"Trump escalated his campaign of criticism against European allies on Wednesday, accusing Germany of being “captive to Russia” and demanding that all NATO members double their military spending targets."
It's time NATO told Trump in no uncertain terms to stick it where the sun don't shine. They're committed to following the agreement they all singed back in 2014 to raise their contributions to 2% of their respective GDP by 2024.
Guess who was in the White House in 2024? And guess whose footprints trump is following while making a royal mess of everything?
Every President since Bill Clinton wanted the NATO Nations to increase defense spending. What I don't understand is why make it the very first Topic when the Cameras are rolling and make it look as you are making Mr. Putin Happy? NATO needs to remain Strong and give the World the image of Unity. Trump did all the opposite. Plus when he makes a statement he constantly adds untrue facts to his argument. I'm Sure Mr. Putin will Welcome MR. Trump with Open Arms when they meet. Why are they Planning to Meet alone? What is it That Mr. Trumps doesn't want us to know?
On a positive note, the UK has saved the US taxpayer $6.6 million for the President's golf trip This weekend.
Donald Trump must think we're still operating under the Marshall Plan, and that the United States has some sort of right to dictate how Germany manages its own affairs. What would Americans think if some other country belittled us as Trump has chided our allies. I can tell you, we wouldn't like it. Trump disparages our friends and praises our enemies. This man who used five deferments and a bone spur to stay out of the military is no patriot. See: RevolutionOfReason.com
1
It is clear, at least to my thinking, that trump is not so much interested in NATO countries need to share in their own countries defense spending,but in SPENDING to buy Anerican military goods from our Industrial Military Complex. Trump is out there selling for his backers, and has little interest in American defense or in the Overt threat of Russian agression. He sold out to Russia long before he used their help to buy his lucrative presidency. trump is loyal to only one person, himself, and how much power and money he can accumulate. What a surprise for him when he dies, just like the least of us that he so despises.
1
Getting allies to spend %4 is not the point. The point is to turn Americans against NATO.
1
The TrumPutin love affair is so obvious. Putin's plan to use the "useful idiot" to destabilize Europe by supporting Syria and destabilizing NATO, must be countered by solidarity in Europe and NATO. Unsettling the United State's relationships with its Allies in the world, that have been built up since World War II, must give Putin a secret smile as he has his morning coffee. This plan, while diabolically clever, is a formula for a potential war in Europe. A Europe united with the United States, provides the balance of power that keeps keeps Russia in check and the world in peace. Trump's criticism of Germany's gas trade with Russia, does not see that trade and inter-relationships are the grease of peace.
2
It appears that the non history reading citizens of the USA are unaware of the history of militarism in Germany and Japan. Germany...WWI and WWII and Japan WWII. Think all you commentators in your derogation of Germany. There are powerful right wing,fascist and nationalistic movements in Germany and parts of Europe now. One of the functions of NATO was to contain those. NATO and the EU is to maintain cohesion so IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN. Millions of people world wide died.
4
The question which your president fails to answer for us is why the US continues to spend 4 times as much on defence compared to the only other states that could threaten you Russia and China.
Now if you intend to police the world fair enough, but Trump is clearly an isolationist so the question remains why?
I'm sure the US could spend just 2% of its GDP on defence and still be a superpower the money saved could then rebuild your ageing infrastructure and resolve your health care issues.
Is waging war preferable to curing your sick and building a better USA?
As a European, I can say we are grateful for your commitment to our peace and security and we understand that you may need to redeploy your forces elsewhere now the cold war is over.
4
Given that NATO currently spends in the neighborhood of thirteen times more than Russia's military budget (http://natowatch.org/newsbriefs/2017/nato-military-spending-over-12-time... why is anyone talking about increased contributions? The U.S. could easily reduce its contribution to the same level as other member countries with no threat to anyone's security.
4
Notice that the Liar in Chief wants yet more military spending--the increase in the Pentagon budget wasn't enough and all this from a draft-dodger. And I love the reasoning--these allies spend too much on education and social services--too bad the US is not following in our European allies' footsteps. MAGA indeed!
