Trump Gave Merkel an Invoice for NATO

[BDKJMU]

Yep, I agree think the US (in Europe) should close up shop. The cost of running the bases overseas is GINOURMOUS. Of course our govt would find other means to squander the $$ on.

Germany & other NATO countries aren't going to adequately provide for their own defense as long as we provide it for them for free. Germany has other financial priorities- like trying to maintain a high standard of living while paying for higher energy costs with alternative energy & paying for Merkel's million muslims.

[CID1990]

Yep, I agree think the US (in Europe) should close up shop. The cost of running the bases overseas is GINOURMOUS. Of course our govt would find other means to squander the $$ on.

Germany & other NATO countries aren't going to adequately provide for their own defense as long as we provide it for them for free. Germany has other financial priorities- like trying to maintain a high standard of living while paying for higher energy costs with alternative energy & paying for Merkel's million muslims.

That has a ring to it... like a song

to the tune of "Funky Cold Medina"

[CAA Flagship]

Here we go again. Trump is tightening the screws on our NATO partners.

This is high level entertainment. I give it 5 Popcorns.

[Ivytalk]

Here we go again. Trump is tightening the screws on our NATO partners.

This is high level entertainment. I give it 5 Popcorns.

It just goes to show the difficulty of enforcing a “guideline” rather than a treaty provision. All you can do is “jawbone” and threaten to leave the organization.

[Rob Iola]

Here we go again. Trump is tightening the screws on our NATO partners.

This is high level entertainment. I give it 5 Popcorns.

It just goes to show the difficulty of enforcing a “guideline” rather than a treaty provision. All you can do is “jawbone” and threaten to leave the organization.

Or cut a deal with Putin to add Russia...

[JohnStOnge]

Rand Paul on NATO membership for Montenegro. He gets ramble-y towards the end but nails this:

"For decades, NATO has been an organization where the U.S. disproportionately spends our blood and treasure. .

I don't know about treasure but when it comes to blood is it not true that the only time the NATO thing has ever been invoked was when the United States suffered the "9-11" attacks and its NATO allies came to the United States' aid? You know, sacrificed some blood for the United States. Have US troops ever died because some other NATO country was attacked?

[JohnStOnge]

Yep, I agree think the US (in Europe) should close up shop. The cost of running the bases overseas is GINOURMOUS. Of course our govt would find other means to squander the $$ on.

If NATO countries told us tomorrow to get our bases out of their countries we would freak out because we want those bases. I don't think we have those bases for altruistic reasons. We have those bases because we want to be able to project power. This thing where people think that we don't get anything we perceive as beneficial with all that is, to me, utter nonsense.

[Ivytalk]

Yep, I agree think the US (in Europe) should close up shop. The cost of running the bases overseas is GINOURMOUS. Of course our govt would find other means to squander the $$ on.

If NATO countries told us tomorrow to get our bases out of their countries we would freak out because we want those bases. I don't think we have those bases for altruistic reasons. We have those bases because we want to be able to project power. This thing where people think that we don't get anything we perceive as beneficial with all that is, to me, utter nonsense.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this board is now dumber for having read it. I award you no positive emojis, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[SeattleGriz]

If NATO countries told us tomorrow to get our bases out of their countries we would freak out because we want those bases. I don't think we have those bases for altruistic reasons. We have those bases because we want to be able to project power. This thing where people think that we don't get anything we perceive as beneficial with all that is, to me, utter nonsense.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this board is now dumber for having read it. I award you no positive emojis, and may God have mercy on your soul.

It was something about bases.

[HI54UNI]

So Germany is going to build a new pipeline so 70% of their gas will come from Russia. This will make them Russia's bitch and gives Russia more money while we defend Germany from the perceived Russian threat.

Trump is right on this one. Time to end NATO and bring the troops home from Europe.

[CID1990]

Yep, I agree think the US (in Europe) should close up shop. The cost of running the bases overseas is GINOURMOUS. Of course our govt would find other means to squander the $$ on.

If NATO countries told us tomorrow to get our bases out of their countries we would freak out because we want those bases. I don't think we have those bases for altruistic reasons. We have those bases because we want to be able to project power. This thing where people think that we don't get anything we perceive as beneficial with all that is, to me, utter nonsense.

We don't get anything beneficial from our membership in NATO.

[BDKJMU]

For the other 28 members of NATO, Article 5 stands for "America, come save us".

[Skjellyfetti]

For the other 28 members of NATO, Article 5 stands for "America, come save us".

Except for the fact that Article 5 has only been invoked in defense of the US, of course

[BDKJMU]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/11/behind- ... led-t.html

Germany gets rid of their nuke plants, become's Russia's energy bitch. Bush and Obama were against Nordstream 2 also. Trump is right.

[Skjellyfetti]

Vyborg is a beautiful city.

[CID1990]

For the other 28 members of NATO, Article 5 stands for "America, come save us".

