Europe Is Now Alone (well, with US guarantees)

[mark46]

neither can you -

but just for funzies:

As of the latest reports, several NATO countries are not meeting the 2% GDP defense spending target. These countries include:

• France (1.9%)
• Germany (1.57%)
• Canada (1.38%)
• Italy (1.46%)
• Spain (1.26%)
• Belgium (1.26%)
• Portugal (1.48%)
• Netherlands (1.7%)
• Norway (1.67%)
• Denmark (1.65%)
• Turkey (1.31%)
• Slovenia (1.35%)
• Croatia (1.79%)
• Bulgaria (1.84%)
• North Macedonia (1.87%)
• Montenegro (1.87%)
• Albania (1.76%)
• Czech Republic (1.5%)

Beginning to really like AI!

of course, there is no date

We should know the 2024 final numbers within a month

But make no mistake. Trump will reach his goal and have some of Europe's country spend 5% on defense as he wants, and they will mobo;ize their armies as is now increasingly necessary.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Because it tells you lies you want to hear?

Thank you for adding informative information to this thread - as always.

 

[Always in His Presence]

of course, there is no date

We should know the 2024 final numbers within a month

But make no mistake. Trump will reach his goal and have some of Europe's country spend 5% on defense as he wants, and they will mobo;ize their armies as is now increasingly necessary.

Sorry, you've missed it too many times in this thread alone for me personally to accept anything you say without proof.

 

[7thKeeper]

neither can you -

but just for funzies:

As of the latest reports, several NATO countries are not meeting the 2% GDP defense spending target. These countries include:

• France (1.9%)
• Germany (1.57%)
• Canada (1.38%)
• Italy (1.46%)
• Spain (1.26%)
• Belgium (1.26%)
• Portugal (1.48%)
• Netherlands (1.7%)
• Norway (1.67%)
• Denmark (1.65%)
• Turkey (1.31%)
• Slovenia (1.35%)
• Croatia (1.79%)
• Bulgaria (1.84%)
• North Macedonia (1.87%)
• Montenegro (1.87%)
• Albania (1.76%)
• Czech Republic (1.5%)

Beginning to really like AI!

I think you should try looking these things up instead of using AI. That's the problem, those are still old numbers you're posting. And you relied on an AI model to "think" for you instead of looking things up.

So you're celebrating AI a bit too early...

Maybe try educating yourself instead? I've looked them up, which is why it's so easy to spot these mistakes.

But like I said, thank you for proving that you didn't know the current situation. That's what this conversation was about. You tried to use the nebulous "them" to hide the fact that you were uneducated on the matter. Not a sin or anything in and of itself, everyone is uneducated on some topics but it kinda makes your argument moot when done from a place of ignorance.

 

[Vambram]

I agree that some critics of President Trump exacerbate issues that do not exist. The US involvement with NATO remains unchanged from January 19, 2025, to today. The US commitment to defend NATO members has not changed.

Nevertheless, the United States has ceased sharing intelligence with an ally currently under attack by Russia. While it is understood that President Trump intends to apply pressure on President Zelensky to enter negotiations, is it prudent to withhold intelligence from the Ukrainian military during a Russian assault? What message does this action convey to other US allies who rely on American support for their security?

Ukraine accepts deal, says Rubio: 'We'll take this to the Russians'

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Ukraine has accepted the U.S. 30-day ceasefire proposal and now Washington will take it to Russia which it will 'hopefully' accept before more negotiations can begin.

www.foxnews.com

 

[mark46]

You have a reference at the bottom. I clicked and found that

gotcha

Only 35% of NATO Countries Meet the Group’s Defense Spending Target​

That means that 20 NATO countries were expected to spend less than 2% of their GDP on defense, based on the 2023 estimates. The countries with the lowest percentages of spending were Luxembourg (0.72%), Belgium (1.13%) and Spain (1.26%). Five other countries, including Canada, did not meet the 1.5% mark.​

Despite being a major contributor to NATO otherwise, Germany had fallen below the 2% minimum as of 2023. But – perhaps in response to the uproar over Trump’s comments – the spokesman for the German defense ministry announced on Feb. 14, 2024, that the country had hit the 2% mark, which is thanks at least in part to a government allocation for defense spending.​

​

​

NATO Spending by Country 2025

worldpopulationreview.com

NATO Spending by Country 2025

worldpopulationreview.com

This is just a repeat from YOUR post. It shows only EIGHT countries below 2%. What am I missing?

