Sadly, NATO actually needs America. Despite Russia's economy being tiny - their military spending is huge

[Nithavela]

The United States appears to be losing influence among some Americans who support the idea of making America great, yet align with Russia and blame America for various global issues.

BRICE is just a small drop in an ocean.


BRICE = Russia 1.8+ China 18.4 +India 3.7 + Brazil 2.1+ Iran 368b + South Africa - 405 b + Egypt -387b + Ethiopia 156b + UAE -499b + Saudi Arab 1.1t + Argentina 641 =29.5 trillion

vs

USA 25.1 + Japan 4.9 + UK 2.8 + Canada 1.7 + South Korea 1.9 + Australia 1.8 + EU 17 = 55.2 trillion total GDP.

I prefer US stay with it’s ally.

I see where the problem is, some Americans may struggle to understand that a $55 trillion economy is greater than a $29 trillion economy.

People have problems with numbers in general. For example, they see DOGE announcing daily cuts of 10 to 100 million dollars to the US budget and imagine that this will make a sizeable dent in a multi-trillion dollar budget.

It's a bit like that old story of the 1/3 pounder failing in the USA because people preferred the quarter pounder since they thought it had more meat.

I don't even say that americans are ignorant or stupid or something. The human brain isn't designed to operate on numbers of such a scale, so all one hears is that a big number was substracted from a bigger number.

It helps to break it down to "household numbers", like saying how much a family budget of 100k dollars would be changed by an equivalent cut.

 

[Laodicean60]

What a convenient timeframe for your argument.

Wasn't Finland part of Russia in those times?

 

[Nithavela]

Wasn't Finland part of Russia in those times?

No.

 

[Laodicean60]

No.

It must have been before the winter war, then. You made me look it up. I think Stalins fear of Nazi expansionism is somewhat true and Finland aligned with Nazi germany in the Continuation War.

 

[Laodicean60]

BRICE is just a small drop in an ocean.

But gaining steam.

BRICE = Russia 1.8+ China 18.4 +India 3.7 + Brazil 2.1+ Iran 368b + South Africa - 405 b + Egypt -387b + Ethiopia 156b + UAE -499b + Saudi Arab 1.1t + Argentina 641 =29.5 trillion

vs

USA 25.1 + Japan 4.9 + UK 2.8 + Canada 1.7 + South Korea 1.9 + Australia 1.8 + EU 17 = 55.2 trillion total GDP.

When they only trade amongst themselves, then what happens to GDP? No one is going to want America's expensive stuff. You count GDP now with our current trade setup.

 

[7thKeeper]

It must have been before the winter war, then. You made me look it up. I think Stalins fear of Nazi expansionism is somewhat true and Finland aligned with Nazi germany in the Continuation War.

Yes we did. Because well... There was no one else, essentially, if Finland wanted to get any actual material aid.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

But gaining steam.

When they only trade amongst themselves, then what happens to GDP? No one is going to want America's expensive stuff. You count GDP now with our current trade setup.

Finally, we are on same page on how international diplomacy works. The US should actively work to align other nations with its interests. The US is the largest economy in the world, followed by the European Union and the UK. To counter BRICS GDP, it is crucial to have the EU on our side. Additionally, alliances should continue to other democracy such as Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Canada. The US must also form alliances with smaller Asian countries like Bangladesh, the Philippines, and others in Southeast Asia.

instated, the current administration appears to view Europe, the second largest economy, as an adversary of the United States and seems to favor aligning with Russia.

You are correct; BRIUCE is unlikely to afford expensive American products and will likely choose more affordable Indian or Chinese alternatives. Only Europe, with its higher GDP, can afford American goods. In 2024, Europe purchased $117 billion worth of weapons from the United States, representing just one sector of U.S. exports.

 

[RDKirk]

Right, and it was a smart decision, just like India's decline of NATO. Russia has not attacked either. And if you are a leader of the free world and want peace, you have to decline membership to keep the peace.

It won't take article 5 for us to help any neutral country; we have examples in history where we have.

But after decades of refusing to join NATO, Finland and Sweden did join NATO...immediately after Putin invaded Ukraine.

 

[Laodicean60]

But after decades of refusing to join NATO,

Why? Because they didn't feel Russia was a threat, doesn't that make sense? There goes the narrative of big bad Russia.

Finland and Sweden did join NATO...immediately after Putin invaded Ukraine.

Russia attacked, which was wrong, but this attack wasn't out of the blue. Putin had been warning us for sixteen years up until they invaded but we had to have them in the country club.

 

[Nithavela]

Why? Because they didn't feel Russia was a threat, doesn't that make sense?

If they didn't think that Russia was a threat, why did Finland maintain a very powerful military for it's size?

