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 07-20-2018, 08:19 AM
 
Location: SE Asia
16,236 posts, read 5,876,252 times
Reputation: 9117

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post


I also find it strange the way Trump's America is attacking allies and trading partners.

Canadians have always been fantastic allies and friends to Britain, and long may it continue.
I find strange that some refuse to question existing partnerships and policies that aren't in our favor.
Allies not honoring their commitments and who never have. Not really good allies. At least you didn't refer to them as friends as man do.

I agree with you that Canada and England are good friends and allies. That doesn't mean we shouldn't question the status quo.
We should absolutely question trade agreements between ourselves and Japan, China, and our so called pals in Europe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-20-2018, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Canada
7,677 posts, read 5,522,852 times
Reputation: 8817
Quote:
Originally Posted by mightleavenyc View Post
Europe is the one that needs our defense, not vice versa. We have two oceans, two pathetically weak neighbors, and the most powerful military in the world. We're fine.
So why not make reductions to your obscenely high military budget?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2018, 11:50 PM
 
435 posts, read 175,928 times
Reputation: 395
Quote:
Originally Posted by boneyard1962 View Post
The OP seems to feel that American Tax payers should spend as much or more than all the European members of NATO combined, for their defense.. LMAO. How insane is that. As it stands we already spend over a third of what they do.

If I had my way every member country would have to pay the same dollar amount.
The USA would save billions.
Then again I would also cease all world cop activities and turn them over to the UN. We would save many billions.
Billions that could be spent on health care, infra structure and education.
We don't spend money on our defense for others, we do it for ourselves and our own interests. We do it because we like to call the shots and want to be on top.

NATO countries are paying more than they have and yet we still increased our military spending, we didn't decrease it accordingly and never would. The notion that we would cut our military spending if NATO increased theirs is absurd. We like our military and we like to use it.

Hell, we fund the militaries of other countries we like militaries so much. How much do we give to Israel each year for defense? 3 Billion? And they give their population free healthcare and services we tell our citizens we can't afford. But we pay for their military. Why? Because it is what we do.

Also, you gotta give Boeing that business
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2018, 12:10 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
27,555 posts, read 28,636,675 times
Reputation: 25141
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnirene View Post
So why not make reductions to your obscenely high military budget?
The U.S. military needs to be strong to counteract adversary countries like China, Russia, North Korea and Iran and also to clamp down on ISIS and other Islamic terrorism.

You need a strong military as a deterrence from war mostly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2018, 02:51 AM
 
Location: Phoenix
30,348 posts, read 19,134,588 times
Reputation: 26234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
The Truth instead of Trump's nonsense.

As well as the US $87 Billion already being spent (almost three times the total US spending on NATO), there are plans for much more future spending and many countries are looking to meet guidelines and increase spending.
Great news, now we can abandon NATO and let the Euros fend for themselves (that's always worked well in the past)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2018, 03:47 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
27,146 posts, read 13,434,325 times
Reputation: 19446
Quote:
Originally Posted by boneyard1962 View Post
I find strange that some refuse to question existing partnerships and policies that aren't in our favor.
Allies not honoring their commitments and who never have. Not really good allies. At least you didn't refer to them as friends as man do.

I agree with you that Canada and England are good friends and allies. That doesn't mean we shouldn't question the status quo.
We should absolutely question trade agreements between ourselves and Japan, China, and our so called pals in Europe.
By questioning Article 5 Trump has already damaged NATO to an extent it's future is now far more uncertain.

In terms of a European Pact replacing NATO, this is something that the US has always been very much against, so the US needs to make it's own mind up.

US concerns over EU defence pact cloud NATO talks | SBS News (15th February 2018)

As for questioning allies, feel free, although don't be surprised if they question their relationship with the US.

The US bases in Europe are often for America's own good, in relation to such areas as ballistic missile early warning, intelligence, logistics and supply, medical support, naval support and numeroys other activities that support US operations in other regions and across the globe.

The US is already on shaky ground with many in Germany and other countries actively wanting the US to leave, so just kep pushing and calling people freeloaders.

As for the 2% it's a guideline and not a legal stipulation and is in relation to 2024, and Europe has already vastly increased it's defence spending and is increasing it further.

Other than Germany, most Europeans do not have hugh trade supluses with the US and the average rate of tariffs is extremely low at 3%, or at least it was until Trump.

