknowledged that the bad economic situation for working class people in the USA makes it easier for the US to recruit soldiers than it is for the Europeans. And the promise of educational benefits - the Europeans have access to better ones without being required to enlist in the armed forces - is another lure for poorer Americans.

Well, it was tongue-in-cheek, very broad strokes.  A strong defense is better but it sure does look like moves by Russia, China, Iran, with N. Korea providing continuous white noise, is shaping up.   

Edited May 29, 2017 by 55Jay

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, habanero said:

I wish some people would make up their minds. All I keep hearing is;  the United States should tend to it's own affairs. 

Now is Europe's chance to show the world that it can stand on it's own two feet and fend for itself.  So, why the complaints?

 

There was an agreement in place for European members of Nato to contribute 2 percent of their gdp by 2024.  Trump has refused to commit the USA to the common defense pact. It's not the Europeans who have broken their word.

[stevenl]

48 minutes ago, Franko666 said:

A nice twist on not paying your bills, just deferred until the the said Countries are in so much debt it get written off by USA. Good one but it aint going to happen on his Trumps watch.

Debt gets written off by USA.

 

ROFL.

[OKF]

yeah, by printing money....

 

[mikebike]

47 minutes ago, 55Jay said:

Trump's overtures to untangle the US should be embraced by the peace loving liberals, and deplored by war mongering conservatives and their MIC. 

How does 45's rhetoric re NATO have anything to do with his desire to massively increase military spending as evidenced by his budget or his willingness to green light any military action which will draw light away from any of his blunders? Yeah... libs should love that!!

[elgordo38]

Gee Angela your a slow learner. After your trip to Washington and the Trump tweets you should have drawn that conclusion a long time ago. Your dealing with a whirling dervish potpourri of self destructing information and actions. Duck

[elgordo38]

17 minutes ago, mikebike said:

anything to do with his desire to massively increase military spending as evidenced by his budget or his willingness to green light any military action which will draw light away from any of his blunders?

I followed you this far then lost your train of thought. 

[maximillian]

3 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Exactly. Donald Trump got elected on an Anerica First platform. Germany is a rich country. They need tanks, fighter jets and German boys to face off the Russians. The Americans can sell the gear to them. Trade deficit gone. 

 

Well done President Trump.

 

Next up Japan. 

German boys to face off the Russians ? Why ?

Since when are the Russians a threat to Germany ?

We had great business relationship until the EU and US startet meddling with Ukraine.

Who is preparing for an offensive against Russia ? The USA is !

Who is extending NATO towards the Russian borders ?

Who is deploing AntiBalisticMissiles close to Russia ?

Whose military budget is 10 times higher than that of Russia ?

[smedly]

3 hours ago, darksidedog said:

That is one of the dumbest comments I have ever seen on this forum and shows you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. There is no central NATO bill that countries pay into. So there are no unpaid bills. None. Zip. Nada.

Each country is responsible for paying for its own defence forces, and provide some of those forces for international operations. There is an agreement in place that by 2024, each country promises to spend 2% of GDP on its defence. Right now, some countries are spending less than this, but they have a further seven years to rectify that.

All that is happening now is that Trump is bleating that some of them are not at 2% already.

No country is behind on their payments. No country has an outstanding bill. Everyone (apart from you it seems), understands that.

The whole thing is made worse by trumps refusal to acknowledge Article 5 that says the US will come to their partners aid if ever needed.

it is not direct funding as such but resource funding, countries such as Germany who have a considerable shortfall of what they are supposed to contribute are relying on other countries like the US and UK to step up and fill the gap, lets say for e.g. that all countries involved in Nato only contribute the same resource as the lowest contributor - Nato would no longer be able to function.

 

History is actually starting to repeat itself and it seems with the same players as before

[55Jay]

19 minutes ago, mikebike said:

How does 45's rhetoric re NATO have anything to do with his desire to massively increase military spending as evidenced by his budget or his willingness to green light any military action which will draw light away from any of his blunders? Yeah... libs should love that!!

Which highlights the established trend that 45's rhetoric is often at odds with what he does.  If you don't like this piece of news just wait a week, there will be another along shortly. 

[smedly]

3 hours ago, Credo said:

How much is the bill?   Who should they pay?

 

NATO works on a contribution basis, not on a pay basis.   It's a little like a pot luck dinner where everyone brings something and all get to eat, as opposed to a meal at a restaurant where someone gets stuck with the check.   

 

Oops, I see the above poster already explained it. 

The point you are missing is that someone was expected to fund, cook and bring the full 3 courses - the rest just supplied the tea and biscuits, in the end it comes down to money   

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, darksidedog said:

None of the NATO members has any obligation to pay 2% of GDP into defence until 2024. So none of them can be accused of not living up to their commitments. Please try to base your post on fact, rather then repeating falsehoods from Donald.

Also note that all NATO members have agreed to Article 5 that says they agree to assist America if it is ever attacked or needs help. Donald has not reciprocated. So, he wants NATO members to give the 2% seven years early, with NO guarantee that the US will hold up its side of the bargain if a European country is attacked.

And that is why Merkel recognises that the US can no longer be relied upon. 70 years of cooperation falling apart because of this idiot.