4
So.....once NATO countries increase defense spending and pay "their fair share" the obvious outcome is that the US can reduce its own spending on the military... otherwise, what's the point?
4
How come none of the comments will come right out and say it: Donald Trump is a traitor.
(I've felt that long before I read Jonathan Chait's essay in the current issue of New York magazine which provides the evidence.)
5
We must stop pretending that only this irrational President wants to endanger our relationship with our allies. It is VERY ckear that the Republicans in Congress want him to do so. A rebuke is a smokescreen. They have many ways to halt "his" trade wars and destruction of our relationship with our allies, but they do nothing because they agree wth him! Place the responsibility where it belongs: withel the gatekeeoers.
2
Trump sees NATO as an opportunity to run a protection racquet. He's telling NATO countries that if they want the US's protection, they must pay more or they will not be protected and he will also attempt to ruin their economies, which is the equivalent of burning down the store of a market owner who refuses to pay for protection.
That Trump is a thug is bad enough. However, he is trying to change the world order. He is trying to create a new axis among the most wealthy and the most powerful, He sees the US, China, and Russia at the core of that axis and Europe excluded. As he says, what's wrong with getting along with them?
In his view, that axis could extort huge sums from weaker countries through trade concessions, trade barriers, and military threats.
His argument about Germany's pipeline deal with Russia was actually a warning shot to Putin to let him know that he knows Russia's economy would completely fail without its oil and gas industry. Whatever Putin has on Trump, it remains possible that Trump can still hurt Russia's economy.
And China simply wants to be left alone to continue to rip off every other country and to oppress its own people.
Trump, Putin, and Xi could each make a lot of money if they partnered by using their countries' capital to their personal advantage.
However, Trump has never read "The Prince." He needs a picture book version. Consorting with despots who are equally evil to him and wholly unconstrained is deadly dangerous.
2
There is at least one balancing factor relevant to the Trump challenge on military defence spending he has just tabled.
It is simply that Trump unilaterally withdrew from the well organised and absolutely essential international effort required to abate the impact of climate change on the future of "our" planet.
The arguments supporting this necessity are legion and almost unanimous in every reputable school of science, business and thought, and the impact is felt beyond any territorial borders.
If the impact of Trump's decision were to be confined to the US, one might close an eye to his action. However, this is far from the facts (leaving out those whose opinion can be bought).
The impact of this ignorance is becoming increasingly expensive and unchecked, will require all to pay up now, or be paying much more later.
Delay and denial will only compound the outcome and its cost, so Mr. President, isn't it time to measure the impact of your decision and pay up to do your bit for the planet too?
5
I’m sure that the US pushing for more military spending by other nations is making it’s own military industrial complex happy. The US should take a page from some of the EU countries and Canada and provide some health care and other social programs for its citizens. You are the richest country in monetary terms but the poorest in so many ways.
10
mr trump. you do not appear pleased with participating in nato. mr putin is not pleased with the us participation also. take your guns and go home.
He's not trying to get a better deal, he's just a fool that craves attention.
Say good-bye to strategic diplomacy....
8
I find it ironic that Trump is lecturing the NATO members about their failure to pay their fair share. He has filed for bankruptcy six times and stiffed many of the contractors who worked on his projects. So much for paying his bills! The man has no shame!
Here are two articles that he should read that might help him to understand how the funding for NATO works:
nytimes.com/2017/05/26/world/europe/nato-trump-spending.html
latimes.com/nation/la-na-pol-trump-nato-20180710-story.html#
6
Trump is a textbook case for psychological projecting. Now he’s projecting on a world stage and affecting the world. He’s yelling that Germany is “controlled” by Russia.....when HE is being controlled by Russia, at the detriment to all of us.
“Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually intolerant may constantly accuse other people of being intolerant. It incorporates blame shifting.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
8
As a Canadian, I will be furious with any government of mine that ups defense spending to 2%, let alone 4%.
We seem to be unable to procure replacements for any equipment, some of the processes have been going on for more than a decade, with a good portion of the money budgeted so far spent on paperwork and committees. It is all a waste. I think this says a great deal not only about our government, but about the military/industrial complex that makes the darned stuff.