See the Trade Balance by country in the link below, indeed the vast majority of the EU trade surplus relates to just three countries - Germany which is responsible for the bulk of the trade surplus, followed by Italy and Ireland (which is not in NATO). The rest of Europe does not have much of a trade surplus and is certainly not rolling up huge trade surpluses.

File:Trade balance with the United States by Member State, 2017.png - Statistics Explained

Link to Table


In terms of cars, Europe does have a 10% tariff on US Cars and the US has a 2.5% tariff on EU Cars however the US has a 25% tariff on pick up's and light commercial vehicles and has since 1963. This constitutes a large part of the US Vehicle market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EU and United States

Given the low average tariffs (under 3%), the key to unlocking this potential lies in the tackling of non-tariff barriers. These consist mainly of customs procedures and behind the border regulatory restrictions.

United States - Trade - European Commission

If the US wants a trade war and wants Europe to increasingly make seperate alliances to NATO then so be it.

Nine EU states to launch joint military force as Paris pushes for post- Brexit crisis defence group - The Telegraph

Trump somehow still doesn't understand NATO - Vox

Nato needs new thinking, not new money - The Business Times

Last edited by Brave New World; 07-21-2018 at 04:09 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2018, 08:12 AM
 
7,489 posts, read 4,950,618 times
Reputation: 8031
It's curious that the USA views the Northern Atlantic Treaty Organization as an EU +USA thing. Even if the USA pulls out of NATO, Canada will remain and will continue to participate in NATO peacekeeping missions. It seems to me that the result will be a power shift that excludes the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2018, 08:17 AM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,480,377 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by cofor View Post
We don't spend money on our defense for others, we do it for ourselves and our own interests. We do it because we like to call the shots and want to be on top.

NATO countries are paying more than they have and yet we still increased our military spending, we didn't decrease it accordingly and never would. The notion that we would cut our military spending if NATO increased theirs is absurd. We like our military and we like to use it.

Hell, we fund the militaries of other countries we like militaries so much. How much do we give to Israel each year for defense? 3 Billion? And they give their population free healthcare and services we tell our citizens we can't afford. But we pay for their military. Why? Because it is what we do.

Also, you gotta give Boeing that business
Well, finally a concise and accurate picture of the reality of America's military spending. It ain't done to protect anybody or anything other than America's continued prominence.


Suggesting it's done for any kind of altruism is a dog that not only isn't going to hunt but was never intended to get out of the Pick-up truck and get it's feet dirty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2018, 04:45 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
27,146 posts, read 13,434,325 times
Reputation: 19446
Further problems caused by Trump's Article 5 comments include;

1. NATO Countries allow US Bases to operate under the understanding that it is part of a defence agrreement based on mutual support.

2. US Bases are often unaccountable, and there are a considerable amount of US Inteligence facilities in Europe. There would be massive pressure to close these facilities if the US was no longer going to honour Article 5 or wanted to leave NATO.

Whilst Trump and his administrations careless leaking of foreign intelligence material and Trump's close links to Putin's Russia will eventually put a strain on intelligence sharing with the US and security arrangements.

3. Many US bases in Europe support US Operations in the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East and beyond.

4. Trump rants and raves, but there have been no plans put in place to close US Bases in Europe, indeed the US is currently supporting the development of two new NATO Commands, so Trump needs to clarify his stance on NATO and a timeframe for US withdrawl from Europe.

5. Trump's policy on NATO is at odds with his own Congress and the Pentagon, as well as Jim Mattis, the current United States Secretary of Defense.

6. The US has consistently tried to stop and has consistently been against a European replacement for NATO.

7. Finally the European countries are already forging new defence pacts outside of NATO, with no US involvement.

In terms of Europe it has increased defence spending by $87 Billion per year since 2014, with further increases planned. Indeed the European NATO allies spend arond $270 Billion on defence, which is more than Russia and China combined, and constitutes the second largest combined defence spending after the US itself.

If Trump and the US want to leave NATO and withdraw forces from Europe then I suggest they start planning and working with allies in order that they can also plan ahead.

Last edited by Brave New World; 07-22-2018 at 04:53 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2018, 04:49 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
27,146 posts, read 13,434,325 times
Reputation: 19446
As for Montenegro, why didn't Trump let his feelings known when he agreed to them becoming part of NATO last year. Whilst the US has consitently pushed for the expansion of NATO since the end of the Cold War.

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 10:28 PM.

© 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