In fact, the only NATO member to ever invoke Article 5 is America, in the wake of 9/11. NATO members responded and sent troops and equipment to fight alongside America in Afghanistan. NATO member troops are still in Afghanistan 16 years later. 

[55Jay]

Never let a good crisis go to waste. 

[smedly]

20 minutes ago, maximillian said:

German boys to face off the Russians ? Why ?

Since when are the Russians a threat to Germany ?

We had great business relationship until the EU and US startet meddling with Ukraine.

Who is preparing for an offensive against Russia ? The USA is !

Who is extending NATO towards the Russian borders ?

Who is deploing AntiBalisticMissiles close to Russia ?

Whose military budget is 10 times higher than that of Russia ?

The Ukraine were about to join the EU and Russia doesn't like it, they are now being bullied by Russia - history repeating itself, what exactly is Germany/EU going to do about it.................absolutely nothing without the US  the UK and Nato.

 

There is currently a dangerous standoff going on across the world right now were certain Nations and leaders are wanting stuff and/or wanting to dominate or take - even settle old scores 

[Flustered]

4 hours ago, Juan B Tong said:

Today's bashing comments seem to be anti Trump and USA as usual with special guest targets the Germans and Australians.  Great for a rainy day in Pattaya.

The majority of TV threads are anti Trump so no surprise there.

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, Flustered said:

The majority of TV threads are anti Trump so no surprise there.

The majority of threads on TV have nothing to do with trump, pro or con.

However, on threads that do touch on the so called president of the USA, it's quite understandable that the comments are mostly negative. 

[smedly]

23 minutes ago, Flustered said:

A very polite question....

 

Why the personal insults?

because some people on here have no idea how to post and present an opinion without also trying to demean others, in a face to face discussion it wouldn't happen without someone being slapped 

[Baerboxer]

8 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

                  It's true.  Though Merkel lost some respect during the massive migrant issue (which is still going on), she's now gaining respect.  She's emerging as the leader of the so-called 'Free World' (countries which rely on real democracy and free press, unlike the US, Thailand, China, N.Korea, Zimbabwe, etc).

 

                  Britain still has some relevance in Europe, but the US is fast fading in its leadership role, due to the fatally flawed and borderline-treasonous people at its helm.

 

So from former Communist Party activist in a ruthless one party no dissent state she has blossomed into the leader of the free world (well in your opinion and that of many anti Trump Americans at least).

 

So it's ok for her, as German Chancellor to attempt to dictate EU policy? To simply tell other member states they must accept her idea of quotas on migrants; to tell other member states they cannot erect border fences when securing her own borders in response to electorate unrest; to refuse to meet her country's NATO obligations, which were agreed before she took office and on which she has previously ignored; and up to now, no one really knows at what point she and her government knew of the horrendous VW fraud on emissions. Truly "democratic" if you consider that's how democracy works.

[Andaman Al]

5 hours ago, DiamondKing said:

MAYBE SHE SHOULD PAY HER BILL as well as the other 22 nations welching on their responsibilities 

TRUMP was spot on to call them out why the F should the USA pay for all these loser countries that are not paying their bills

 

5 hours ago, DiamondKing said:

 

Why should he not renege ????

23 Nations have reneged by NOT PAYING their share of NATO expenses in fact many are years behind including GERMANY 

You and the folks 'liking' your posts have zero idea of how NATO works. That you actually believe Donald Trump after 4 months of constant lying as a President is even greater testimony to your folly "Better to remain silent and have people think you may be a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it."

[Thongkorn]

He is right 23 of the 28 Countries In the EU are not meeting there Nato 2% of JDP, Germany is  paying 1.3%, France has only been paying into Nato since  the 1970s, Britain has been paying since 1947. But Europe is involved in 11 conflicts at the moment, So if they did not do that America would have to be Involved in peacekeeping.

[Thakkar]

Since 1945, the supreme strategic goal in Europe of the USSR and then Russia was the severing of the US-German alliance. Trump delivered.

— David Frum (@davidfrum) May 28, 2017

[Flustered]

8 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Another even more polite question.  How can recommending you try Pragmatic Criticism be a personal insult?

And a polite answer.

 

The personal remark was "But that measure requires a degree of intelligence and insightfulness. You should try it.". 

 

Completely uncalled for as was your post which ignored the obvious personal remark and tried to focus on a different section.

 

It must be a very quiet, boring day out there. if trying to flame FMs is all you have to do.

[Flustered]

3 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

Since 1945, the supreme strategic goal in Europe of the USSR and then Russia was the severing of the US-German alliance. Trump delivered.

— David Frum (@davidfrum) May 28, 2017

I think you mean "Merkel did it".

[Srikcir]

8 minutes ago, Thongkorn said:

He is right 23 of the 28 Countries In the EU are not meeting there Nato 2% of JDP, Germany is  paying 1.3%, France has only been paying into Nato since  the 1970s, Britain has been paying since 1947. But Europe is involved in 11 conflicts at the moment, So if they did not do that America would have to be Involved in peacekeeping.

On the other hand the US may have been instead involved in full scale wars in Eastern Europe rather than just peacekeeping. Meanwhile, the US has brought NATO into the decade old war in Afghanistan - a region that has nothing to do with Europe and no end in sight.