Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Pyongjang
5,701 posts, read 3,221,095 times
Reputation: 3925

Advertisements

10 years is ridiculous. Trump is right to demand a faster pace. In 2024, if you wait, they'll just have more excuses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:10 AM
 
56,988 posts, read 35,193,725 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by mightleavenyc View Post
10 years is ridiculous. Trump is right to demand a faster pace. In 2024, if you wait, they'll just have more excuses.
Trump would be right if he pulled the USA out of NATO and left the Europeans to their own devices.

He’s absolutely NOT right to ask them to be as stupid as his nation is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Brew City
4,865 posts, read 4,179,081 times
Reputation: 6826
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
The required goal should have been at least 2% by every NATO country already.

But 4% would be preferable since that is what the U.S. has been spending all these years.
You make it sound like all countries should have the same wealth .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:14 AM
 
9,345 posts, read 4,322,927 times
Reputation: 3023
Quote:
Originally Posted by mightleavenyc View Post
10 years is ridiculous. Trump is right to demand a faster pace. In 2024, if you wait, they'll just have more excuses.
Why is it ridiculous? The only time that NATO required nations to come t9 a members defense was to defend the United States. If the NATO countries all reached the 2% immediately 8t would not save the American taxpayers a penny, and it is an organization of nations where the President of the &SA is not the boss. You are asking countries to ignore a negotiated agreement and be bossed around by a single nation.

If you want that money spent immediately please lay out a sensible plan for just one member, Canada, to spend 20 billion dollars by the end of March on 8ts military. 8f equipment also lay out the plan to have its storage, maintenance and training done within that time period. You may need to spend more than 20 billion if our economy booms ,

The 2% is the plan laid out so that nations can use long term planning to build up their militaries in a reasonable and considered method s9 that 8t is money well spent not simply spent. That Trump ran promising an even larger spending on military even though the US already spends 4 times the amount that the next largest spender China. He was not elected chief of NATO countries nor does he have the right to demand it spent now.

N9, neither Trump nor American citizens have the right to demand the rest of the nation's to do as he orders. You do understand that we are sovereign nations that have an agreement to spend that increased amount by a certain year. Only Trump has decided, unilaterally, to move the deadline.

He is not in charge of our military nor does he have any right to try to control our budgets or our government. I thought you fought a war s9 that a foreign country does not control your taxation but now you desire to be in control of 21 other country budgets and essentially controlling their governments.

I do understand that Putin wishes to weaken NATO. We came to America's defence, when has the States actually defended a NATO country being attacked?

Last edited by badlander; 07-19-2018 at 08:29 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Minnysoda
10,659 posts, read 10,726,169 times
Reputation: 6745
Good! Then we can leave completely?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:21 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
The required goal should have been at least 2% by every NATO country already.

But 4% would be preferable since that is what the U.S. has been spending all these years.

How is percentage of GDP any kind of guide for what a country's defense spending should be? Take the US, surrounded by two large oceans and two friendly nations, shouldn't its defense be relatively easier than that of a country bordered by hostile nations? And if a country's doing well and its GDP increases, how has the task of its defense become more difficult?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:22 AM
 
Location: OH->FL->NJ
17,003 posts, read 12,589,940 times
Reputation: 8921
Im betting much of the increase is done by those at the 2% or close enough to call it a win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:23 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by mightleavenyc View Post
10 years is ridiculous. Trump is right to demand a faster pace. In 2024, if you wait, they'll just have more excuses.
Well, Trump's certainly a master at reneging on agreements, the man's word is worth nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:24 AM
 
4,559 posts, read 1,436,094 times
Reputation: 1919
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
The required goal should have been at least 2% by every NATO country already.

But 4% would be preferable since that is what the U.S. has been spending all these years.
Those countries would want military bases here as well then ?
We pay more so we get to put our military wherever we want ? Is that the actual deal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2018, 08:31 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by what'd i miss View Post
Those countries would want military bases here as well then ?
We pay more so we get to put our military wherever we want ? Is that the actual deal?

Well, it does keep the MIC happy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:59 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top