 

[mark46]

Sorry, you've missed it too many times in this thread alone for me personally to accept anything you say without proof.

I am not trying to convince you of anything. Feel free to ignore my posts.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Did you bother to look at the date on that thing? March 2024. Try again. Name the countries.

Did you bother to look at the second link?

 

[7thKeeper]

Did you bother to look at the second link?

Yes I did. Did you? Judging by the list that you put up in the next post, it's quite obvious that you didn't.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Did you bother to look at the date on that thing? March 2024. Try again. Name the countries.

NATO Spending by Country 2025​

worldpopulationreview.com

 

[7thKeeper]

NATO Spending by Country 2025​

worldpopulationreview.com

Don't be obtuse, you fully well know that was the date of the article that you posted.
You know, the first link you posted and quoted from, the majority of that post.
You didn't even look at the second link, which was obvious because of the post after that where you touted different numbers.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Don't be obtuse, you fully well know that was the date of the article that you posted.

That is why I asked you if you read the SECOND link - which I posted again - have a great day.

 

[Helmut-WK]

Cite ONE time President Trump has stated he favors Putin over NATO and the EU.

He said he would leave any country to Russia that does not give 2% of GNP into defense.

So he does not bother when a NATO country in an economic crisis will be the prey of Putin.

Or look into the present talks with/about Ukraine. Trump demanded the Ukraine should accept a peace without guarantees, which is the same as the guarantee the Ukraine will become Russian within 2 years (whether an autonomous Russian region like Yakutsia, or a formal independent state like Belarus, is unimportant).

And then the NATO will be under threat, because Russia got stronger and closer. This is favoring Putin over NATO, not by an explicit sentence, but by action.

If you always want explicit statements, you would certainly have believed Hitler that he is a man of peace … and you will believe that Putin has no interest to get Alaska back to Russia - until Putin feels to be strong enough to demand that. By now, it is only a thought talked into the Russians' minds, certainly not against the will of Putin.

 

[Helmut-WK]

40% of Americans believe that the United States should withdraw from international affairs and adopt a policy of isolationism. They think the country can be prosperous and peaceful if it does not get involved in other nations' matters.

With China that wants economic domination over the whole world, and Putin who has promised to destroy the USA (and allow the promotion of the idea that Russia should get Alaska back), this is an illusion. Well, unless you think the USA can prosper as the low-tech-market for China, and without Alaska, of course

I don't say that Russia and China will achieve their aims, but with the USA withdrawn from the world politics, this will become easier (or, to put it the other way round: It will be much harder to prevent them from winning).

The potential risk for the United States is that if Europe allocates 1 trillion USD annually to its defense budget, which exceed combined expenditure of China, Russia, India, Iran, Pakistan, and all other US adversaries, within five years

Up to now, the use of money for defense was often rather ineffective in Europe, more money does not mean a more powerful army. Europe has some ideas, but no plan agreed on by the countries involved. The game may end up in an Europe that collapses economically.

Americans who advocate for leaving Europe may not fully understand a future scenario where Europe, with multiple nuclear powers and the second-largest economy in the world, becomes an adversary of the US.

This may be the case simply because Europe could not withstand Russia. The hidden war strategy of sabotage, political influence thru disinformation and allied political parties may be enough to make Europe weak. When Putin got Europe (or only an significant part), the next step will be a similar attack on the USA. In a limited way this has already begun, remember the support of Trump against Clinton, e.g. by espionage and publishing emails?

 

[Always in His Presence]

He said he would leave any country to Russia that does not give 2% of GNP into defense.

That is NOT saying he favors Putin over NATO and the EU.

So he does not bother when a NATO country in an economic crisis will be the prey of Putin.

He did not say that

Or look into the present talks with/about Ukraine. Trump demanded the Ukraine should accept a peace without guarantees, which is the same as the guarantee the Ukraine will become Russian within 2 years (whether an autonomous Russian region like Yakutsia, or a formal independent state like Belarus, is unimportant).

