NATO's Defense Dilemma: Rising Costs, Reluctant Nations

[Frankfooter]

If you're a liberal this is how you will see it.
Trump literally helping Putin by putting pressure on NATO allies. They're logic is the US should spend Trillions of $$$ to become world police.

The world sees trump as a dangerous wildcard. Someone who is threatening all his allies and trading partners. Denmark and Canada are NATO, as is the US, but now there is a chance that trump will back out of NATO and then NATO would be defending Canada and Denmark. Panama is talking about BRICS and nobody is talking about partnering with trump on any level. Even Netanyahu realizes that trump's ethnic cleansing proposal is too far for them.

What happens to Ukraine without US support is yet to be seen. Already Putin is relying on North Korean troops and is perhaps less likely to try to expand into eastern Europe then he was a couple of years ago.

If there is a new alliance with the US it might be with the far right wing extremists like Hungary and AfD. Putin and trump are both still wildcards.

 

[richaceg]

The world sees trump as a dangerous wildcard. Someone who is threatening all his allies and trading partners. Denmark and Canada are NATO, as is the US, but now there is a chance that trump will back out of NATO and then NATO would be defending Canada and Denmark. Panama is talking about BRICS and nobody is talking about partnering with trump on any level. Even Netanyahu realizes that trump's ethnic cleansing proposal is too far for them.

What happens to Ukraine without US support is yet to be seen. Already Putin is relying on North Korean troops and is perhaps less likely to try to expand into eastern Europe then he was a couple of years ago.

If there is a new alliance with the US it might be with the far right wing extremists like Hungary and AfD. Putin and trump are both still wildcards.

So you're proving what I just said...You expect the US to be the world police and should spend trillions...and NATO don't shell out more than they should right now and you think this is fair.

 

[Frankfooter]

So you're proving what I just said...You expect the US to be the world police and should spend trillions...and NATO don't shell out more than they should right now and you think this is fair.

Not at all, the US is the world's worst global cop. They prop up despots for business, overthrow governments at will and are generally more empire based.
Trump is destroying all those alliances and everything is shifting now.

It looks to be rearranging to BRICS, NATO and the US by themselves as the three major powers.

 

[danmand]

The CIA has discovered a dangerous plot by China. They are going to sit back and let USA destroy itself.

 

[Robert Mugabe]

So much for NATO being a threat to Russia.

 

[danmand]

So much for NATO being a threat to Russia.

And Russia being a threat to NATO. It is USA that is a threat to NATO.

 

[Skoob]

As the article I posted above explains, the 3 largest economies in NATO (Germany, England, and France) are all above the 2% threshold…as is Poland which is up around 5%.

Not that I expect you to care…but what you are claiming is incorrect.

Which countries in the Nato alliance are paying their fair share on defence?

The alliance expects each member nation to spend at least 2% of its gross domestic product on defence, but plenty are falling short.

www.forcesnews.com

Which nations are not spending 2% on defence?
Eight Nato members are not estimated to reach the target in 2024. They are Croatia (1.81%), Portugal (1.55%), Italy (1.49%) Canada (1.37%), Belgium (1.30%), Luxembourg (1.29%), Slovenia (1.29%) and Spain (1.28%).

However, all of the above-listed countries apart from Croatia are spending more on defence than last year, bringing them closer to the target.

I didn't say anything is incorrect...I said it's ironic.

Remember when Trump called out all those countries not meeting their commitments and people scolded him for doing so? I guess it worked.

 

[Skoob]

There's a reason Poland and the Baltic countries step up to the plate.

Unfortunately, many of the socialist-leaning countries don't pay their fair share but expect their citizens to in taxes. Ironic indeed.

 

[nottyboi]

Apparently, you don't know history and you don't know any Poles.

This statement is so ridiculous that the Mod should suspend you for insulting everyone's intelligence.

Katyn massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Warsaw Uprising - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Per Wikipedia and everyone who has any common sense:
"The uprising was timed to coincide with the retreat of the German forces from Poland ahead of the Soviet advance.[16] While approaching the eastern suburbs of the city, the Red Army halted combat operations, enabling the Germans to regroup and defeat the Polish resistance and to destroy the city in retaliation. The Uprising was fought for 63 days with little outside support. It was the single largest military effort taken by any European resistance movement during World War II.[17] The defeat of the uprising and suppression of the Home Army enabled the pro-Soviet Polish administration, instead of the Polish government-in-exile based in London, to take control of Poland afterwards. Poland would remain as part of the Soviet-aligned Eastern Bloc throughout the Cold War until 1989."

