Saturday, February 18, 2017

NATO Leaders Say No To President Trump's Ultimatum That They Must Increase Defense Spending

(Click on Image to Enlarge)

The Telegraph: Angela Merkel and European leaders resist Donald Trump's ultimatum to increase defence spending or risk losing US commitment to Nato

European leaders have pushed back at Donald Trump’s ultimatum that they increase defence spending or risk America scaling back its commitment to Transatlantic protection.

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, said her country would not accelerate existing, long-term plans to ramp up the military budget by 2024 despite a demand by the US this week that countries increase spending by the end of the year.

The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, also said countries must not cave in to US demands.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: NATO's leaders are taking a lot for granted .... especially on the U.S. continuing to cover its commitments and (of course) its bills to the organisation. Just like much of the Washington establishment/U.S. main stream media/the progressive left/etc. .... I find it astounding that many European leaders are in denial that someone like President Trump is now in power .... and that his budget priorities and foreign policy focus are different from that of Europe's NATO partners.

More News On NATO Leaders Saying No To President Trump's Ultimatum That They Must Increase Defense Spending

EU leaders defiant over US pressure to increase Nato defence budgets -- The Independent
Germany will take own time to boost defense, Merkel tells Pence -- Politico
Germany vows to increase defense budget & meet NATO obligations in long term -- RT
Mike Pence widens US rift with Europe over Nato defence spending -- The Guardian
U.S. steps up pressure on Europe to boost defense spending -- Reuters
Daily chart: Military spending by NATO members -- The Economist

16 comments:

Jay Farquharson said...

Washington has yelled, begged, pleaded and threatened NATO , day in and day out, to spend more money on defence since 1991.

It's just security theatre.

" the second world war alone.

Another thing the crazy drunk guy at the end of the bar probably won’t understand is that we’ve wanted Europe to be dependent on us, which is part of the reason that we’ve been okay with these countries not meeting their obligations. It keeps them from getting overly militarized and fighting among themselves, and it gives us a lot more influence over their politics."

http://www.boomantribune.com




B.Poster said...

Jay,

Times change perhaps this may have been the case at one time, say around 1950 or so. America is no longer the same country as it was in say 1950 and these countries are not the same either.

This has all the markings of an abusive relationship. The abusers, in this case, the EU/NATO countries are happy with the relationship. The abused, in this case, the United States often times has trouble breaking away from the abusive relationship and it is not unusual for the abused to beg, plead with, and cajole the abuser to change behavior. Furthermore it is not unusual for the abused to say to the abuser, "stop, this time I really mean it." It's not unusual for this to go on for quite some time.

The abused has two basic choices, 1.)allow the abuser to continue and by the time the abused comes to their senses it's to late the abused has been sucked dry and has nothing left or 2.)the abused can find the courage to break away. If option 1 is chosen, the abuser will simply try and find someone else to such dry while essentially leaving the abused abandoned. If the abused has the courage to pursue option 2, the abuser will often strike out at the abused and attempt to maliciously hurt them. If Americans can find the courage to pursue option 2, we should watch ourselves for this type of lashing out at us that may occur from EU/NATO nations.

Regardless the United States cannot continue to carry on with business as usual. We are 20 trillion in debt and climbing, have huge unfunded liabilities, a broken military that includes an aging and questionable nuclear deterrent that would be hard pressed to defend the US mainland let alone do anything else, and crumbing infrastructure that is badly in need of repair and upgrades. As such, America's commitment to NATO will have to end or at least change significantly.

The only question is will this be an orderly transition or a disorderly one. As the editor points out. these people truly are in denial. To add to this, the American people are fed up with this and their patience and tolerance for leaders pushing the same old policies is wearing thin and is nearly gone.

While this is certainly plausible that NATO does give the US a certain degree of influence over the policies of the countries within NATO, this influence likely works both ways as it gives them ready access to American muscle any time they want it.

Jay Farquharson said...

LMFAO.

Anonymous said...

LMFAO Jay, LMFAO


LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO
LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO LMFAO

Jay Farquharson said...

LMFAO.

RussInSoCal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

The U.S. will withdraw nuclear weapons currently stored in these non-compliant countries and move them to compliant countries. Such an action will move security and other resources to countries that care about their defense and respect America.

Jay Farquharson said...

LMFAO,

"Of the three nuclear powers in NATO (France, the United Kingdom and the United States), only the United States is known to have provided weapons for nuclear sharing. As of November 2009, Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey are hosting U.S. nuclear weapons as part of NATO's nuclear sharing policy.[3][4] Canada hosted weapons under the control of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), rather than NATO, until 1984, having left the NATO program in 1972[5] and Greece until 2001.[3][6] The United Kingdom also received U.S. tactical nuclear weapons such as nuclear artillery and Lance missiles until 1992, despite the UK being a nuclear weapons state in its own right; these were mainly deployed in Germany."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_sharing

Unknown said...

Jay is the guy at the end of the bar.

Unknown said...

It keeps them from getting overly militarized and fighting among themselves,


and it gives us a lot more influence over their politics."
Like we decide who their PMs are going to be and their policy?

Give yourself a break Jabber and hang it up.

Jay Farquharson said...

LMAO,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UXHwIrEpeSQ

Jay Farquharson said...

Old man yells at clouds in his yard.

jimbrown said...

Nato is priming itself for self destruct.

Unknown said...

Jay,

you are the one around 60 or older and moved out of the big city because you could not deal with it.

You could not deal with your 1sty wife either. But then she wanted a man not a mouse that trolls.

Unknown said...

It's funny I go to one of the top public affairs and political science programs in the country and we are never allowed to use Wikipedia as a source.

Andrew Jackson said...

Canadia's not even a real country,lol!!!