You mean the negotiations happening for a 30 day cease fire where The President has been able to bring both sides to a negotiating table? Something NO ONE has done in three years

And then the NATO will be under threat, because Russia got stronger and closer. This is favoring Putin over NATO, not by an explicit sentence, but by action.

Nope - not happening anywhere else but in someone's imagination

If you always want explicit statements, you would certainly have believed Hitler that he is a man of peace … and you will believe that Putin has no interest to get Alaska back to Russia - until Putin feels to be strong enough to demand that. By now, it is only a thought talked into the Russians' minds, certainly not against the will of Putin.

Ah, the Hitler card - you just lost all credibility.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

This may be the case simply because Europe could not withstand Russia. The hidden war strategy of sabotage, political influence thru disinformation and allied political parties may be enough to make Europe weak. When Putin got Europe (or only an significant part), the next step will be a similar attack on the USA. In a limited way this has already begun, remember the support of Trump against Clinton, e.g. by espionage and publishing emails?

I am not suggesting that Russia will take over Europe and make it an adversary to the United States.

If Europe unites today and builds a strong military, Russia would not be able to dominate Europe. Europe would remain independent. Russia would not be able to take over Europe whether or not the US supports Europe.

My concern is that if Europe becomes a strong military power and distances itself from the United States, we Americans may need to monitor Europe with the same adversarial approach as we do with China, Russia, or Iran. A powerful country or alliance that is not an ally is considered an adversary. This is how international affairs operate. If that happens, the US will spend much more on defense than it does now. Unfortunately, many Americans are unaware of this. They live in their own bubble and keep discussing how much America spends on EU defense.

 

[Helmut-WK]

Sorry, I was not active 0mline for a while …

That is NOT saying he favors Putin over NATO and the EU.

But when he believes Putin more than NATO allies, despite the fact that Putin lied when he said that he did not want to change the borders to Ukraine and had no interest at all to take the Crimea. But even when he said so, there were indications that he did indeed wanted the Ukraine …
Now we see indications Putin wants Alaska in the long run. So you expect that Putin will tell this to Trump?

He did not say that

He did not say that verbatim, but he threatened that the USA will not help a NATO member that did not pay enough for defense, if this country will be attacked by Russia,

You mean the negotiations happening for a 30 day cease fire where The President has been able to bring both sides to a negotiating table? Something NO ONE has done in three years

Because no one was ready to accept all demand of Putin even before the negotiation started. There have been attempts, but they failed, because Putin did not show any sign of compromise.

Just sitting at an negotiation table is no good way to secure peace with an aggressive dictator. Remember 1938!

Nope - not happening anywhere else but in someone's imagination

Yes, Trump never said that the NATO was no help to the USA, that spending money to help the Ukraine was no help, he emphasized that every Dollar to Ukraine was a Dollar for the defense of NATO, and hence USA. So nothing happened. Irony off.

Ah, the Hitler card - you just lost all credibility.

Did you ever try to find out the parallels? Putin is no Nazi, but he is a fascist, he is aggressive to the outside (ask Georgia, if you do not want to learn from the was he treated the Ukraine). So some parallels are close enough to draw some conclusions. In the case of the Ukraine, the turned out to be true- to the embarrassment of many politicians, even in Europe (Merkel).

 

[Helmut-WK]

If Europe unites today and builds a strong military, Russia would not be able to dominate Europe. Europe would remain independent. Russia would not be able to take over Europe whether or not the US supports Europe.

The discussions in Europe, with countries like Spain rather disinterested to do more than lip service, your »if« is something that will not happen.

My concern is that if Europe becomes a strong military power and distances itself from the United States, we Americans may need to monitor Europe with the same adversarial approach as we do with China, Russia, or Iran. A powerful country or alliance that is not an ally is considered an adversary.

You can turn an adversary into an ally or an ally into an adversary. Trump is good in the second kind of turn.

The best allies are those who tell the truth. If you treat a democratic country respectfully, you can turn it into an ally again - provided you stay a democracy. But will you, given the way Trump violates the law over and over again?

 

[Always in His Presence]

Because no one was ready to accept all demand of Putin even before the negotiation started. There have been attempts, but they failed, because Putin did not show any sign of compromise.

And with Trump there are talks showing signs of compromise.

But when he believes Putin more than NATO allies

He has never said that - that is the result of someone's impression or imagination.