Welcome home, fellow Gator

...to the Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Trump Calls Out NATO

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by diehardgator1, Jul 11, 2018 at 8:26 AM.

  1. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    7,540
    281
    348
    Apr 8, 2007
    Rather than defense spending as percentage of GDP, direct contributions to NATO may be more relevant and in relation to the size of the US economy our contributions to NATO (around 23% of the total NATO budget) are not disproportionately large.
    [​IMG]
     
  2. dynogator

    dynogator GC Hall of Fame

    5,975
    175
    333
    Apr 9, 2007
    Just more of your sneaky "nuance," Bling.
     
  3. gatorev12

    gatorev12 GC Hall of Fame

    11,415
    528
    648
    Jan 27, 2009
    I had a post on the last page that explained what NATO funding goes to and why it's important.

    To say that it's more relevant than actual defense spending would be very false, however.
     
  4. GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    11,130
    664
    688
    Apr 3, 2007
    This thread has really quieted since actual facts were introduced.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. NavyGator93

    NavyGator93 GC Hall of Fame

    495
    163
    328
    Dec 4, 2015
    The only winner in this collossal goatrope is Russia.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. gatorev12

    gatorev12 GC Hall of Fame

    11,415
    528
    648
    Jan 27, 2009
    For now, yes.

    But Russia also wins if the status quo continues (effective unilateral European disarmament on their border).

    Either way: the situation had to change. What comes next is undetermined; but there's room for the alliance to shape up and emerge stronger.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
  7. MaceoP

    MaceoP GC Hall of Fame

    2,525
    77
    278
    Apr 3, 2007
    The NATO budget is something like 1.5 billion a year. It is an immaterial amount (as it this chart) in relation to how much each country is spending on Defense.
     
  8. ursidman

    ursidman GC Hall of Fame

    4,177
    1,485
    443
    Sep 27, 2007
    Trump throws NATO summit into crisis mode with demands, before switching and claiming victory
    President Trump threw the annual NATO summit into crisis Thursday — forcing an emergency session and suggesting the United States could leave the nearly 70-year-old alliance — before switching positions and claiming victory.
    As the summit closed, the president held an unexpected news conference, taking credit for having secured firmer commitments from all 28 other member nations to increase their spending on defense.
    French President Emmanuel Macron, in his own closing news conference, said NATO members had made no new commitments. He also said that Trump "never at any moment, either in public or in private, threatened to withdraw from NATO."
    (aka, a lie)
    During Trump’s news conference, a reporter asked the ebullient president if he would go back on his positive statements about NATO once he was again aboard Air Force One and able to tweet. Trump scoffed at the notion that he is at times inconsistent.

    "I'm very consistent," he said. "I'm a very stable genius."


    Not kid chaos at all - he's a very stable genius.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018 at 5:18 PM
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. BigCroc

    BigCroc Premium Member

    782
    109
    218
    Apr 3, 2007
    Actual facts are like Kryptonite to Trump and many of his supporters. ;)
     
  10. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    3,839
    553
    378
    Nov 25, 2017
    I think it is clear that there are parallels to Russia’s growing expansionist behavior and its actions in the Soviet Union days. A difference is that the expansionism is not disguised under the rubric of spreading socialism. I am curious how many people who offer opinions grew up or were “aware” during the Cold War. It has been a long time now.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. gatorev12

    gatorev12 GC Hall of Fame

    11,415
    528
    648
    Jan 27, 2009
    Russia has always been an expansionist power going back to the tsars: historically, they've been invaded from both east and west, so they seem to have a cultural pre-disposition to always wanting to be on the offensive and be unpredictable in order to throw off potential adversaries and to build up as much territory between their heartland and their adversaries (since their heartland is fairly open plains). It's guided their foreign policy for centuries now.

    I think there's a fair point that most younger generations don't quite "get it" since Russias were mostly characterized as drunken oafs, mobsters, or insanely hot porn stars as millennials were growing up. Then again, as someone who technically falls within the millennial age group (albeit on the older side); anyone can study history and pick up an understanding of their history.
     
