VOA: Tillerson: NATO Allies Must Boost Their Defense Budgets
U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, meeting with his NATO allies' counterparts, said Friday in Brussels that they must increase their countries' defense budgets.
The top U.S. diplomat told the foreign ministers the alliance must have "all of the resources, financial and otherwise, that are necessary for NATO to fulfill its mission" in places like Iraq and Syria.
Earlier Friday, Tillerson said he also wanted to discuss "Russia's aggression in Ukraine" with the NATO allies.
Upon arrival in Brussels, the top U.S. diplomat said he sees three important areas to discuss: NATO's resources for its mission, the organization's fight against terrorism, including Islamic State, and NATO's posture in Europe, "most particularly Eastern Europe in response to Russia's aggression in Ukraine and elsewhere."
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The U.S. Secretary has told NATO members that they have 2 months to propose a plan on how they will be boosting their defense budgets. I know in Canada .... they are not going to do it. And the Germans .... they are signalling no .... Germany balks at Tillerson call for more European NATO spending (Reuters).
More News On U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Warning NATO Members That They Must Boost Their Defense Budgets
Tillerson demands US's NATO allies pay up -- AFP
Tillerson gives NATO two-month deadline on defense spending -- The Hill
US gives NATO allies 2 months for defence spending plans -- Canadian Press
Tillerson Calls NATO Critical in Countering Russian Aggression -- Bloomberg
When it comes to protecting the Arctic mineral and oil rights of Canada and the 1st nations, Canada will rely on the Eskimo self defense force.
ReplyDeleteLMFAO,
DeletePerhaps you meant The Canadian Rangers.
LMFAO,
At least we have Icebreakers, unlike the US.
For some reason my previous post is not here. Admittedly it may have been a bit over the top. I apologize for any offense that may have occurred.
ReplyDeleteWith that said I will try this again. The current nature of the NATO "alliance" is unreasonable and unsustainable. It is completely wrong to ask America to bear this much of a burden and it is completely wrong for America to expect to bear this kind of burden.
The current nature of the "alliance" is a net drain on American resources and is a net loss to American national security. Unless the nature of this changes America will have no choice but to withdraw from this "alliance" sooner rather than later.
Furthermore, as people tend to change over time as they gain new experiences, the attitudes of Americans are changing and their patience is very limited on this. They will not tolerate this type of situation for an indefinite period of time.
Based upon the headline Mr. Tillerson does not go far enough. Along with increases in defense spending by these "allies" needs to be presented a reasonable time table whereby the US can withdraw its forces from these countries. As it will happen, the only question is will it be orderly or disorderly. NATO members need to work constructively with the United States on getting this done or the United States will be getting this doen without them.
Aizino,
ReplyDeleteCanadians are more secure, healthier, wealthier, and have more opportunities for advancement than most Americans can begin to dream of. As such, they may be on to something that Americans should try and emulate.
Canada has been a very successful country for a very long time. I'm sure they are going to manage to defend their mineral rights just fine. Since they are more secure than America, we should be looking at their military posture and perhaps trying to emulate it.
Americans can fix Canada.
ReplyDeleteWe give anyone coming over our southern border 3 weeks to get across the Canadian. U.S. border.
This is the type of law that Mexico has enacted.
We can go Canadian and give out visas like cotton candy. Then when the visa holders sneak across the Canadian border, not our problem.
Just think how much nice Canada will be with 30 million Latin American who do not speak English or French. To be fair Canada will have to hire bilingual or trilingual teachers. Those do not come cheap.
Jay can have his illegal gardener and maid and pay them under the table. Who knows, he might get something on the side.
Can the Canadian health system, education system and welfare system survive and additional 30 million low skill, no Spanish speakers?
If Russia wants to draw a 9 dash line patterned after China's that goes right up to the shores of Baffin island, who is the U.S. to complain? the Leftard Canadians will only have themselves to blame.
Thins to consider BS Poster.
Canadia,the North American Siberia.
ReplyDeleteKyle's mother was right,"blame Canada"!
ReplyDeleteAizino,
ReplyDelete"Thins to consider BS Poster." I was specifically referring to Canada's ability to defend it's mineral rights. It clearly can do this. As for Americans being able to fix Canada, we cannot even fix our own country right now and assuming we can at some point we are going to be plenty busy doing this for quite some time. As such, the resources are simply not available for us to fix Canada assuming it needs fixing.
From that you delve off into a tangent on illegal immigration or so it appears. Clearly both America and Canada need to do much work in this area and both countries are somewhat lacking in defending their nations from this scourge.
As for Canada being able to protect it's mineral rights, this is no problem. As for Canadians having a better lifestyle than Americans as pointed out previously, there is evidence to back up such a claim. as such these are not BS as you put it.
Canada most certainly cannot defend it rights against China or Russia should either of those two countries decide to do anything against Canada.
ReplyDeleteTry again.
