Welcome home, fellow Gator.

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.

  1. diehardgator1

    diehardgator1 Premium Member

    6,635
    271
    383
    Apr 3, 2007
    At least he is not drawing lines in the sand like obama. Of course maybe obama was just wanting to play marbles
     
  2. diehardgator1

    diehardgator1 Premium Member

    6,635
    271
    383
    Apr 3, 2007
    I believe its liberals who have a psychological problem.
     
  3. diehardgator1

    diehardgator1 Premium Member

    6,635
    271
    383
    Apr 3, 2007
    Illegitimate election . Boy winning 32 states to 20 is really getting your ass kicked. And by the way no where did I see any Russian soldiers guarding election booths any where in the U S keeping people from voting for hillary
     
  4. luvtruthg8r

    luvtruthg8r Premium Member

    602
    154
    193
    Apr 3, 2007
    The effort by Trump to get the allies to increase spending is mere subterfuge by Trump to harm relations between our country and our allies. Sure....our allies increasing military spending IN AND OF ITSELF would help to defend against Russia. But if the alliance is broken, and more Putin allies in Europe take office, which is Trump's and Putin's goal, the amount of money the Europeans spend would be immaterial. For instance, if a Putin puppet (like Trump) is installed in Germany, individual military spending amounts by European countries will not even be a slight factor.

    Trump and Putin are trying to destroy NATO to help Russia harm the US and the entire free world. Thanks to Trump, Russia will dominate Europe and the middle east, while China will dominate the Pacific rim.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. luvtruthg8r

    luvtruthg8r Premium Member

    602
    154
    193
    Apr 3, 2007
    You are purposely missing the point. A total of 80,000 votes in three states, and not many more in other states, was the difference. If you think the Wikileaks and other Russian efforts to trash Democrats were ineffectual, then you are willfully ignoring the reality that Trump and crew railed and railed for thousands of hours over a period of months, making it a central theme of his campaign, about all the emails and other Wikileaks junk, which affected a lot more than 80,000 votes in those three states.
     
  6. citygator

    citygator Premium Member

    3,883
    798
    493
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    Seemed to...

    “liberals who seem to have no problem with borrowing money to pay for the defense of countries”

    ... I take that as we’d cut our spending on defense cuz today it includes spending for things you don’t think we should be paying for.
     
  7. T3goalie

    T3goalie Premium Member

    3,910
    498
    318
    Apr 3, 2007
    Countries such as Germany have not met their obligations.

    They are in breach of their Agreement .

    Meanwile, Germany is cutting sweet heart energy deals with Russia, at rates not available to other NATO countries. All the while making themselves dependent on Russia.

    Germany is sending billions of dollars to Russia in hard currency. (The irony is that the preachy greens of Germany are importing fossil fuel after discontinuing vast percentages their own clean energy.)

    Putin/ Russia would never turn off the faucet to Germany, would they? Hmmm . Recent history says otherwise. See Ukraine.

    And if Russia did, would that be an act of economic war against Germany ?

    The purpose of NATO is what?

    It offers protection from whom?

    Germany is the economic powerhouse of the EU and acting like an entitled child, buying cut rate energy, saving billions and not paying treaty requirements on their defense. Why? Because the USA has been disproportionally subsidizing NATO defense for so long that Germany, et al, see no reason to meet their obligations.

    Germany lords the EU ountries with an iron fist of which Hitler would be envious. It is a crack up how Leftworld news is making Germany out to be a victim today... Poor Merkel. Trump is bullying her in public? Merkel the wallflower? Merkel the snowflake? NOT hardly. ROTFL.

    And what is Leftworld's solution? Do what they have been doing for decades and hoping for different results? Transfer of wealth continued....

    Unfortunately, the previous gentile diplomatic nudging didn't work. God forbid the NATO breaching parties (deadbeats) are called on the carpet in public in plain unambiguous language.

    The resident of 1600 knows how to follow the money. And he won't allow third parties to characterize greed and breach of agreement as nuanced diplomacy. This is pure and simple free riding.

    X away Leftworld.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    9,001
    739
    478
    Dec 9, 2010
    Which agreement in particular have they breached?
     
  9. jmoliver

    jmoliver GC Hall of Fame

    1,744
    11
    243
    Apr 3, 2007
    No country is lagging unless they aren't at 2% by 2024.
     
  10. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    5,242
    474
    323
    Apr 16, 2007
    I would love us to reduce our defense spending to 1.75% of GDP. Actually, that is far too draconian even for me, but with where we are at now I would love to just see it get under 3%. Which would still have us spending multiples of anybody else. But considering the reaction to the Obama era sequester (which basically just held spending flat for a couple years, and you'd think budget sequester meant Obama had single handedly destroyed our entire military capability), do you even think 3% is possible?

