(Click on Image to Enlarge)
Comparison of defence spending by NATO members
AFP: Defence spending by NATO members
A row over how much NATO members spend on defence will overshadow a summit of alliance leaders this week, with US President Donald Trump set to tell allies in blunt terms to boost their military budgets.
Trump has repeatedly berated European NATO members and Canada for lagging on a pledge to try to spend two percent of GDP on defence, and he harangued them again on Twitter on Monday.
- How much does the US spend on NATO? -
Trump claimed on Monday that the United States was "paying for 90 percent of NATO", though it is not clear how he arrived at this figure.
According to alliance figures, the US accounted for just under 72 percent of defence spending in NATO in 2017 -- $686 billion of a total $957 billion spent by all 29 members that year.
Read more ....
Military And Intelligence News Briefs -- July 10, 2018
NATO Summit set to begin in Brussels -- NATO
Trump blasts NATO again as he departs for Europe: 'US is spending many times more than any other country' -- CNBC
Trump says Putin summit could be 'easiest' stop of European tour, amid NATO tensions -- FOX News
NATO successfully tests upgraded Sea Sparrow missile -- UPI
WATCH New Ad by Danish Military Designed to Appease Trump Ahead of NATO Summit -- Sputnik
Watching for Signs of NATO’s End of Times -- Ulrike Franke, War On The Rocks
China Paper Denounces US Navy Ships' Taiwan Strait Passage -- AP
China Won't Back Down on Cyber Espionage Anytime Soon -- Stratfor
PKL to provide F-15 operations training for Singapore air force -- UPI
Russia introduces new domestically-produced protective helmets for military pilots -- TASS
Stealth Killer? Russia's Sixth-Generation Fighter Might Have a "Radio-Photonic Radar" -- National Interest
Russian Navy to accept 19 new warships for service by yearend.
Source Reveals Tech Details of New Russian Anti-Satellite Warfare Plane -- Sputnik
Russia retains modest contacts with NATO, Kremlin says -- TASS
Russia Building Up Military Sites on Poland’s Border Before Trump-Putin Meeting -- Defense One
Pentagon finally says how much it saves by canceling 'war games' with South Korea -- Washington Examiner
Military's readiness problem 'not even close' to being solved, Martha McSally says -- Washington Examiner
Has the US Navy thought this new frigate through? New report raises questions. -- Defense News
Army to Send Stinger & Hellfire Armed Strykers to Europe -- Warrior Maven
Fire Scout unmanned helicopter finishes first flight tests from LCS -- UPI
Full Details: The Army Finally Reveals Future Combat Fitness Test -- Military.com
Why Is NSA Deleting Call Records? -- Julian Sanchez, CATO Institute
CIA Official: Cloud Is More Secure Than Old Tech, Less 'Soul-Crushing' -- NextGov
Here's How the CIA Taps Start-Ups to Make Killer Spy Tech -- Maxim
Polar fitness app broadcasted sensitive details of intelligence and service members -- Fifth Domain
As Army Discharges Immigrants, Corps Still Allowing Hundreds to Enlist -- Military.com
Navy IDs Ensign Killed During Small Boat Training in Red Sea -- Military.com
West Point Shifts Focus of Sexual Assault Awareness Program -- Military.com/The Times Herald-Record, Middletown, N.Y.
Former CIA spies try to lead average lives in St. Petersburg -- Miami Herald
The F-23 Fighter Would Have Been a Killer (But It Never Joined the Air Force) -- Dave Majumdar, National Interest
There’s Nothing the U.S. Navy Can Do to Avoid a Submarine Gap -- David Axe, War Is Boring
4 comments:
I wouldn't support more money for NATO at the expense of universal healthcare.
Most western European NATO members seem to resent being prodded to spend 2 cents of every GDP dollar defending themselves and the alliance to which they belong. Resent being called out.
That isn't a functioning alliance anymore, its low hanging fruit to aggressor nations.
"That isn't a functioning alliance anymore...." Bingo!!
NATO is supposed to be for the mutual defense as I understand it. With that lack of readiness on the part of these allies what use are they? If we are invaded, how are they going to assist us? With that lack of readiness how can we be expected to properly deploy our forces to defend America and provide for their defense at the same time? With such lack of readiness is it a particularly good idea to make moves that Russia arguably the world's powerful military force will view as provocative? Backed up by such unreliable allies is it wise for America to support and contribute to such actions that Russia will likely view as provocative?
I suspect that how POTUS approaches the meeting with Putin will in large part be determined how the meetings with NATO members go. I suspect Trump and Putin already know how this is going to go.
NATO members will not make the adequate contributions to be of use to America as a reliable defense partner, they will further demean and slander America, and Trump and Putin will make big steps to resolving the long standing disputes between Russia. In other words what was likely agreed to in advance of the meeting will likely be formalized. From here if the Euros want to fight Russia they can spend the money and resources to do it themselves while kindly leaving America out of it. At this point without their American b!tch boy, they might actually come up with more sensible policies.
"Hungry". Hmm...
Post a Comment