Aizio,
ReplyDeleteIf Canada cannot or will not defend it's own rights against Russia or China, the United States definitely can't. The United States would be hard pressed to defend it's own rights against either or both of those countries let alone try and defend Canada's rights.
Canada has a long and successful history. I have much more confidence in our northern neighbors. They might be offended at what such little opinion you seem to have of them.
BS Poster,
ReplyDeleteYou are shameless are you not?
check Jane's out and then get back to us with your lies.
You also forget the Samson option.
I have a low opinion of liberals be they American, Canadian or some other disease ridden variety.
ReplyDeleteAizino,
ReplyDeleteI actually agree with much of what you post here and agree ot disagree I always try to be respectful to everyone. "Shameless?", I'm not sure what you mean.
I'm familiar with Jane's. While it does provide some excellent information, it's analysis are flawed. As with much that passes for ana American capabilities thexe days, it tends to underestimate the abilities of adversaries of America while greatly overestimating American capabilities. As such, it would be uneise in the extreme to reference it as a secondary or third source let alone a primary one. I suspect it only survives brcause it tells it's readers what they want to hear as opposed to presenting something that might be factual.
As for a "Samson Option," Canada is a higly advanced country technologically. They should be able to develop a nuclear deterrent relatively quickly. Also, they might persue policies that are non confrontational towards the likes of Russia and China. Perhaps they may dven look for says they can add value to those powers. In fact, I'd suggest persuing both tracks for Canada. How Canada chooses to proceed is up to Canadians. With that said such an approach or a similar one would probably be good for America as well.
I will reiterate. Ametica cannot be expected to defend Canadian rights. We are hard pressed to defend our own. To place such demands on Amdrica and the American people is both unreasinable and unethical.
As to the theme of this post, the nature of the NATO alliance needs yo change. It's long past time that this happened. It needdd to be done in 1997. It's even more imperative today that this get done.
As for your opinion of liberals, I'm generally in agreement.
Just for those new to this blog and don't know Bposter..he's paid for commenting by Russia. Think about all he writes under this prism
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteYou know nothing about me. I have said nothing that would lead to any indication that I am taking a pro-Russian position. The fact that you would need to try and discredit me by stating something so patently ridiculous is confirmation that what I am posing here is factual and you are trying to discredit the messenger because you don't like the message.
I'm going to try and put this another way where perhaps some here can understand this who seem to be having trouble grasping basic information. Let's say you need a medical procedure. You have $3,000. You know this is going to cost you somewhere between $2,950 and $3.500. Your neighbor needs a similar procedure. In your present position, you cannot nor should you be expected to bear any of the burden of paying for or contributing to your neighbor's procedure. The same basic premise applies to NATO and the defense of Canadian mineral rights. At this pint, the US is going to be hard pressed to defend its own country and its own mineral rights should someone try and take them. As such, it is both unreasonable and unethical to expect Americans and America to bear such an exorbitant level of the costs of these things.
Unless these things are changed and changed soon America will simply have no choice but to withdraw from NATO and a number of other defense "agreements." To calmly and rationally point out such things hardly makes one a tool of a foreign power. In fact the opposite may be the case. I'm sure there are a number of adversaries of America who would be more than happy to see the status quo continue and have America utterly and completely break itself under the strain of these ridiculous and unreasonable obligations. These are most likely the ones who are "paid for commenting by Russia."
So CanadiAn ice breakers will take on Russian subs.
ReplyDeleteI am glad that the coward, Jay, who retreated form the city to Kamloops, wants to pit icebreakers against Russian subs.
Subs do not need icebreakers.
Canada virtually has no navy, 4 subs and 12 frigates. I am sure that keeps the Kremlin up at night.
In reality that means 2 subs and 8 or 9 frigates on duty.
Without friends the Canadians are f_cked.
LMFAO,
DeleteThe only people who have tried to invade Canada, have been the 'Murkins, and we kicked your asses twice, burned down Washington, and you pussy's couldn't handle the cold, the bugs and the wilderness.
And that was in the temperate South, not the Arctic or the Northern Shield.
LMFAO,
Must be difficult being a yellow bellied 'Murkin staying up late at night inventing new highly improbable things to be afraid of. Suprise you havn't started ranting yet on how your shadow is trying to kill you.
LMFAO at the cray cray.
If the polar Ice caps melt and America falls, Putin will be right over to give you a good reaming.
ReplyDeleteI know there is no downside for you form that. You loo forward to a good reaming.
Putin might be right over without the poles melting.
LMFAO,
DeletePutin's too busy running Agent Orange and his WhiteSupremacy House to bother.
JabberJay deflects and does not answer whether the Canadian Navy could take on the Russian Navy.
ReplyDeleteIt figures.
LMFAO,
Deleteشركة نقل عفش بالمدينة المنورة
ReplyDeleteشركة نقل عفش
ارخص شركة نقل عفش بالمدينة المنورة
شركة نقل عفش بالقصيم
شركة نقل عفش بخميس مشيط