    With the special interests, lobbyists, and politicians in the pockets of the MIC, all I have to say is "good luck with that." Maybe you actually think we spend 3.6% "because NATO", but I don't believe that at all. I think we spend that much because of the MIC, broken contracting/bidding system, and crooked lying politicians that largely inhabit congress and the White House. It's really the same reason we spend so much on healthcare per capita in this country relative to other nations. Both symptoms of the same underlying problem.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. mutz87

    mutz87 Ain't me VIP Member

    36,256
    2,718
    1,786
    Aug 30, 2014
    This from...Russia's state TV

    Tatyana Parkhalina:

    "I never thought I’d live to see this—neither the USSR nor Russia, who tried many times to drive the wedge between transatlantic allies, but Washington is doing everything to break down the foundations of transatlantic alliance & unity."

    [​IMG]
     
    • Informative Informative x 6
  12. gatornana

    gatornana Administrator Moderator VIP Member

    46,632
    1,194
    1,893
    Apr 3, 2007
    Dang!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. fastsix

    fastsix Premium Member

    10,436
    1,144
    833
    Apr 11, 2007
    Seattle
    Unless Canada decides to fight a war of their own making, in a foreign land, they'll get our support by default. Unless you think we'd sit back and let a hostile foreign power take over a country we share a 1500 mile border with.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. gatorev12

    gatorev12 GC Hall of Fame

    11,510
    562
    648
    Jan 27, 2009
    Namely that they haven't matched minimum defense spending for decades now; and worse: because of outright incompetence in defense planning, they've had readiness failures in their army, air force, and navy that force all the other NATO countries to cover the slack.

    When their subs are all unable to deploy, their area of operations needs to be filled by someone else. Ditto for their air force. And same when their rapid reaction forces (the rotating force that's supposed to be ready to deploy within 48 hours) are sidelined. This isn't an isolated bad year: it's been like this for a decade...and half of that decade has been with the US asking politely for them to get their shiza together...and now with a boot firmly up their arse.

    And STILL they don't plan to be at 2% defense spending in 2024. Their current budget aims for it to be at 1.5% then...and Merkel's senior govt planners have candidly said they don't expect spending to actually rise beyond 1.4%.

    You can make a valid point that many NATO countries are doing what they can to do more...but Germany isn't even trying and everyone damn well knows it.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    62,085
    9,482
    2,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    Obama said the same thing to NATO... So, now how do you feel? LMFAO! :rolleyes::oops:
     
  16. dynogator

    dynogator GC Hall of Fame

    6,188
    263
    333
    Apr 9, 2007
    I wouldn't be so quick to take Russia out of the equation.
     
  17. diehardgator1

    diehardgator1 Premium Member

    6,635
    271
    383
    Apr 3, 2007
    Trump cannot help it if the Democrats rigged the election for Hillary and got caught
    [​IMG]
     
  18. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    7,305
    1,410
    453
    Nov 25, 2017
    Historically, western European countries have not been ready and became susceptible to attack. WW2 is a paradigm example. So, imploring European countries, who can deploy faster in their own theatre, to be ready makes sense. What does not make sense is the way Trump is going about it and his related economic policies. Together, our allies rightly perceive that they are being assaulted. Especially when Trump reaches out to Putin like he has. The comment on the pipeline was very interesting and appropriate. I thought. The pipeline will strengthen Russia economically and make Germany more dependent on Russia at a time when its commitment to NATO is very weak. This is more dangerous than people think and it should have been called out (maybe not the same way Trump said it). Russia has a long history of making nations energy dependent and using that to expand its influence and control. If Germany commits to meeting its funding obligations to NATO, that would really help. Russia would be paying for NATO. And, Germany is probably the most important country for us strategically in NATO, for reasons that are self evident. I do agree with the posters who say that Europeans do not push Germany to strengthen its armamanets for self evident reasons.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. gatorev12

    gatorev12 GC Hall of Fame

    11,510
    562
    648
    Jan 27, 2009
    Technically, yes. But it should be mentioned that lots of things have changed since that was agreed to.

    Russia has continued to make aggressive moves in Europe; the conflict in Syria kicked off; ISIS became a thing; and the Sahel is slipping into greater chaos.

    Time is not a luxury NATO has anymore and vague plans to "move towards" spending "in the future" ignore the issues that everyone is facing NOW. When Italy has to recall ships to port because they can't fund their navy being out to sea anymore...it doesn't stop the migrants trying to flood into Europe. Forcing everyone to deal with unpopular immigration that much of the continent abjectly does not want.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    7,305
    1,410
    453
    Nov 25, 2017
    If Trump made the argument this articulately, nobody would complain.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1