Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trump genuflects to the Saudis who are the greatest financers of extremists Islamic ideology, who surreptitiously fight USA interests around the world, and have institutions that are anathema to US democracy. He bowed down to these autocrats.
He goes to Europe and berates our closest allies and weakens the institution of NATO that kept the peace for 70 years.
No, he is not a leader. He has as a matter of fact ceded leadership of the free world to the Germans.
Trump's a disgrace to this country. He is a weak, feckless leader with no moral core. That is why he falls to his knees and is effusive in his praise to Russian and other despots.
Trump is nothing more than a pitiful amoral little man.
You said it.
NATO was formed to keep generations from having to repeat WWI, WWII, ... So far, so good. Fingers crossed.
By USA agreeing to back NATO countries, they could then focus on getting their economies back up after WWII rather than trying to develop a nuclear bomb to protect themselves from the Russians.
In any case, why is Trump all up in arms about them boosting their military to protect themselves from Russia? Aren't Russians the good guys now?
Yeah, I guess all those court records that show he was sued for non-payment over and over through the years were... what, exactly?
ETA: Oh, wait... I just saw your post above, and yes, "what a load of bull", indeed. But, not the way you think.
I've talked on here about how Trump stiffed my husband's company, but of course the cons say I'm making it up. But I have first-hand experience here. And there are hundreds if not thousands of similar stories out there.
I don't know why he's lecturing to European Leaders, the vast majority don't have US Bases, indeed there are no US Bases in France and the French have already stated they will meet the 2% figure, although they spend close to 2% anyway.
Indeed the vast majority of US Forces are concentrated in three countries, the UK which has US Airbases and some US Intelligence bases but already meets the 2% agreed, the Germans who have stated that they will meet the 2% required and the Italians who have also promised to meet the 2% figure.
There are some US Forces in Eastern Europe but mainly in Poland, a country that has significantly increased it's defence spending and which meets the 2% requirement.
Many of the 28 countries in NATO are tiny such as Albania, Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithunania, Luxembourg, Slovenia, the Slovak Republic and Iceland (which desn't even have an Army) and I would hardly call countries such as the Czech Republic, Belgium, Greece, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria as major military forces, indeed what are they going to spend the extra GDP on, Aircraft Carriers!!!!
Even countries such as Norway, Denmark, Portugal and the Netherlands hardly have massive populations, whilst the Spanish have been through a very harsh economic crisis, as have the Greeks who have managed the 2%, but it's 2% in relation to a very depleted economy.
It also should be noted that Canada is way off the 2% minimum, never mind small European states that joined NATO after the collapse of communism and the so called Iron Curtain.
Some of the NATO countries are so small that we could have a whip round at the pub in order to bring them up to the 2%.
I don't know why he's lecturing to European Leaders, the vast majority don't have US Bases, indeed there are no US Bases in France and the French have already stated they will meet the 2% figure, although they spend close to 2% anyway.
Indeed the vast majority of US Forces are concentrated in three countries, the UK which has US Airbases and some US Intelligence bases but already meets the 2% agreed, the Germans who have stated that they will meet the 2% required and the Italians who have
I didn't know Germany doesn't yet meet their 2%. I think they have sufficient means to do so, but chose to spend their money elsewhere.
Is there not an agreement that a certain % of GDP will be dedicated to each country's defense?
So what do you mean other countries don't need to follow suit? The % of GDP defines the amount, which of course will not be as large as America's defense allocation.
Yes, they do have time to get up to the full percentage, and Trump's reminder is that they should step it up. Some countries are not doing that without extra prompting.
Yes and the agreement states that all NATO countries have until 2024.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound
You're quite vociferous on this. "No dues" does not mean that nothing is due. Their 2% is due.
Are you just anti-Trump or strongly pro NATO with America carrying the defense burden for all?
Don't you think they all should throw some money into the pot for their own defense?
Yes, I am. Because NATO doesn't have dues like some GD country club. They have to pay for their OWN militaries just like we do. I'm pro-honesty and I'm pro-facts. There is no pot that we all put our money into.
Yeah but President Trump will do everything in his power to annihilate ISIS, so its perfectly understandable that he'll push NATO members as much as he can.
So because the US decides to do something like this the agreement is now null and void? And he can go bully other countries? I don't think so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
