NATO cannot be dependent on whims of US President - EU

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Trump says stupid stuff. The NATO countries need to wake up and get off American welfare because someday Russia will attack and your country. neighbor will wish they built up the defense. Plus when you guys spend more American companies make more.
How much has your country spent on defense since Trump asked everyone to put 2% of GDP when he was president? So much for our collective security. It is about taxes and when America goes broke we won't be able to provide you security.

Just to clarify, Trump didn't come up with the 2% commitment. That was established in 2006.

You have a perceived hostile country at your neighbor's borders and those tanks could help Poland if needed. All of you know you have America as your security blanket.

NATO was established on the premise that the United States would be pretty literally a security blanket for the organization's members. We agreed to it. It's one thing to be critical of other members for not meeting their 2% and encouraging them to commit to doing it sooner. It's quite another to threaten to sick the country whose threat NATO was created to counter on countries that don't meet the goal.

 

[Laodicean60]

Perhaps the "writing on the wall" did not include the possibility that a Trump administration would rather have Russia as an ally, rather than the NATO countries.

Not true. Because of the coup in 2014, the writing was on the wall, even this old dummy saw it.

 

[trophy33]

You have a perceived hostile country at your neighbor's borders and those tanks could help Poland if needed. All of you know you have America as your security blanket.

Russia was not a hostile country. The full blown attack on Ukraine and threats to NATO started relatively recently. Poland is also modernizing for just few years.

Sadly, the American security blanked reminds a bit of an indecisive man.

 

[Laodicean60]

Just to clarify, Trump didn't come up with the 2% rule. That was established in 2006.

Wow even worse our NATO friends have been riding our coat tales even longer.

 

[trophy33]

Wow even worse our NATO friends have been riding our coat tales even longer.

Its called a peaceful era. USA is extraordinary with its desire to control the world militarily, so you have huge investments into military all the time. But the EU does not have military presence all over the world. Its not comparable.

Its also not riding your coat tales (not sure what that means, though), because you were not needed, here, too. American soldiers in EU have been rather on a vacation. There was peace and you also cooperated with Russia in many areas for decades.

 

[Laodicean60]

Russia was not a hostile country

Why did your country join NATO?

Sadly, the American security blanked reminds a bit of an indecisive crazy man.

Sadly, I somewhat agree with you on the four presidents we have had before on foreign policy.

 

[trophy33]

Why did your country join NATO?

There was no actual threat. The CEE countries joined NATO more as a gesture of new political direction than from an acute fear. It was different from for example Finland and Sweden who joined in the time of crisis.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Wow even worse our NATO friends have been riding our coat tales even longer.

Read my amended part. That's baked into NATO.

But you keep talking about your tax dollars and whatnot like we're sending money to these NATO countries. That's not how it works. We likely would be spending what we are on defense whether we were a NATO member or not. So, it's not like we're paying more somehow than other countries in that regard. And, the military aid and presence we have around the globe is mostly related to our own interests. Again, we would likely be doing that too via other treaties even if we weren't a member.

 

[Laodicean60]

There was no actual threat. The CEE countries joined NATO more as a gesture of new political direction than from an acute fear. It was different from for example Finland and Sweden who joined in the time of crisis.

Of course, there wasn't acute fear but the threat still remained.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Why did your country join NATO?

Sheesh, man. It's not like Russia has ever invaded the Czech Republic or anything...

 

[trophy33]

Of course, there wasn't acute fear but the threat still remained.

Thats the reason for the existence of NATO. But the threat can be weak for decades, so money are spent where they are needed more. We do not have constant military expenditures and military industries with a lot of jobs like the USA have.

When the threat becomes more significant, economies react and invest more into defense. I am not sure what you are still trying to criticize.

 

[jacks]

Just for information; HERE is a link from News Week, that shows what each country pays as a percentage of GDP.

 

[Laodicean60]

But you keep talking about your tax dollars and whatnot like we're sending money to these NATO countries.

Every base overseas needs taxpayer funding.

We likely would be spending what we are on defense whether we were a NATO member or not.

This is true! what country in their right mind would not be spending more money on defense, especially in the East?

the military aid and presence we have around the globe is mostly related to our own interests.

What are our interests overseas? The Soviet Union is not today's Russia and why do we still have an 80-year-old treaty? Is it because we like to force other countries to bend to our will?

 

[Laodicean60]

Sheesh, man. It's not like Russia has ever invaded the Czech Republic or anything...

When?

 

[Hans Blaster]

When?

1945. 1968.

 

[trophy33]

When?

Well, it was more Warsaw Pact invasion, but led by Russia.

Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[BCP1928]

Thats the reason for the existence of NATO. But the threat can be weak for decades, so money are spent where they are needed more. We do not have constant military expenditures and military industries with a lot of jobs like the USA have.

When the threat becomes more significant, economies react and invest more into defense. I am not sure what you are still trying to criticize.

No, there is some validity to the notion. NATO has in fact been relying on the US military establishment--which the US would have anyway--and without it NATO would necessarily have to spend considerably more to ensure their current degree of military security. Thus the threat of the US pulling out of NATO can be used as an ideological weapon against the European countries who belong to it.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Just for information; HERE is a link from News Week, that shows what each country pays as a percentage of GDP.

Huh, Iceland has no military.

No wonder Trump wanted Greenland. If there's no armies on Iceland, you can just swoop into Europe.

 

[Laodicean60]

1945. 1968.

lol, even more reason for them to build up their military.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Huh, Iceland has no military.

No wonder Trump wanted Greenland. If there's no armies on Iceland, you can just swoop into Europe.

View attachment 342675

Putin has so many of his men to Ukraine that there is just one guy in Kamchatka. We should move 3 more there and take the Bering Straight...