Except for the fact that Article 5 has only been invoked in defense of the US, of course

Completely symbolic -

or did they save us? I may have missed it

[∞∞∞]

Germany gets rid of their nuke plants, become's Russia's energy bitch. Bush and Obama were against Nordstream 2 also. Trump is right.

Except Germany gets most of its energy, something like 35%+, from its own renewable resources...and has at times completely run its grid on renewable energy. And Germany's GDP has correspondingly grown. I read natural gas is 15% or so, which really doesn't make it Russia's bitch for anything.

You'd think the US would want that, if not for environmental purposes, at least for the benefits to defense (what kind of military wouldn't want 100% free and nearly unlimited energy?).

edit:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factshe ... mix-charts

[GannonFan]

Germany gets rid of their nuke plants, become's Russia's energy bitch. Bush and Obama were against Nordstream 2 also. Trump is right.

Except Germany gets most of its energy, something like 35%+, from its own renewable resources...and has at times completely run its grid on renewable energy. And Germany's GDP has correspondingly grown. I read natural gas is 15% or so, which really doesn't make it Russia's bitch for anything.

You'd think the US would want that, if not for environmental purposes, at least for the benefits to defense (what kind of military wouldn't want 100% free and nearly unlimited energy?).

edit:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factshe ... mix-charts

Wait, are you saying renewable energy is "100% free"? Details are surely needed in that.

As for Germany, you sound like Trump, but just in the different direction of exaggeration. Germany is pulling back from nuclear power, so they still burn a bunch of coal, and their use of natural gas is rising significantly, also due to a retreat from nuclear, hence why they need the controversial (and not just controversial here, it's been a controversy inside Germany for awhile now) Baltic pipeline. Germany gets about 30%-40% from renewable energy, and that could be in danger as the potential for the cutback of government subsidies for renewables is one of the things that has stymied Merkel's chances to pull together a coalition government, since her party's power is waning following the past election.

[houndawg]

What an idiot.

NATO countries are under commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defense by 2024.

No NATO country is currently obligated to spend that now. And, certainly not to the US.

But haven't they underspent in general compared to us?

Nobody forced us to spend what we spend did they? I thought it was voluntary?

[houndawg]

Yep, I agree think the US (in Europe) should close up shop. The cost of running the bases overseas is GINOURMOUS. Of course our govt would find other means to squander the $$ on.

Germany & other NATO countries aren't going to adequately provide for their own defense as long as we provide it for them for free. Germany has other financial priorities- like trying to maintain a high standard of living while paying for higher energy costs with alternative energy & paying for Merkel's million muslims.

That has a ring to it... like a song

to the tune of "Funky Cold Medina"

just when I think there is no hope...what kind of whisky do you drink?

[houndawg]

So Germany is going to build a new pipeline so 70% of their gas will come from Russia. This will make them Russia's bitch and gives Russia more money while we defend Germany from the perceived Russian threat.

Trump is right on this one. Time to end NATO and bring the troops home from Europe.

I'm not opposed to that but there are lot of people over here making bank on military contracts. That's a lot of welfare to cut all at once.....

[houndawg]

It just goes to show the difficulty of enforcing a “guideline” rather than a treaty provision. All you can do is “jawbone” and threaten to leave the organization.

Or cut a deal with Putin to add Russia...

As long as they buy US weapons.

[kalm]

What’s funny here is Houndy, me, BDK, and CID all agreeing we should cut back on overseas military spending. I’m guessing that’s a popular sentiment in general. So why doesn’t it happen?

[∞∞∞]

So Germany is going to build a new pipeline so 70% of their gas will come from Russia. This will make them Russia's bitch and gives Russia more money while we defend Germany from the perceived Russian threat.

Trump is right on this one. Time to end NATO and bring the troops home from Europe.

I'm not opposed to that but there are lot of people over here making bank on military contracts. That's a lot of welfare to cut all at once.....

Preach!

[HI54UNI]

Germany gets rid of their nuke plants, become's Russia's energy bitch. Bush and Obama were against Nordstream 2 also. Trump is right.

Except Germany gets most of its energy, something like 35%+, from its own renewable resources...and has at times completely run its grid on renewable energy. And Germany's GDP has correspondingly grown. I read natural gas is 15% or so, which really doesn't make it Russia's bitch for anything.

You'd think the US would want that, if not for environmental purposes, at least for the benefits to defense (what kind of military wouldn't want 100% free and nearly unlimited energy?).

edit:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factshe ... mix-charts

Only 15% of natural gas is used for power generation. They are using more gas in factories and to heat homes. What if Putin shuts the gas off in the middle of winter?

And the average German is getting screwed on their energy bill. Germany keeps industrial rates low while the cost of energy for German households household is among the highest in Europe and about 3x what it is in the US. How many people in the US want their electric bill to triple?