I will only support my government in more spending if Canadians go back to one of our most rewarding military ventures - that of being UN Peacekeepers.
I don't want to see our men and women being blown up in Afghanistan or any other place anymore. I want them to be wearing blue helmets and actually doing some good.
A delusional, cognitively impaired, illegitimately elected 'president' of your country telling Canadians that we should be using our resources as 'he' sees fit is beyond the pale. I won't go into the personal insults our legitimately elected leader has received from him.
7
Trump is bent on destroying destroying the NATO alliance and is using a two-pronged strategy. First, he's employing his populist rhetoric - "We're being ripped off!" It's a near-term strategy of demands and insults. It's typical Trump, not surprising and plays well to his base.
His second method is a medium-term strategy. Let's say that in order to appease Trump and preserve the alliance, NATO members do radically increase their defense spending. Trump can turn around and say, "This is great. You're all militarily self-sufficient now and Europe's dependence on the United States' commitment to NATO is no longer needed." He can unilaterally withdraw and look like he's left the rump alliance in good stead. (He'll also posture as a great statesman. Time for that Nobel Peace Prize!) But, as with anything else Trump does, it is Russia that's the big winner. Even with increased defense spending, Western European nations - without US leadership - would be greatly weakened.
2
Just curious, how many wars are currently going on that the USA didn't start or stir the pot to get it started??
7
Trump is like the very rich uncle, everyone is nice to him no matter what obnoxious things he says at the holiday dinner table because they all seek an inheritance from him.
1
What is the difference? Trump is in debt to Russia to help get elected?
5
This is typical of the way the Reactionary Republicans think. They favor regressive flat taxes over progressive proportional taxes. Everyone should pay the same no matter how much they benefit from the system. Wall Street has rigged the global economic system in favor of the US. NATO helps keep the world peaceful and the US standard of living is disproportionally high because of that. But Trump, who is a “ free rider” on his income tax, thinks that the US should be a “ free rider” in NATO. I think the leaders of the NATO countries are a little smarter than the Trump voters and they are not going to fall for this carnival barker.
3
If we want the USA to be the pre-eminent world leader culturally, economically, and militarily - essentially the empire of the current age - then we have to be mature enough to recognize that we have to pay for what we intend to be. Otherwise we will become, under Trump and his sycophant citizens, another "has been" nation, like Britain and France are today.
History repeats itself, and always will because of an ingrained human gene, the - I know better
President trump, like many if not all humans possess this gene of the human species that blinds one from his own bias and weakness in thought.
Massachusetts bred for sure.
Why don't the Europeans just take care of their own defense and this won't be a problem for anyone.
2
Yes. And then we can reduce our own military spending. Right?
1
Simply stated, if any office holder or military officer, of any rank, publicly suggested that the Russian invasion & annexation of the Crimean Penninsula was acceptable conduct, that individual would suffer catastrophic damage to their professional standing and the destruction of any future political opportunity. The counter-espionage investigation that follows would leave an indelible stain, regardless of its ultimate findings.
Unless you are Donald Trump.
In his "behind the looking glass" reality, the conduct clearly intended to provide comfort to a geopolitical adversary begs to be repurposed for his domestic audience. In Trump's alternate reality, his treasonous conduct is simply the bait in a trap set to provoke naive patriots to act in defense of our allies. Once self-identified, opponents of Trump's corrupted loyalties, can be programmed for professional destruction by Fox News or a less formally established group from within the "base". Attacks devoid of merit work best! Thus setting an example for others with a similarly antiquated concept of patriotism.
It really is a simple process. Trump can progressively twist U.S. foreign policy to the purposes of advancing the objectives of the Russian Federation. At the same time, he maintains his hold on a neurologically primitive segment of the U.S. electorate. By tweeting a stream of insults & hostility, he elicits an addictive dopamine surge that a reptilian brain finds absolutely irresistible.
