Trump: “No, I would not protect you; I would encourage …..

[agentorange70]

When you tell an ally country "I got you",....they spend .7 percent of gdp on defense,...if you raise a little bit of hell with them about not protecting themselves, they spend 3.9 percent gdp on defense,...see Poland,..just because they are allies doesn't mean they don't exist with their own self interests and negotiating tactics

 

[MCinATL]

As all the dims say "Pay your fair share".

yes, but what they really mean is that YOU pay for OUR VOTERS, who should pay nothing..... so at least they are being consistent in this regard.

 

[MRDAWG]

Let me see if I can explain it so you'll understand. As of 2016 the U.S. was spending right at 3.6% of GDP on defense. Germany otoh was spending right at 1.2 and was party to an agreement that each country helps with the defense of others. Iows, Germany was getting all of the advantages of you and me helping to pay 3.6% of our GDP on the collective defense while they were able to keep about 2.4% more of their GDP to invest in infrastructure and social projects. Maybe if Canada, Italy, France and Germany all paid 2.5% of their GDP on defense, we could cut some defense spending and use that money here.

You are right. However Trump is talking about these countries paying not raising their military to 2% of GDP.

 

[Moosefish]

You are right. However Trump is talking about these countries paying not raising their military to 2% of GDP.

It's a NATO guideline that all members agreed to. I'm confused by your point here, what are you arguing for or against?

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness. This guideline also serves as an indicator of a country's political will to contribute to NATO's common defence efforts since the defence capacity of each member has an impact on the overall perception of the Alliance's credibility as a politico-military organisation.

While the 2% of GDP guideline alone is no guarantee that money will be spent in the most effective and efficient way to acquire and deploy modern capabilities, it remains an important indicator of the political resolve of individual Allies to devote to defence a relatively small but still significant level of resources.

 

[Eastmandawg]

You are right. However Trump is talking about these countries paying not raising their military to 2% of GDP.

If you are speaking of Trump saying “pay” versus spending or spend .I’m pretty sure most knew what he was talking about……..semantics. His point was made.

The other 19 or 20 countries need to meet their obligations or what was agreed to.

 

[KidneyStoned]

I could not of responded any better, well said!!! These woketards are so out of touch on politics. Hell IF this person works for a living, do they not realize their tax dollars goes to these countries that DGAS about USA...

You have a fundamental ignorance of how NATO works and how it is funded. There is a common fund. No active member country is in default on their payments into the common fund, nor did any active member country default on common fund obligations during Trump’s presidency. That fact, in and of itself, puts the lie to the story Trump made up this weekend. Lies like that are stupid and reckless, but that’s his thing so whatever.

In 2014 the member nations agreed that they would all endeavor to spend no less than 2% of their respective GDPs on military defense. It was not a rule, and not a requirement for continued membership. It was aspirational.

As of 2024, the 2% spending threshold is an actual rule, and one that should be enforced by NATO.

 

[Lady43]

Yawn.

Go check up on Taylor and Kelsey's latest happenings.

What Trump does is forces them to pay their fair share instead of the American tax payers paying it. If you want to be protected, PAY your share!

 

[maugwa]

I like the guy that hold others accountable.

FACTS are undeniable, America has been paying the way for the majority of NATO since it's inception.

Trump had it fixed while he was in office and Let's go Brandon cancelled yet another one of DJT's solutions to Keep America Great Again.

You dims are a cancer.

Trump's victory in November is the cure.

 

[KidneyStoned]

I like the guy that hold others accountable.

FACTS are undeniable, America has been paying the way for the majority of NATO since it's inception.

Trump had it fixed while he was in office and Let's go Brandon cancelled yet another one of DJT's solutions to Keep America Great Again.

You dims are a cancer.

Trump's victory in November is the cure.

There is literally nothing in your post that is even remotely accurate. Nothing. Trump made zero changes to how NATO funding works, because he has NO AUTHORITY to make changes to how NATO funding works. Neither does Biden.

 

[jay5020]

More Democrats watch Fox News during prime time than CNN: data

More Democrats are watching Fox News during prime time than CNN, according to data from Per Nielsen MRI Fusion.The data shows Fox News is watched by 29 percent of liberal prime-time viewers co…

thehill.com

Tucker Carlson Tops With Democratic Demo Viewers in Primetime

Tucker Carlson was watched by more liberals in the key ratings demo in October than any other cable news program, according to Nielsen data.

www.thewrap.com

Better stop throwing stones. You guys helped make Fox News more popular. That applies to the independents too. Just sayin.

