Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Who Supports NATO?
#1
Not I. Can anyone explain why we should ever again? They can't even give us an assist in Afghanistan. If we want allies,let us work with individual states and forget this nonsense.




NATO
Reply
#2
Well it's almost Christmas, let's think Christmas carol, starring Ebenezer Scrooge.

So what is that about? Getting richer and richer and spending no money while that would make you pourer. Meanwhile Tiny Tim is perishing because there is no money for medical treatment.

So what to do, don't care less about Tiny Tim or help him and be rewarded with the most precious reward within mankind, the sincere thanks to have been helped.

NATO is anti Ebenezer Scrooge.
Reply
#3
andre, you sound more like the solicitors that kept harranguing old Ebeneezer to give money for charity. Ebeneezer would give them a few coins to get them off his back. It wasn't until after he decided to give of his own accord that his charity rose to the level of actually making a difference.
Reply
#4
Not Trump
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-el...SKBN1380FB
Reply
#5
(11-13-2016, 03:06 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Not Trump
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-el...SKBN1380FB

My guess is that he is going to expect the other members to spend more, since the US has been shouldering the majority of the budget since its beginning.

I'd be interested to see just who pay how much. Does anyone have the numbers.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#6
(11-13-2016, 03:06 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Not Trump
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-el...SKBN1380FB

I think he's going to treat it the same way as trade and expect a lot more from our 'partnerships'. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/canada-pm-tru...13892.html

http://www.breitbart.com/border/2016/11/...fta-trump/

Canada and Mexico seem to have gotten on board with the idea.  I expect Europe will as well ... eventually. We're a sovereign nation fred, not just another cog in the global order based on the Obama/Soros vision of the future.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#7
(11-13-2016, 04:19 PM)mr_yak Wrote:
(11-13-2016, 03:06 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: Not Trump
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-el...SKBN1380FB

I think he's going to treat it the same way as trade and expect a lot more from our 'partnerships'. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/canada-pm-tru...13892.html

http://www.breitbart.com/border/2016/11/...fta-trump/

Canada and Mexico seem to have gotten on board with the idea.  I expect Europe will as well ... eventually.

The problem with the Euros is that almost every State is a form of Democratic Socialism, i.e. squishy Fascism.  And they are run up to the ceiling already with Welfare programs taking the Lion's share of the pie.  There is no more room for robbing Peter to pay Paul.  If the Euros are going to fork over money, then they will have to cut back on the Welfare State, which will lead to some form of rebellion within the Euros.  

This is what happens when Collectivism promises the best of all worlds.  Other than the fact that it is not self-sustaining, it is eventually going to have a head-on collision with reality.  And this is the greatest problem facing the Euros, and I'm talking about each State here.  They are already skating along with just the barest investment in their security, and they expect the US to keep playing Sugar Daddy.  

Something is going to have to give.  It will be interesting to see what each European participant has to say on such a sacrifice.  It is going to be the same old "Guns Vs Butter" argument.  Shock
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#8
This could be a good negotiating ploy. They may not have the funds to divert from nanny-state to NATO, so what might they offer up? Basing rights? Would lease payments for US bases be reduced or zeroed out? How about favored trade status? There are many things that may be offered.
Reply
#9
(11-13-2016, 07:44 PM)WmLambert Wrote: This could be a good negotiating ploy. They may not have the funds to divert from nanny-state to NATO, so what might they offer up? Basing rights? Would lease payments for US bases be reduced or zeroed out? How about favored trade status? There are many things that may be offered.

The best 'ploy' appears to be providing a clear indication that you expect something that might actually be in your nation's best interests to come out of the negotiations.  Compare and contrast with the Iran deal  ... or any deal that Obama has brokered for that matter.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#10
Here's the percentages that each of the 28  members are forking over. Sorry about the huge size. S5

[Image: 20151019_1510_NATO_common_funded_budgets...jpg&w=1484]
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#11
And here's a different way to look at it.