4
Anybody checked the math of Trump's demand for 4% military spending? Looks like well over $1 trillion a year, each year. Has anybody asked why? Can't be Russia he's worried about. Putin's "fine". Trump sees border hostilities and mercantile bullying as the lifeblood of international relations. If the blonde baby gets his way, simple border friction and trade wars will result in shooting wars that rival the World Wars. Is it possible Trump has made a business decision to get into the arms trade? He may well envy the people that bought his overpriced properties and seen they made their money in the international arms trade.
3
If the NATO charter specifies that your country's financial obligation is 2% - you pay the 2%. how hard is that to understand? The Head of Nato agrees with Trump.
1
Trump needs to show his line item military budget to all the world since he makes such a fuss. Let's see how much is going toward protecting our allies and how much is going toward unilateral military policy decisions that even US citizens and Congress don't know about.
4
Forget that, we should be paying the NATO countries for helping with the refugee problem the U.S. created in the Middle East. Those NATO countries are spending to take in the people we displaced by the 2003 Iraq invasion and the follow-on instability, war, civil unrest, and violence. Our blunders became their expense. Maybe they can just deduct that from what Trump thinks they owe.
6
Yes. All our fault. Shias and Sunnis and all the Muslims and Jews would be living peacefully side by side if it weren't for the darned imperialism of the United States.
Is Putin pleased with the idea of European countries spending more on defense? Or with Trump pressuring Germany to reduce its purchase of natural gas from Russia? I would not think so. But I don’t know.
1
Those blurtings by Trump have a purpose: to confuse busy people unable to spare enough time to fact check and consistency check them so that whose interests he is actually serving can be deduced according to one's preconceived preference. In actuality he is only ever serving his own narcissistic interests. I wish Americans Godspeed in containing his policies and actions and in due course in replacing him and his ilk. That will help us all.
1
Hopefully, the additional funds from our allies will be used to buy US military equipment. US is the best selling arms dealer in the world and can assure the clients of the highest quality and most accuracy. US may not be able to afford basic healthcare for its citizens, but is proud of its military research, development, industrial complex and the ability to procure needed funds when a country needs to be invaded. Rumors are Venezuela is on Trump’s list.
4
Trump was elected by a popular minority of Americans who he convinced were ‘losers’ in today’s world. He sold them the delusion that he was a ‘winner’ and that they would benefit from his winning ways. He sold the same tripe at his fake ‘university’. He fuels his political support by damning America’s allies & trading partners as the source of their problems.
9
Our NATO allies don't spend too little, we spend too much on a very wasteful Defense Department. Rather than cut waste in domestic programs, we should train an eagle eye on DOD overruns, overpayments, and duplication. If we could save just a fraction of our budget for defense, we could fix the looming shortfall in Medicare (2026); Social Security (2034), Medicaid, the ACA, and a host of other social programs that help the middle class, the ill, the poor. And these are national security issues. A nation of sick, homeless, destitute elderly people cannot defend itself from external foes when it's rotting within.
9
I would like the Europeans to turn around and demand that the US begin paying market rate rent for all the land our military bases use in Europe. Transactional alliances seem to be the only thing Trump understands sadly.
15
Don't kid yourself, they LOVE having American military bases on their soil, it creates a local economic boondoggle. Especially in an isolated area.
2
We should all spend less on NATO overall and Europe ought to share the burden. Bush and Obama, as politician presidents, wouldn’t push this point. Trump will. No offense, but fair is fair. The military threats of the future are Cyber and Asia. Adjust accordingly
7
The problem with Trump is he doesn't know history. He doesn't know we became the super power we are through diplomacy and taking care of our allies. His idea of power is dictatorship. Again he doesn't study the eventual ending of most dictatorships. He wants to wear a military outfit and have weapons parades. His idea of negotiating is to start a trade war via twitter. If he hadn't been born into wealth he would be just another two bit con man. The fact that he won the Presidency only shows our lack of education as a country. If he wins a second term it will be very difficult to undo all the damage he has done.
20
--"We demand you spend the full %2 GDP you promised!"
--"Okay. You're right. This is a good idea. We're glad you suggested it. We appreciate your leadership.* So we are ramping up spending right away. It will however take us some time to reach the full %2 GDP."