 

[zingerdawg]

Well done. I laughed. Now stop watching so much Fox News. You and your brethren can’t get enough. Roger madcow is appt tv. You keep watching fox and she is going to be pissed with you.

 

[Moosefish]

As of 2024, the 2% spending threshold is an actual rule, and one that should be enforced by NATO.

Per my link above from NATO, the earliest mention of a specific 2% was in '06, although the general non-specific requirement goes back to 1949 & the Washington Treaty and it's been a common definition of defense expenditure since the early 1950s. Every "agreement" or "commitment" since was just reiteration of that, because like you said, they did the same in 2014.

...In 2014, NATO Heads of State and Government agreed to commit 2% of their national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending..

HERE is a link to the '23 Summit, where again...

Consistent with our obligations under Article 3 of the Washington Treaty, we make an enduring commitment to invest at least 2% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) annually on defence...

It's no more a "rule" in '24 than it was previously and cannot be "enforced" by NATO, as a collective treaty has no enforcement power over a soverign nation. You can only encourage/pressure other members to fulfill their commitment, which (right or wrong approach) is what I believe Trump was trying to do. There is no mechanism for enforcement that I'm aware of. Do you have any further information on what the 'enforcement' you were referring to consists of?

(HERE is further reading on the subject)

 

[KidneyStoned]

Per my link above from NATO, the earliest mention of a specific 2% was in '06, although the general non-specific requirement goes back to 1949 & the Washington Treaty and it's been a common definition of defense expenditure since the early 1950s. Every "agreement" or "commitment" since was just reiteration of that, because like you said, they did the same in 2014.



HERE is a link to the '23 Summit, where again...



It's no more a "rule" in '24 than it was previously and cannot be "enforced" by NATO, as a collective treaty has no enforcement power over a soverign nation. You can only encourage/pressure other members to fulfill their commitment, which (right or wrong approach) is what I believe Trump was trying to do. There is no mechanism for enforcement that I'm aware of. Do you have any further information on what the 'enforcement' you were referring to consists of?

(HERE is further reading on the subject)

You are correct, it is still just an unenforceable "pledge".

 

[Moosefish]

You are correct, it is still just an unenforceable "pledge".

The good news is that more NATO members will reach that number this year. I deployed to Afghanistan on a NATO billet 10 years ago & really enjoyed working w/ many NATO-member & NATO-aligned countries (like Australia). It's a unique experience.

 

[Eastmandawg]

You are correct, it is still just an unenforceable "pledge".

Sounds like a heckuva deal. Wonder if the US can spend 1/10 of a percent and have others come in and help fight our fight…..the “good fight”.

 

[MRDAWG]

I like the guy that hold others accountable.

FACTS are undeniable, America has been paying the way for the majority of NATO since it's inception.

Trump had it fixed while he was in office and Let's go Brandon cancelled yet another one of DJT's solutions to Keep America Great Again.

You dims are a cancer.

Trump's victory in November is the cure.

"Trump had it fixed while he was in office" What did he accomplish besides setting the tone to pull out of NATO and let his boss Putin restore the old USSR? How did he fix it?

 

[LRA Dawg]

them (Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc) to do whatever the Hell they want;” what Trump said about protecting NATO countries if they are attacked by the Axis of Evil. My My! I realize that some countries have not paid their full 2%, but Trump is an extremist on this question just like he is on every other question. He is so unfit to be president of the USA.

NEVER TRUMP

If people think times are tough now, wait until Trump lets Russia and China run roughshod over what is left of the free world.

One candidate is completely unhinged and the other does not know what planet he is on. Frustrated to no end with both parties.

 

[MRDAWG]

When you tell an ally country "I got you",....they spend .7 percent of gdp on defense,...if you raise a little bit of hell with them about not protecting themselves, they spend 3.9 percent gdp on defense,...see Poland,..just because they are allies doesn't mean they don't exist with their own self interests and negotiating tactics

Poland upped their defense after seeing Putin attack Ukraine. They know they are next. In Tucker's interview Putin mentioned Poland 30 times. Trump did not cause Poland's increase.