When going per capita, Finland has more active and total military personal available than the USA. When going by total military personal, it's on spot 13, with 47.8 active and reserve personel per 1000 people. That means that 5% of finns are ready to fight in a war. That's double the number Ukraine has available. The USA has 6.2 people per 1000 citizens ready to fight.

That's not a stance of a country that is at ease with it's neighbours.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Why? Because they didn't feel Russia was a threat, doesn't that make sense? There goes the narrative of big bad Russia.

Russia attacked, which was wrong, but this attack wasn't out of the blue. Putin had been warning us for sixteen years up until they invaded but we had to have them in the country club.

If we follow this logic then Osama Bin laden also justified for attacking US. After all Osama warned US to leave Middel East for 20 years.

What is the purpose of the United States spending 850 billion dollars on its defense budget if Russia can dictate who our allies and adversaries are?

 

[Laodicean60]

If they didn't think that Russia was a threat, why did Finland maintain a very powerful military for it's size?

Because it's smart for countries to be able to protect themselves. Not like NATO countries that use the power of the USA. You guys fear Russia and don't have a military to show for it. Then, whine because the US may back out (not likely). You guys should have been like Poland.

 

[Nithavela]

Because it's smart for countries to be able to protect themselves. Not like NATO countries that use the power of the USA. You guys fear Russia and don't have a military to show for it. Then, whine because the US may back out (not likely). You guys should have been like Poland.

What is it now? Was Finland smart for preparing to protect itself or did it not see Russia as a threat?

You can't have it both ways. Or do you want to say that Finland was getting ready against an invasion from Sweden?

 

[Laodicean60]

If we follow this logic then Osama Bin laden also justified for attacking US. After all Osama warned US to leave Middel East for 20 years.

Source please? I also don't want us meddling with in ME with our hegemony.

What is the purpose of the United States spending 850 billion dollars on its defense budget if Russia can dictate who our allies and adversaries are?

I also wonder about the purpose too, and I agree with some common-sense Democrats when it comes to military spending. You know we wouldn't have to spend this kind of money if NATO had been committed to having self-protection.

 

[Laodicean60]

What is it now? Was Finland smart for preparing to protect itself or did it not see Russia as a threat?

Russia isn't the only country surrounding Finland, and again, it's smart to have a strong military no matter who your neighbor is. Just like Finland joining Nazi Germany.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Source please? I also don't want us meddling with in ME with our hegemony.

I also wonder about the purpose too, and I agree with some common-sense Democrats when it comes to military spending. You know we wouldn't have to spend this kind of money if NATO had been committed to having self-protection.

I'm not a Democrat; you should ask them about their policies. There are many individuals with common sense in both the Democratic and Republican parties. Unfortunately, those lacking common sense often make up a significant portion of the primary voters for both parties, leading to the election of politicians who may lack common sense.

If you are interested in whether Osama bin Laden warned the United States to leave the Middle East, you should search for information online. He had been warning the United States to withdraw from the Middle East since President H. Bush sent American troops to Saudi Arabia.

I am interested in understanding the reasoning behind the idea that if NATO countries defend themselves, the US can reduce its defense budget. Do you think that if Europe and other NATO members increase their defense spending, have more active duty military personnel and equipment, the United States could withdraw its forces from around the world, reduce its military personal, and decrease military hardware?

 

[7thKeeper]

Why? Because they didn't feel Russia was a threat, doesn't that make sense? There goes the narrative of big bad Russia.

Oh, this is just nonsense. There's a reason why "Yellow Nation" always seemed to be coming from the East during military practises. And a reason why we maintained a military sizable enough that it would make the cost-benefit assessment of an invasion tilt towards "not worth it" and why we didn't downsize or stop conscription after the USSR fell. The nations name changed, the same people remained.

 

[Laodicean60]

If you are interested in whether Osama bin Laden warned the United States to leave the Middle East, you should search for information online.

I did, "Osama bin Laden, the founder and first general emir of al-Qaeda, declared war on the United States in 1996 and advocated attacks targeting US assets in various countries. He was opposed to the United States' foreign policy in the Middle East and warned the U.S. to leave the region, believing that the Israeli state's ultimate goal was to annex the Arabian Peninsula and the Middle East into its territory and enslave its peoples, as part of what he called a "Greater Israel"

I guess we should have. We'd still have two trade centers and thousands of lives, and no one would be dying today of environmental illnesses caused by it.

The biggest we would be having an endless war in the ME.

 

[7thKeeper]

Russia isn't the only country surrounding Finland, and again, it's smart to have a strong military no matter who your neighbor is. Just like Finland joining Nazi Germany.

Yeah, and none of them were going to invade us, but Russia.

 

[Pommer]

I guess we should have. We'd still have two trade centers and thousands of lives, and no one would be dying today of environmental illnesses caused by it.

Wow. No.
What benefit would we have had in getting such an outcome?

Oh sure, The homeland would have been “safe”, but we would have increased our enemies (not lessened them).