  12. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    3,839
    553
    378
    Nov 25, 2017
    I remember hiding under my desk in elementary school. I am a great believer in a strong NATO and the strong bonds with our allies. You may be a milleneals, but your life experiences are different.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    7,540
    281
    348
    Apr 8, 2007
    Keep in mind that Vladimir Putin referred to the breakup of the Soviet Union as the greatest tragedy of the 20th Century. It's Putin's goal to create a new Russia with the influence of the old Soviet Union and Donald Trump is his useful idiot.
    Putin: Breakup of USSR a great tragedy for Russians
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  14. oragator1

    oragator1 Premium Member

    13,706
    1,211
    948
    Apr 3, 2007
    If they were actually kryptonite they would have an effect. Even kryptonite can’t breka through the bubble.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. INGATORSWETRUST

    INGATORSWETRUST GC Hall of Fame

    15,897
    503
    628
    Apr 8, 2007
    Just the facts

    Every country in NATO has previously agreed to spend 2 percent of their GDP on NATO. Previous Presidents “have” all addressed the issue while also lacking a spine due to political correctness to do anything about it. It is true that we are paying 3.7 percent of a much larger GDP on protection of Europe. Why should US taxpayers pay to protect countries that don’t pay a previously agreed upon fair share? We could use thes funds for other needs in the US. Then the ultimate disrespect, Germany enters a deal with Russia for their oil, when they are only paying 1.2 percent of GDP to NATO defense and the US has a large trade deficit with Germany. They want us to pay for their defense and then don’t buy oil from us to lower the deficit. Why do Democrats think that is okay? This is the first President to look out for US and not be taken advantage of by other countries. Why do Democrats care more about Germany than the US? Lower trade deficit means more jobs for US citizens. Just the facts
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  16. oragator1

    oragator1 Premium Member

    13,706
    1,211
    948
    Apr 3, 2007
    Who here said it was ok?

    It’s how trump is choosing to address things like this that people have a problem with. He publicly attacks our allies regularly (often on a personal level), while praising our enemies, and then wonders why no one does what he wants.
    He named called the Canadian prime
    Minister when they wouldn’t do what he wanted, he had a 2 hour meeting with Kim lavished praise on him and declared the issue resolved, publicly endorsed someone other than the British PM yesterday and told them if they didn’t do brexit how he wanted he would not trade with them, said Putin would be the easiest part of his trip, claimed Mexico would pay for a Wall they have no intention of paying for, dropped 200 billion in tariffs without even telling China what he is expecting them to do (they are literally reaching out to random people in the government to ask because they have no idea), spent his iniital conversation with the Aussie PM bragging about how big his electoral college win was, told the Russians he fired Comey over the investigation. Claimed Russia interference was a hoax....I could go on for pages.
    He is an embarrassment. This is just the latest example- all those countries he just finished beating his chest in front of us went to deeply unpopular wars in the last few years simply because we asked. They lost lives, governments toppled for backing us...we can have disagreements but they deserve to be treated as friends, not worse Jan he treats Kim and Putin.
    And the ironic part is the same people now defending it are the ones who framed it when Obama simply moved a statue of Churchill. The blind faith in this guy is downright scary.
     
  17. rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    Apr 8, 2007
    Trump's False Claims at NATO - FactCheck.org
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    7,540
    281
    348
    Apr 8, 2007
    The facts are that we are now spending 3.1 percent of our GDP on defense. The 3.7 percent is from 2015. Only a portion of our defense spending goes to the defense of Europe. We have defense commitments around the world. US troops are based in dozens of countries outside of Europe and we have naval fleets in virtually every ocean. And no, Trump was not the first president to request that other NATO members increase their defense spending (Obama and George W. Bush have also made that request) and most have been doing so. The 2.0 percent of GDP is the goal for 2024. As far as the Russian-German natural gas pipeline is concerned, keep in mind the less than 30% of Germany's energy is from natural gas (more electricity in Germany is generated by wind power than natural gas for example) and that the Russian pipeline would only provide a portion of that total.