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.
In 2006 NATO countries made a commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on defense and some countries have not met that goal (but the 2006 NATO agreement gives those countries until 2024 to meet that 2% goal.)
"NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told Politico EU’s Confidential podcast this month that he expects eight nations will cross the 2 percent threshold in 2018, which he said was up from three countries in 2014."
So the vote supporting NATO was 97-2, with only the isolationist twins, Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky voting no, and John McCain not present to vote.
They're not isolationists. That's what the dishonest war mongers say. I'm sure you were okay with Korea and Vietnam and all the murdering our government does in the Middle East.
Trade with all nations, entangling alliances with none. You remember, it's what the founders preached.
Non intervention
In 2006 NATO countries made a commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on defense and some countries have not met that goal (but the 2006 NATO agreement gives those countries until 2024 to meet that 2% goal.)
"NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told Politico EU’s Confidential podcast this month that he expects eight nations will cross the 2 percent threshold in 2018, which he said was up from three countries in 2014."
'In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of two per cent of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to spending on defence.'
The NATO 2% guideline was established in 2006. Then, in 2014 (under Obama), after 8 years of NATO countries leeching off of the US defense nipple, while defense spending of other NATO countries continued to decrease, another agreement was reached that requires these nations to increase their defense spending to 2% of GDP by, at the latest, 2024.
This did not erase or newly establish the previous 2% requirement that had been agreed to in 2006. In fact, it was an admission of their failure to comply and a recognition that they would continue to fail to meet the standard they had agreed to for fully another 10 years yet.
Does that mean that the 2% standard does not apply during this interim period from 2014 - 2024? No, it doesn't. The standard still applies, these countries are just failing to meet it.
So, what happens if they are still not meeting it in 2024, as if that were some sort of magic date? How can or will this requirement then be enforced? It can't.
And why should these countries be excused - or why should they even want to be excused - from making a sufficient effort to contribute to their own national defense starting right now? Some one please answer this one for me, because nobody has yet.
Trump is re-expressing a policy that has existed for decades in this country and has been repeated by Obama and Bush II before him. We have a $21 trillion national debt, which is growing rapidly, and as strange as this may sound to some people, we cannot continue to be the primary funder of Europe's defense now over 70 years after the end of WWII. It is absurd, and the European nations know it.
The 2% requirement is probably on the low side if the European nations of NATO are as concerned about a Russian military incursion as they appear to be. The European countries are the primary beneficiaries of this arrangement. They are comparatively rich countries that are supposedly examples to the world of all that is enlightened and desirable and advanced in the world.
Just because they are fiscally irresponsible is no excuse. They still have to provide adequately for their own self defense.
Enough is enough. And no, it is not OK to wait until 2024 to see what happens. They need to start doing this now, and should have been doing it all along.
Senate voted 97-2 on a motion to re-endorse NATO and support the mission of NATO.
Swamp rats doing swamp rat things. Shocker. Where would these politicians be if they weren't getting their pockets padded by their european counterparts?
Trump isn't saying we are leaving NATO, he's demanding they pay their share because American tax payers are unfairly paying more than our share.
That is not how NATO works. The 2% has nothing to do with contributions towards paying for NATO and nothing to do with American taxpayers paying g more than their share. Tye agreement was for each country to spend two percent of the gdp on military not just NATO. The US taxpayers are paying for you to have the most powerful military in the World not for NATO. The US spends 4 times more than the second largest spender and Trump campaign to spend more on the military as he claimed it was depleted and neglected. That is 4 times larger than the second place and almost all in the top 15 are American allies.
He is demanding that other countries move up their budgets by 6 years. A fair share for Canada would be to spend that by 2024 as agreed not by whenever Trump wants it. And even if every NATO country does push up their time lines to 2018, your budget will not go down and will not save the American taxpayer a dime.
Just another con job. For example Canada could go ahead and spend 20 billion a year on a fancy tropical resort for the military not adding any defence to NATO and meet the criteria, or we could have a serious recession and match it .
Trump did say earlier that NATO was a waste and should be ended.
Following Trump's repeated attacks on NATO ahead of the NATO summit, the Senate voted 97-2 on a motion to re-endorse NATO and support the mission of NATO. Lawrence discusses with David Corn, Ruth Marcus, and David Leonhardt. https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/...-1274326595573
But what will they do now, that the PUTRID pile of EXCREMENT is being his usual insulting self at the Nato Summit?
The vote is worthless and "non binding." This is the biggest beach balls the GOP traitors (not McCain) can throw. It's an attempt to tell those who used to be our allies, ignore what the orange thing says, we're on your side. But there is no side because the vote has no impact on Putin's puppets - all of them. Pompeo and others have done it - orange says something treasonous to feed its base and its handlers (right ... the only handler is Putin) bs by giving the appearance of toning it down.
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.