Personally, I have to agree with Trump on this. We are spending far more than we should be. And we're not the ones who are libel to be invaded. Spiteful

[Image: 160708114244-chart-spending-percentage-gdp-780x439.jpg]

[Image: 160415172159-nato-gdp-1-780x439.jpg]
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#12
Why look at GDP as how much a state should pay? I betcha if our GDP went down, we'd still pay the same.
Reply
#13
JL Wrote:The problem with the Euros is that almost every State is a form of Democratic Socialism, i.e. squishy Fascism.
Yesterday the green-leftists complained that Belgium is going to spend 2 billions on new fregates. Before that they complained that we are going to buy F35's...
For them the governement is there only to pay jobless benefits (indefinetly) and give money away to fight climate change.
They don't understand that the primary goal of a governement is defense of its territory.

Fortunately not every politicians and leaders think like that. You heard Stoltenberg.

WmL Wrote:Why look at GDP as how much a state should pay? I betcha if our GDP went down, we'd still pay the same.

I agree that less than 2% of GDP is not enough especialy when your GDP is not that high.

But... It's not our fault if the US is spending INSANE amounts of money on its military dollar-wise.
And it's not our fault neither if the US is WASTING half of this money in Iraq, Afghanistan and where else.

You know what? Greeks need jobs right now. I suggest we outsource some defence contracts to lower pay countries in eastern Europe.
It will help both the Greek and the US budgets. Trump wants to reduce deficit, here you are!
Reply
#14
(11-15-2016, 05:44 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: You know what? Greeks need jobs right now. I suggest we outsource some defence contracts to lower pay countries in eastern Europe.
It will help both the Greek and the US budgets. Trump wants to reduce deficit, here you are!

Fred, you're naturally assuming(and you know what happens when you Ass_u_me, right?) that there is a Greek contractor that can actually produce a quality product. S13
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#15
I'm glad that Trump is finaly changing his mind at the contact with foreign entities and non-US persons.

Trump during his campaign Wrote:The US should leave NATO.
Trump once elected Wrote:link

John, don't underestimate the Greeks. They can do good jobs too. It's collectivism and their sovereign debt which made them look like lazy.
Reply
#16
(11-13-2016, 08:15 PM)John L Wrote: And here's a different way to look at it.

Personally, I have to agree with Trump on this.  We are spending far more than we should be.  And we're not the ones who are libel to be invaded.  Spiteful

[Image: 160708114244-chart-spending-percentage-gdp-780x439.jpg]

[Image: 160415172159-nato-gdp-1-780x439.jpg]

I hope Trump puts pressure on the well-meaning moron we have for a prime minister.
'It's not who votes that matters, it's who counts the votes'  |  György Schwartz, Budapest, Hungary
Reply
#17
I hope Trump will reduce the US defense budget so that we get a chance to come close to something balanced. We are going to spend more on military but we can't spend as much as the US and pile up a 17 trillion debt doing so.
Reply
#18
Obama cut money to the military and raised the Debt hugely. Reagan increased spending for the military and improved the economy.
Reply
#19
(11-18-2016, 10:29 PM)WmLambert Wrote: Obama cut money to the military and raised the Debt hugely. Reagan increased spending for the military and improved the economy.

This is true. US-military is not only about spending money overseas, but it brings also a lot of business in return.

Personally I think, it has more to do about that there are too many US-servicemen in combat operation overseas.

NATO is a left-over of WWII in Europe and has to be changed, same with Asian countries especially Japan and South Korea.

The military presence of US-servicemen has to be reduced abroad, but it should continue to supply arms against cash to friendly countries.

Friendly country = a country which is willing to pay in cash

That's good maybe in future with Trump. He cares more about business and not really much about all these objections regarding human rights, women rights, children rights, animal rights, transgenders, poor Muslims, minorities etc. etc.

I see no reason for example, why Japan and South Korea should pay for expenses and even for the salaries of US-servicemen.
They should co-operate slowly to replace US-soldiers with their own people. This does not mean that Japan and South Korea will in future buy weapons from China but they should continue to consider US as their most important supplier.

It's about to replace military links with economic links. About to replace humans (US-servicemen) with goods (military supply).
Reply
#20
Actually, I would say that NATO is a left-over from the Cold War. Unless Trump can rein-in the Russians, it could be starting up again. It probably is not too late to salvage good relations between the USA and Russia, once we have a strong and respected and decisive president, who specializes in knowing how to "make a deal." It has been observed that Russians make good neighbors, once you have installed reliable locks on all your doors and windows.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)