--"Not good enough. Pay %4! Immediately!"
Is this really the art of the deal?
*Yes. That is a near quote of what NATO Secretary General said to POTUS this morning
3
while I don't support Trump at all, I do agree that it is outrageous that so many NATO countries are not living up to their 2% commitment, especially those who chastised the Greeks during their debt crisis! talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
1
He was overwhelmingly correct in his choice of tissue paper in Puerto Rico too. That doesn't make it right for him to toss it like he was feeding seals. BTW how is the power supply there?
4
So Pelosi and Schumer defend Germany's deal with Russia while Trump condemns it..so who is colluding with Putin?
7
Europe has been buying russian gas since the 80s (during the cold war). This new pipeline ensures that ukraine cannot hold europe hostage again. This pipeline is a direct response to ukraine's using russian gas pipeline to leverage europe and russia.
BTW, Germany is also investing in LNG terminals to diversify their gas supply. No rational country wants only a single energy supplier.
1
So, Trump thinks the US is spending too much on a military budget and not on healthcare or other social programs like us evil Europeans do? Okay, so then why not - crazy thought I know - pay less on defence and more on other things? I mean, obviously he’d need to be in a position in government and issue some kind of - oh I don’t know - executive order or something(?) to amend spending accordingly and...wait a second, you mean he is in that position? No problem then, right? Right?
What’s that? He actually wants to raise the US military budget? So then...errrrrrrr, whatever
9
Fact: the United States supplies 69% of the total NATO military budget. Fact: 24/29 NATO countries are NOT contributing the amount that they agreed to when they signed the last NATO treaty. As Obama liked to say back when he was trying to pass his tax increase, “its time they start paying their fair share.”
10
Please stick to actual facts and not just parrot false figures.
"Today, the volume of the US defence expenditure effectively represents some 67 per cent of the defence spending of the Alliance as a whole in real terms."
https://www.nato.int/cps/ie/natohq/topics_67655.htm
This is much different than the NATO budget.
Just because the usa drastically overspends on "offensive capability" does not mean that all countries also must. German military budget (only defence) is comparable to russia's military budget.
Here's the kicker - Russia's investment in our election has paid off big time for them in terms of weakening NATO. And that is why they have a defense budget that is about 1/10 the size of the ours - they know what they are doing.
9
Given that Trump has a long history of stiffing employees and workers and not paying his own multi-million dollar debts, his stance toward NATO "paying up" is laughable. Obviously, there is an underlying motive. The pipeline seemed placed to throw us off.
13
Canadian Roy, Thank you and your fellow Canadians for your help in Afghanistan as well as your help in WWII. Are you saying that should not have got our selves into WWII to help your other Commonwealth members? Roy, should we just let you and the rest fight your own budgets and battles? We lost a lot more than you and Germany taking care of a European problem with Afghanistan . Do your homework and respect the thousands we have lost for you and your Commonwealth members.
3
Afghanistan is not and was not a european problem. Who created the taliban to fight the russians - USA.
God forbid NATO members pay for their own defense. If you don’t want to be invaded by Russia maybe you should contribute to make sure an invasion doesn’t happen.
12
I think you are confusing NATO defense with offensive capabilities of the usa. As is trump when when he confusingly mixes NATO contributions with total usa military spending.
Trust me most USA military in europe is to support middle east intervention and not stop a russian invasion that is not a real threat anyway. Who would buy their gas then?
Perhaps not all countries want to be US-hypermilitary and prefer to spend more on healthcare and education. Maybe, just maybe, the good ol' Red White and Blue could take a lesson from Europe. Only kidding! The US is too besotted with cash and too owned by its military industrial complex.
If you never watch another 3 minute video in your life, you should watch this. The ex CIA Director, serving under 8 presidents in one way or other, Leon Panetta, gives his take on Trump's actions recently.
"This president, for whatever reason, is not operating with the awareness of how much an adversary Russia is to the stability of the United States."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/postlive/wplive/leon-panetta-warns-...
14
Trump, the master of zero-sum "thinking". In everything.
Thanks, GOP.