Oh my, 12K militray were killed by the Russians, how many Jews did POland kill? Russia and Poland had many, many wars. 66K polish soldiers were killed by Germany and only 6K by Russia during the invasions. . Considering Russia invaded Poland and their long history on enmity, why would one expect the Red Army to save the Polish Resistance. Did the Polish resistance help the Jews in the Ghetto uprising? Why would it be in the USSRs interest to have a large armed group of hostile partisans in its midst as it moved West? Even worse if they were led by the 12K Polish militray the USSR killed. So it was a brutally logical decision. The type of decision you make in an existential war. War is hell. Compared to the slaughter in Gaza Katyn is not even worthy of mention.

 

[Valcazar]

It means that much of the world benefited from U.S. protection of territory and shipping pretty much unconditionally for eighty years. Now there will be conditions including honoring NATO commitments.

I don't think the focus on NATO commitments is a major concern about Russia per se. It's really a not so subtle shift by the U.S. towards the Asia Pacific region. We also forget NATO efforts in the Balkans prior to now assisting the Ukraine. If the Soviet Union wasn't in the process of disintegrating, Russia would have certainly had Serbia's back.

You have to take my entire post into context.

I did take it into context, it wasn't clear to me.

The US has always imposed conditions when it felt it was in a national security interest to do so.
Sanctions, trade embargoes, etc. I do agree that the US in general did keep shipping lanes open and so on, though.
Turning the "global order" into a more explicit protection racket is bold.
How extensive do you see this getting?
Pirates are fine if you haven't paid protection money?
Does the US engage directly in embargoes and confiscation of ships?


Russia would LOVE the US to focus on NATO commitments and "punishing" members who don't comply.
The US taking an antagonistic approach to NATO means NATO becomes not too functional.
Everyone arming themselves a lot more might bother Russia, though.

 

[WyattEarp]

I did take it into context, it wasn't clear to me.

The US has always imposed conditions when it felt it was in a national security interest to do so.
Sanctions, trade embargoes, etc. I do agree that the US in general did keep shipping lanes open and so on, though.
Turning the "global order" into a more explicit protection racket is bold.
How extensive do you see this getting?
Pirates are fine if you haven't paid protection money?
Does the US engage directly in embargoes and confiscation of ships?


Russia would LOVE the US to focus on NATO commitments and "punishing" members who don't comply.
The US taking an antagonistic approach to NATO means NATO becomes not too functional.
Everyone arming themselves a lot more might bother Russia, though.

As I said, I don't know what Trump's "ultimate" endgame is. We know he tends to over negotiate and make bombastic comments in support.

The world order probably needs a little more order as it relates to the Western nations. Marco Rubio is the U.S. Secretary of State. Rubio might be on the hawkish side, but his words are generally measured.

Note: This is not addressed to you, but I notice this wordsmithing that the Chinese and Russians are no longer Communist countries. They are however dangerous countries so much so their neighbors fear their intentions. The U.S. didn't manufacture this fear of China and Russia.

 

[danmand]

I wonder if Trump is doing this consciously, in any event, I believe we are seeing a glacial shift in Europe. Traditionally, Europe was afraid of the Soviet Union.

After having destroyed the industry of Germany and other European nations, Trump is now openly threatening several NATO countries, one of them with military force.

I am one that welcomed the realization, that Europe need to grow a pair and become independent of USA.

Along the same line, I have always thought Canada should develop more trade with other countries, instead of focusing almost entirely on USA. Being antagonistic towards the biggest economy, China, is simply idiotic.

 

[WyattEarp]

After having destroyed the industry of Germany and other European nations, Trump is now openly threatening several NATO countries, one of them with military force.

I'm not sure how you came with this. Germany destroyed the industry of Southern Europe and to some extent the UK. Now China is trying to turn the tables on German trade. Throw in the high cost of German energy and you have two years of decline.

Along the same line, I have always thought Canada should develop more trade with other countries, instead of focusing almost entirely on USA. Being antagonistic towards the biggest economy, China, is simply idiotic.

It's a matter geography for Canada. One of the few things that would overcome your geography is Canadian oil. Not only are there some challenges, your current government has been a hindrance.

China's economy is in serious trouble. You're one of the few who doesn't seen to be getting this news.

 

[danmand]

I'm not sure how you came with this. Germany destroyed the industry of Southern Europe and to some extent the UK. Now China is trying to turn the tables on German trade. Throw in the high cost of German energy and you have two years of decline.



It's a matter geography for Canada. One of the few things that would overcome your geography is Canadian oil. Not only are there some challenges, your current government has been a hindrance.

China's economy is in serious trouble. Your one of the few who doesn't seen to be getting this news.

