Posted on 02/20/2024 3:55:35 PM PST by DoodleBob
Thank you USA-FRANCE. Nothing to add.
“Defend from who, the Islamic hordes? Hell, Europe might need Russia to fight that ongoing invasion.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I presume you made a sarcastic joke?
Russia is THE country which has allied itself with Iran/Hamas, against Israel.
Russia is using vast amounts of drones provided by the Islamic State of Iran to attack a European country as we speak...
Russia used islamic Chechen troops in the beginning of the war against Ukraine.
Putin inaugurated Europe largest Mosque right in the Emile of Moscow!
I don’t want Moscow’s pro Islamic polices to come to Europe. Look what t hey do to Israel! Russia has allied itself to the world’s worst islamists and they used armed islamic troops to attack areas of Europe. No Thanks.
Whatever the Economist is against, I am for.
It took British and American boys to save Europe’s ass in WW1. It took American and British boys to save Europe’s ass in WW11. It took American nuclear bombers and submarines and ICBM’s to save Europe’s ass in the Cold War. Then it took Billions of American dollars to rebuild Europe from THEIR WAR.
No, Europe cannot fight and will not fight. They’ve proved that over and over. Trump is 1,000% correct to not pull any punches with spineless, lilly livered, gutless, cowardly, socialist European’s.
Th EU has been talking about forming a European military for a while now. NATO should help them and then combine all their assets into it and then dissolve. The US should get out and stay out, but provide support.
Here's a sampling of NATO, of late, as led by a Norwegian politician. Implementing NATO's Climate Security Agenda: Challenges Ahead NATO, 10 August 2023
Preparing NATO for climate-related security challenges Chatham House, UK, 4 July 2023
Can NATO Supercharge Military Greening? RAND Corporation, 1 December 2023
NATO wants to fight climate change. Its chief tells AP the trick is to make armies green but strong Associated Press, 21 June 2023
2022 - NATO AND THE INDO-PACIFIC REGION - REPORT NATO Parliamentary Assembly, 7 December 2022
NATO to upgrade ties with Australia, New Zealand, South Korea Asia.Nikkei, 13 June 2023
Why is NATO expanding its reach to the Asia-Pacific region? Conversation, 10 July 2023
NATO Can Help Create a Global Security Architecture Foreign Policy, 17 July 2023
Relations with partners in the Indo-Pacific region NATO, 17 August 2023
NATO - News: "NATO's strength is its diversity" NATO, 17 May 2023 One observes how some supposed "conservatives" who comment wind up defending the growing globalism and wokeism of NATO.
Diversity is not a strength, except to flood nations with migrants. Green is not a plan, except to finance "zero carbon" with 'beaucoup' money. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization eyes the Indo-Pacific? Mission creep around the world and throughout politics.
Trump can be crude, boorish and inarticulate but quite effective when push comes to shove. And in this case out NATO “partners” needed a swift kick in the a$$, which Trump delivered. Too bad that now they’ll have decide to cough up the money to protect themselves or keep funding their stupid “climate change” crap. I don’t think they can do both. We’ll see which is more important, the “existential” threat of the planet burning up or the real threat of seeing T-72 tanks sauntering through the brandenburg gate.
I’m not quite that negative, but, I still maintain Europe on it’s own will eventually fracture and end up in a massive arms race including nukes by several more countries. That will make Europe the most dangerous area on the planet. We will pay dearly.
Europe is well ahead of the US in total aid for Ukraine. They just don’t have the weapons making capacity, and we’d be beyond crazy to wish they got ahead of us in such.
You raise an interesting question, though. Let’s say the Euro’s proposed a $20 billion deal to buy F-16’s to turn over to Ukraine. They could get ~ 400 older F-16’s, training, and a bloody mountain of munitions — luckily we have PLENTY of both. Throw in a few Patriot batteries for airfield AD.
Would Congress approve that? Would all FReepers (except for the obvious Pooty tools and trolls)?
It is true that the NATO countries outside of the US will COLLECTIVELY meet the 2% of GDP guidance for defense spending in 2024.
In fact, NATO outside of the US will COLLECTIVELY meet the 2% of GDP defense spending guideline in 2024.
Arguably they get less bang for the buck, er, Euro, so in a time of moderate conflict or tension, like the present, that figure probably needs to be amended to 2.5%.
It was merely a musing. The primary danger though, is indeed the Islamic invasion. Don’t lose sight
Of that.
2% may not be a high enough objective for this point in time...
Where on earth did you get that ridiculous figure of 1.3 trillion dollars to Ukraine??
All you do is make a joke of yourself.
https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/evolving-trajectory-of-us-aid-to-ukraine
You don’t have ANY conception of the strategic or economic consequences, do you?
How does one explain “orange” to a blind person...
I will tell you this, though. Europe on its own will once again become the most dangerous continent on Earth. Just give it a little time.
Defend itself from what? It’s already been taken over by Satanists.
True. Europe has a tendency to count industrial and technology development, jobs, and infrastructure spending as defense spending. Moreover, the associated projects like the A400M Atlas military transport and the Eurofighter Typhoon do not provide sufficient military value to justify their development cost. In addition, Europe has a growing internal security threat due to excessive Muslim immigration that diverts funds from meeting external threats.
Yes, I tend to agree as noted above. In particular NATO needs to get Germany up to maybe 2.5%, as the Germans CAN do efficient high quality manufacturing. The tires on my Outback until recently were German, performed great in all respects except for wear (well, they were snow tires that I kept on year ‘round for dicey / muddy roads and such) and the price was good. I now have on Nokians and we’ll see how they do. So far this winter, good, tho’ they’ve not been challenged by 13” of snow or anything like that...
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/nato-member-defense-spending-summit/
https://www.statista.com/chart/14636/defense-expenditures-of-nato-countries/
EXCERPTS:
In 2014, NATO was collectively spending $910 billion annually on defense, but in 2023, that figure is $1.1 trillion.
While U.S. defense spending has grown from $660 billion to $743 billion during that period, the defense spending of the rest of NATO has increased at a higher pace, from $250 billion in 2014 to $356 billion in 2023.
Some of that growth, however, was due to adding three new NATO members since 2017: Macedonia, Montenegro, and Finland.
Shares of Real GDP in 2023:
- Poland 3.90
- U.S. 3.49 (original member NATO)
- Greece 3.01
- Estonia 2.73
- Lithuania 2.54
- Slovak Republic 2.54
- Finland 2.45
- Romania 2.44
- Hungary 2.43
- Latvia 2.27
- United Kingdom 2.07 (original member NATO)
- France 1.90 (original member NATO)
- Montenegro 1.87
- North Macedonia 1.87
- Bulgaria 1.84
- Croatia 1.79
- Albania 1.76
- Netherlands 1.70 (original member NATO)
- Norway 1.67 (original member NATO)
- Denmark 1.65 (original member NATO)
- Germany 1.57
- Czech Republic 1.50
- Portugal 1.48 (original member NATO)
- Italy 1.46 (original member NATO)
- Canada 1.38 (original member NATO)
- Slovenia 1.35
- Turkey 1.31
- Spain 1.26
- Belgium 1.13 (original member NATO)
- Luxembourg 0.72 (original member NATO)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.