7
The US gets nothing in return?
2
Once. Just once. I would like to Macron or Theresa May get up in one of theses meetings and say “We are the leaders of sovereign nations and we will not have a punk like you mouthing off to us.” This person would then point ou the window and say “Three miles from here there is a cemetery with 5,000 American soldiers buried in it. They sacrificed their lives to build a peaceful and secure world and we will not have you insult them by trying to dismember NATO.”
Why does Trump get away with “ straight talk” while everyone else in the meeting smiles uncomfortably? I know the Republicans have to do it, but why don’t Schumer and Pelosi give him a reality check and tell him off in a meeting. They should be calling him Donald and not Mr. President until he starts to behave like a President.
15
The mainstream media is giving this trump blowhard way too much airtime than he warrants... he thrives on it, it's his oxygen.
Give it a break willya? The guy will wilt like a dried-out weed.
5
Trump looks like he is a captive of Putin.
Maybe we will know for sure if Nunes and Jordan don't stop Mueller.
13
Kudos to POTUS. After 8 years of Obama apologizing for America we finally have a President brave enough to lecture the Europeans on doing their fair share. The USA stop being the world's doormat on January 20, 2017. The press is having a fit. Too bad.
14
At least Obama payed taxes! This thug you refer to as "POTUS" has no reason attempting to browbeat EU leaders and NATO members for not paying their share of expenses. Why does he not pay taxes? Because of his failures as a casino owner, real estate developer and self-promoter. The only reason the Republicans are supporting him is that he backed "conservative" ideology to win the election. Although Trump has displayed deplorable behavior as a person, and as a leader, his backers are either pleased in his antics or simply hopeful that his means will be justified by achieving their ends.
Now most Americans are apologizing for our so-called president Trump. Trump isn't "brave" he's just, needy for attention, and Putin's puppet. He really failed with N. Korea but isn't smart enough to realize it.
4%? Never going to happen. I wonder if he knows that too and is setting himself up to take the US out at some point when his demands are unrealised...
“I think the secretary general likes Trump”
I found this line amusing - especially as I read in Politico earlier that Stoltenberg was deliberately stroking Trump’s ego to avoid a repeat of his G7 tantrums by putting him in a good mood. It seems The Donald fell for it.
4
This is Putin's way of driving a wedge between the allies and he's found a good boy in his BFF Donald.
14
Not a Trump fan but have to admit he knows whose chain to pull. NATO established by US with Europe vasssls as buffer during Cold War. Starting with Clinton's use of NATO to dismember Yugoslavia and others and then Bush gets them involved in Afghanistan and Central Asia. No talk of that reality so why not pressure for significant enhancements in Euro contributions? No context and history in these NYT pieces.
7
Please be patient, European leaders. This moron — as former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson labeled him — will not rule our nation forever. There is a good chance he'll be gone in November 2020. Or that sooner he'll be neutralized in November of this year if Democrats can retake the House of Representatives — more so if they can retake the Senate. Don't give up on us. There are people in the U.S. who think straight. Hold on!
6
Can't imagine why the Germans would be offended by Trump's dispensing of diplomatic niceties and engaging in public humiliation of another country when it is recalled that Germany loudly did the same to Greece, Spain and other European countries over their government spending a few years back. Now Merkel and the Germans understand that what goes around comes around.
3
If Trump's presidency--however long it lasts, and yes, that means two terms--ends without him pulling the US out of NATO, then I will believe he will not pull the US out of NATO. Not before.
It's a synthesis of follow the money and be careful for what you wish for. US Defense spending has been a efficient way to influence European policy in many parts of the world. A European defense establishment closer to par with the US might not follow US policy in the mideast for example, or our support for dictators. Larger European defense budgets might be spent in Europe. If Europe pays more to defend itself, they will surely do so how they want, not how we want them to. It is ridiculous to think the EU will spend more on US stuff - they have the technology to be fully competitive and sell it to whoever they want too.
3
As China owns 8 per cent of our debt, it is ironic that Trump has a tantrum about alleged dependency of Germany on Russian oil. The next generation of Germans may decide to remilitarize and request removal of our military installations. There are consequences to weakening our ties with NATO.