China is in trouble? I wish Canada was in that much trouble,

GDP growth 2024:

US 2.2%

Canada. 2,4%

China. 4.5 %

USA destroyed the industry of Germany by stopping cheap energy from Russia. Even Trump said that.

Germany 0.8%

 

[Valcazar]

As I said, I don't know what Trump's "ultimate" endgame is. We know he tends to over negotiate and make bombastic comments in support.

The world order probably needs a little more order as it relates to the Western nations.

There is an interesting article on the fall of the "The Liberal International Order" and the fact people haven't really grappled with it yet.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/trumps-antiliberal-order-cooley-nexon
(Might be paywalled.)

Marco Rubio is the U.S. Secretary of State. Rubio might be on the hawkish side, but his words are generally measured.

Unfortunately, I think the world is already working under the view that the is irrelevant.
What is the point of negotiating with Rubio if Trump may undercut him at any moment with a tweet?

I think they are going to have to do a lot of work to convince people Rubio shouldn't just be ignored.

Note: This is not addressed to you, but I notice this wordsmithing that the Chinese and Russians are no longer Communist countries. They are however dangerous countries so much so their neighbors fear their intentions. The U.S. didn't manufacture this fear of China and Russia.

The idea that "no longer Communist" means "not dangerous" is utterly bizarre to me.

 

[WyattEarp]

China is in trouble? I wish Canada was in that much trouble.

I'm not sure what you are reading. If you wait for the Chinese govt. to report the data shows a recession, they would have been in a depression for five years. They are silencing economists who don't follow the party's line on the economy.

Sure, it's big and the major cities have new centers, but the overall economy has structural problems.

USA destroyed the industry of Germany by stopping cheap energy from Russia. Even Trump said that.

I don't know how we did all that. Seems like the invasion of the Ukraine had a lot to do with that.

A commitment to green energy and shutting down nuclear power plants are all on German decision makers.

 

[danmand]

I'm not sure what you are reading. If you wait for the Chinese govt. to report the data shows a recession, they would have been in a depression for five years. They are silencing economists who don't follow the party's line on the economy.

Sure, it's big and the major cities have new centers, but the overall economy has structural problems.



I don't know how we did all that. Seems like the invasion of the Ukraine had a lot to do with that.

A commitment to green energy and shutting down nuclear power plants are all on German decision makers.

Try The International Monetary Fund.

 

[WyattEarp]

Try The International Monetary Fund.

I'm not sure why I would read the IMF. I don't think of them being independent. It's a quasi-governmental body with financial masters that are governments.

I obviously read Western economists and analysts that don't align themselves politically. I also follow some economists within China that try to stay independent from government influence.

 

[WyattEarp]

Oh my, 12K militray were killed by the Russians, how many Jews did POland kill? Russia and Poland had many, many wars. 66K polish soldiers were killed by Germany and only 6K by Russia during the invasions. . Considering Russia invaded Poland and their long history on enmity, why would one expect the Red Army to save the Polish Resistance. Did the Polish resistance help the Jews in the Ghetto uprising? Why would it be in the USSRs interest to have a large armed group of hostile partisans in its midst as it moved West? Even worse if they were led by the 12K Polish militray the USSR killed. So it was a brutally logical decision. The type of decision you make in an existential war. War is hell. Compared to the slaughter in Gaza Katyn is not even worthy of mention.

I'm not sure why you are ranting about the Poles and the Russians. The Poles haven't been a threat to Russia since the 1600s. The Poles might have had negative attitudes towards the Jews, but it was the Nazis who committed the Holocaust.

Oh my, 12K militray were killed by the Russians, how mEven worse if they were led by the 12K Polish militray the USSR killed. So it was a brutally logical decision.

Since you have quite a few contradictory thoughts running through your head that seem to have found their way in this response, let me say brutal is one thing I can agree with in describing the Soviets in Poland.

 

[Frankfooter]

I wonder if Trump is doing this consciously, in any event, I believe we are seeing a glacial shift in Europe. Traditionally, Europe was afraid of the Soviet Union.

After having destroyed the industry of Germany and other European nations, Trump is now openly threatening several NATO countries, one of them with military force.

I am one that welcomed the realization, that Europe need to grow a pair and become independent of USA.

Along the same line, I have always thought Canada should develop more trade with other countries, instead of focusing almost entirely on USA. Being antagonistic towards the biggest economy, China, is simply idiotic.

The US is destroying alliances, they are trying to cripple the UN and ICC, trump wants to get out of NATO, BRICS is rising as a result and the US stands alone.
Who would want to partner with someone like trump, who lies, cheats and can't remember what he promised last week.