Originally posted by CordMcNally
View Post
X
-
Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post
From what I can tell, the US has been propping up NATO financially for some time. I don't know anything about this website but it has a nice graphic that I'll assume is accurate: NATO Defense Spending: How Much Does Each Country Contribute? (visualcapitalist.com)
The US accounts for 69% of all NATO defense spending in 2021. Why are we even in NATO if we're the ones providing a majority of the money?
The EU doesn't want to do anything. They can't even come to an agreement because several of their members are very reliant on Russian energy. NATO goes as the US goes.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post
From what I can tell, the US has been propping up NATO financially for some time. I don't know anything about this website but it has a nice graphic that I'll assume is accurate: NATO Defense Spending: How Much Does Each Country Contribute? (visualcapitalist.com)
The US accounts for 69% of all NATO defense spending in 2021. Why are we even in NATO if we're the ones providing a majority of the money?
The EU doesn't want to do anything. They can't even come to an agreement because several of their members are very reliant on Russian energy. NATO goes as the US goes.
Ultimately, the I hope the citizens of these countries themselves will decide to support policies of increased defense spending.
Totally agree with you about the funding issue. NATO membership should require a GDP proportionate contribution to mutual defense. I’m not sure how or why we ended up in the position of principal underwriter of European defense.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by dataentryspecialist View Post
I’m really hopeful that this has opened Europe’s eyes to why NATO still needs to exist. One can see that Germany’s calculation that increasing interdependence between Russia and EU would make NATO somewhat obsolete was totally wrong.
Originally posted by dataentryspecialist View PostUltimately, the I hope the citizens of these countries themselves will decide to support policies of increased defense spending.
Originally posted by dataentryspecialist View PostTotally agree with you about the funding issue. NATO membership should require a GDP proportionate contribution to mutual defense. I’m not sure how or why we ended up in the position of principal underwriter of European defense.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post
In Europe's eyes, NATO needs to exist because somebody else (the US) is footing the bill.
They don't want to increase their spending or else they would have. They want free protection and who can blame them?
Unless something has changed, they're supposed to spend 2% of their GDP on defense. Is it really a requirement if no one enforces it?
Now it only takes a special military operation. Baby steps.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by nastle View PostWe are trying to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian man
Europeans need to oppose this myopic and dangerous policy
peace in Europe ASAP
We surrendered all of Eastern Europe to communism without a fight now giving even half of Ukraine to Russia is too much ?
Russia needs to be tamed and defanged yes but not at the cost of every Ukrainian male
It’s cheaper and easier to deal with it now, rather than 20 years from now. But Europe does need to pay its share. Without the US, there is no NATO, just a bunch of bickering states.
You can’t negotiate from a position of weakness with a tyrant who would happily kill your family, if they were a mild inconvenience. When the bullets start flying, you have to call for the sons of bitches to bail you out. You can’t painlessly talk your way out of certain situations.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
The answer seems to be growing from the model developed from Iraq and Afghanistan. What could go wrong?
The Pentagon has modeled a new high-level team to rush military aid to Ukraine after the group it used to rush supplies to troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, according to a memo obtained by Defense News and sources familiar with the matter.
Does anyone have any doubt that the Taliban and al Qaeda won’t regenerate?
Anyone want to visit Somalia?
The president also signed off on targeting about a dozen Shabab leaders in the war-torn country, from which Donald J. Trump largely withdrew in his final weeks in office.
Might be a good move. Might not.
Afghanistan’s geographic location embodies the earliest routes of the Silk Road and modern development would benefit the BRI, but member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) present challenges. The Eurasian security bloc actually formed over 20 years ago to focus on regional security and development, but the bloc has largely enabled an encroachment of Chinese influence. Russia has sought to counter-balance that dominance. With security a concern over Afghanistan and recent unrest in Kazakhstan, Moscow has increased military activities in Central Asia, largely through the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)—China is not a member nor does membership include all SCO members. China’s grand strategy began to play out favorably with Taliban leaders in Tianjin last year. Under auspices of political deference and support for a peaceful transition of power, Chinese officials strategized talks by underscoring policies of non-interference in Afghan affairs. Foreign Minister Wang Yi used the opportunity to criticize U.S. troop departure as being “hasty” and evidence of American policy failures.
Make no mistake, the US is addicted to meddling and reaps unintended consequences.
We are getting played as suckers. Checkbook in hand but a steeper price.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by CordMcNally View Post
From what I can tell, the US has been propping up NATO financially for some time. I don't know anything about this website but it has a nice graphic that I'll assume is accurate: NATO Defense Spending: How Much Does Each Country Contribute? (visualcapitalist.com)
The US accounts for 69% of all NATO defense spending in 2021. Why are we even in NATO if we're the ones providing a majority of the money?
The EU doesn't want to do anything. They can't even come to an agreement because several of their members are very reliant on Russian energy. NATO goes as the US goes.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by fatlittlepig View PostI sleep well at night knowing that if the US got into trouble, nato article 5 dictates that Montenegro and Luxembourg will come to our defense.
it sounds like you would be happy to hunker down in ignorant isolation while handing over Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Romania, and the Baltics to Russia. Most sane observers understand why that would not be acceptable.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by FIREshrink View Post
This is the small minded way of American isolationism which ultimately allowed global war - WWI and WWII - to get out of hand. Do you not understand the economic benefits the US derives from a Europe at peace? Was our society richer or poorer when the Berlin Wall stood and the Eastern Bloc was off limits to American industry? Was it good or bad to bring tens of millions of Europeans into NATO, the EU, and the western economic order?
it sounds like you would be happy to hunker down in ignorant isolation while handing over Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Romania, and the Baltics to Russia. Most sane observers understand why that would not be acceptable.
You realize all the other countries in the world have militaries too, right? It's not our job to stop every psycho with a finger on the trigger in the world. The rest of the world has become weak and reliant on our peacekeeping, much to our detriment. Europe itself could handle and stop the Russian attack of Ukraine, but they have become lazy, helpless and dependent on Russian energy, so they won't do what is necessary and it's on our plate.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Channels
Collapse
Comment