4
Perhaps we could achieve parity with our NATO allies by reducing our defense pending to 2% of GNP. Thereby freeing up funds for proper health care in our great-again country.
4
The US is a militarized country and addicted to guns and the use of its power overseas. It gets its support from the government and its money from the average person. It needs to spend money to keep the military status quo up. Trump especially will not cut spending. The military has done things both good and not so good, but the superpower status of the US is not going away easily and not without a fight for survival. NATO justifies this spending. Trump is playing both sides.
1
What percentage of German GDP does Russia produce with about 40 percent more people? It's about one-third. What does the US need trade wise from Russia? Nothing. What does Trump owe to Putin? Seemingly more than nothing and more than we know, at least for now.
4
I wish someone expert with courage would have a conversation about Donald Trump. We need clarity. I am afraid that he is in worse shape than we thought. Does narcissism include attitudes that would break up all alliances the the US has with the west? Or perhaps it includes wilfully separating the US from all friendly alliances? Does it include hiring people with little or no experience in the job for which they are hired, or worse hiring people that have a viewpoint that sabotages the position and department they are hired for? Does it include separating babies from their mothers and hiding them for months in cages in far places? Trump seems to wilfully sabotage everything and everybody he comes in contact with, except Putin. Surely that is not sane behaviour, but I wish an expert would comment generally on narcissism and how it presents itself and the spectrum it can include.. Joyce
6
I don't believe this but the military expenditure in 1938 in billions of dollars: Japan 1740, Germany 7415, Britain 1863, and America 1131.
Yes, and germany's big budget was used to start a world war. Higher military spending does not it will be used reasonably (i.e. see usa under trump and george w).
Trump is correct about Germany, they pay billions to Russia because they buy Russian gas, and Putin desperately needs that German gas money to expand and rebuild Russian military! Germany pay for the Russian military, while USA pay to protect Germany!
2
It might be time to push back on Trump where it hurts. Stop buying US weapons. Buy European - on security grounds.
7
Since Germany buys Russian natural gas why does the US have an embargo on Russian goods?
Maybe when Russia starts contributing toward NATO, then we can have a more meaningful discussion about how "obsolete" it is.
Until then...
2
The only defense Europe needs now is against being bullied by the Trump. Maybe it is time to team up with Russia after all and tell the US to remove it’s military bases.
If the Republican-led Congress had any patriots among them, the resolution supporting NATO would be accompanied by a censure of Trump for undermining it.
5
Trump contradicts himself. He tells NATO member countries to increase defense spendings. Who is the enemy to defend from? Obviously it is not Russia, according to Trump. This kind of logical breakdown has been seen often in the past. He needs a treatment. Something is wrong with him.
9
He was overwhelmingly correct in his choice of tissue paper in Puerto Rico too. That doesn't make it right for him to toss it like he was feeding seals. BTW how is the power supply there? BTW where are his taxes? BTW who paid Stormy? Was he overwhelmingly correct in his behaviour then? BTW he was overwhelmingly incorrect during Hollywood Access. I bet that didn't stop you voting for him.
He is a real class act right?
6
Progress doesn’t happen in a vacuum, entropy does. You want to know how bad WW2 was? The people who survived it spent the rest of their lives scratching and clawing to make a better world. Remember that as we are sliding back.
5
Ask your average Trump supporter to explain what NATO is and its importance in the world for 70 years. I found in my ad hoc survey that not one of the 10 surveyed could offer any kind of cohesive answer, not even to explain what the acronym stood for. What everyone could agree upon however was that the U.S. is "getting ripped off" by it.
The dangerous power of the incessant Trump propaganda machine is frightening, especially when he frames his attacks on our allies to incite his faithful followers into believing that it is only about taking money away from us. Many of his most rabid supporters are brainwashed into thinking that only Trump can protect us from being taken advantage of as a country. They will continue to shout out "We're #1 USA USA" at his next raucous self-serving rally when he boasts of the great NATO deal he made in Brussels, never knowing what the deal was except getting us back more money.
