Why does Trump keep browbeating NATO members to "pay more?" (parade, CNN)
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.
What's the point? This is stupid. If NATO member nations see no point in paying more, then why should they pay more?
The United States just keeps trying to shoehorn itself into the affairs of other regions. If the European nations don't value NATO as much as we do, then we're the idiots, not them! Why do Americans care more about Europe's security than the Europeans do? Again, these are our economic competitors, and spending billions of US taxpayer money on their defense while they take six week annual vacations and enjoy universal health coverage is insulting and SHOULD be insulting to the average American.
The NATO Treaty, among other things, requires each member/signatory to spend a set amount of their GDP on defense.
Only a few of the NATO members do that. The rest are in violation. Trump has called them out on it as previous Presidents should have done.
I share your aversion to Trump, but he is clearly correct in this case.
Whether NATO is still needed or relevant is a different issue. Clearly the Europeans and Canada still see it as relevant as not one of them has ever left and new members are always willing to join.
What's the point? This is stupid. If NATO member nations see no point in paying more, then why should they pay more?
The point is the US military budget is bloated, everybody knows it and the fact that everyone else has a more reasonable budget is irksome and makes the USA look out of line. (The Pentagon has not had a real reason to increase any further, they don't have a comprehensive plan for what to do with the extra money they would be getting under Trump's proposal.) It is getting very difficult to squeeze more golden eggs from that goose.
Much of the armaments purchasing would be done from USA companies, so any increases would (at least in part) line the pockets of American death merchants. Any small country wishing to be in Trump's good graces would be sure to send a few purchase orders this way.
The point is the US military budget is bloated, everybody knows it and the fact that everyone else has a more reasonable budget is irksome and makes the USA look out of line. (The Pentagon has not had a real reason to increase any further, they don't have a comprehensive plan for what to do with the extra money they would be getting under Trump's proposal.) It is getting very difficult to squeeze more golden eggs from that goose.
Much of the armaments purchasing would be done from USA companies, so any increases would (at least in part) line the pockets of American death merchants. Any small country wishing to be in Trump's good graces would be sure to send a few purchase orders this way.
If a NATO member is not spending the agreed amount per the Treaty, then their military budget is not reasonable.
And Europe has a very, very prosperous arms industry.
The NATO Treaty, among other things, requires each member/signatory to spend a set amount of their GDP on defense.
Only a few of the NATO members do that. The rest are in violation. Trump has called them out on it as previous Presidents should have done.
I share your aversion to Trump, but he is clearly correct in this case.
Whether NATO is still needed or relevant is a different issue. Clearly the Europeans and Canada still see it as relevant as not one of them has ever left and new members are always willing to join.
There it is.
My post isn't about an aversion to Trump. You could replace Trump in the thread title with any dopey president begging NATO for more cash, including the last two presidents.
Again, I already know what they agreed to. Problem is, they ain't agreeing to it anymore. They don't want to pay for it because it's either of no use to them and they don't feel that it's worth it (and they're right) or they find the alliance to be antiquated and a usurper of their national sovereignty that has no right to tell them how much they should spend on defense (they're right about that too). No wonder they don't want to pay.
The United States keeps insisting that they pay because we're pretty much the last bozos that value the alliance and we're hellbound on browbeating the Europeans into helping us maintain our dominance.
The NATO nations that refuse to pony up are giving us the middle finger and saying "you can't make us pay more." And constantly pointing out to them that they agreed to pay more makes us look like we're desperate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth
If a NATO member is not spending the agreed amount per the Treaty, then their military budget is not reasonable.
And Europe has a very, very prosperous arms industry.
Their budget is reasonable to THEM based on threat level to their nations. They shouldn't be basing their defense budgets on what the United States needs to maintain global hegemony.
So obviously the agreed upon amount for them to spend is UNreasonable and usurious. And I don't blame them for resisting. You shouldn't either. Do you routinely overpay for things you don't need, want, or like?
But by suggesting it isn't fair implies like they 'owe' something.
They don't. Every country could raise their budget to 2% (and by the way there are no restrictions or conditions on what is in that military budget -- just the military budget total is suppose to be 2%) and it changes nothing at NATO. Absolutely nothing. Nobody will be actually physically paying more or less to anybody but their own military budget.
Geez, you just keep stating the obvious, as if no one else gets it but you. Give it a rest already.
My post isn't about an aversion to Trump. You could replace Trump in the thread title with any dopey president begging NATO for more cash, including the last two presidents.
Again, I already know what they agreed to. Problem is, they ain't agreeing to it anymore. They don't want to pay for it because it's either of no use to them and they don't feel that it's worth it (and they're right) or they find the alliance to be antiquated and a usurper of their national sovereignty that has no right to tell them how much they should spend on defense (they're right about that too). No wonder they don't want to pay.
The United States keeps insisting that they pay because we're pretty much the last bozos that value the alliance and we're hellbound on browbeating the Europeans into helping us maintain our dominance.
The NATO nations that refuse to pony up are giving us the middle finger and saying "you can't make us pay more." And constantly pointing out to them that they agreed to pay more makes us look like we're desperate.
Their budget is reasonable to THEM based on threat level to their nations. They shouldn't be basing their defense budgets on what the United States needs to maintain global hegemony.
So obviously the agreed upon amount for them to spend is UNreasonable and usurious. And I don't blame them for resisting. You shouldn't either. Do you routinely overpay for things you don't need, want, or like?
"But DD, they agreeeeeeeeed to it!"
Ok, well they no longer agree.
Then they should leave NATO. Yet none of them seem to choose that. Ever.
There are always alternatives, DesertDetroiter.
A NATO member could simply leave NATO and proceed as they wish.
A NATO member could simply leave NATO and declare neutrality.
A NATO member could simply leave NATO and disarm.
A NATO member could simply leave NATO and even hook up with Russia.
Or maybe they could simply follow the terms they agreed to back in 1949.
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.