I wonder if these Trump loyalists will attempt to understand what NATO does mean when we need our allies in the treaty to join the U.S. in defense of the dangerous international security threats we all face in the world today.
9
Russia and China's military spending are not transparent.
No, we don't spend too much on defense,
If the US were not in NATO, then NATO would not be able to offer a credible defense against Russia and east European countries would be in the same situation as Georgia and the Ukraine.
Freedom isn't free. Europe needs to be better security partner with the US
To make it worse, the ones getting taken advantage of are those very Trump supporters.
The Trump / Republican tax bill is projected to add $12 Billion to the debt over the next ten years.
That's $80,000 per taxpayer.
Mr. Trump, show us your tax returns.
"I wonder if these Trump loyalists will attempt to understand what NATO does mean when we need our allies in the treaty to join the U.S. in defense of the dangerous international security threats we all face in the world today."
You would have a genuine point if not for the fact that "our allies in the treaty" aren't even interested in paying for their own defense. Try again.
Trump's tone may be unconventional but the U.S. government has been politely and diplomatically pleading with NATO countries for decades to pull their weight and most allies quietly nod their heads in agreement and then do nothing, or next to it.
If POTUS' big stick approach gets more allies to spend what they themselves committed to spending, then that's for the good. But Trump should balance his criticism with loud and unqualified praise for NATO allies like Estonia that have paid their share and live in genuine fear that the only thing standing between them and a Russian invasion is NATO. Estonia is a model NATO ally (and otherwise superb democracy) that deserves our praise and our support, diplomatic and (if necessary) military.
If we let Russia annex the Baltics, as it did part of Ukraine, it will only be a matter of time before all of eastern Europe (and eventually western Europe) will be feeling the bear's nasty breath.
1
Because they are sovereign democracies where voters decide that they do not want their government to spend 2% on military. An idea that trump just does not get.
You write: "The contrast reflected a growing disconnect between Mr. Trump and the more traditionally minded foreign-policy advisers in his government when it comes to the role of the United States on the world stage. While his aides and advisers toil privately to maintain American global leadership, post-World War II institutions and strong alliances, the president appears bent on challenging if not upending those conventions to get what he considers a better deal for the United States — even if he does not follow through on all of his threats."
Finally revealed! Which side is the NYT on!
1
Americans have always been in need of an enemy they can hate. In most of the XX century and in this century, Russia plays that role. What would Americans do, besides overdosing on drugs and slaughtering each other in schoolyards, if they didn't have Russia to hate? All that is very good, but expecting civilized European nations to also need an enemy to give meaning to their lives is way too much. Let's hope Europe doesn't fall for this.
4
It is clear: Trump works for Putin, and that is why he is tearing down the USA and trying to tear down NATO.
What Putin has on Trump WILL BE REVEALED, and he will be remembered as the traitor he is. May his children never be able to forget that since they benefit from it every day.
3
Trump is not leaving NATO if he did the US arms manufacturers would lose billions and that is what this is all about.
9
If the goal of NATO is to forestall a Kafkaesque invasion of the West by "Barbarians on flesh-devouring horses", some of the NATO governments should regain a warrying spirit and realize that life in the shadow of existential danger is not a bed of roses.
1
Delinquent?
Now Trump knows how his contractors feel.
10
If Trump gets NATO countries to up their defense spending, will it be with Pentagon/US companies or with European countries... I'm just wondering.
1
Important to understand that all this verbal abuse has a simple reason behind it.
When Putin decides to move against Latvia, Lithuania and/or Estonia (cut off energy to the Ukraine or do whatever that threatens European security interests or wherever), Commander-in-chief Bone Spur can use a variety of excuses, ranging from fake news, to doubt about the real reason for NATO's requests for action to simply saying that they should have spent more on defense and the US can't bail them out.
Putin's Poodle is loyal.
7
“Mr. Trump suggested that NATO allies increase their military budgets not to the 2 percent of their economies that they have pledged to work toward within the next six years, but to 4 percent — a steep increase that is inconceivable for many member countries.”
Well maybe those countries wouldn’t be able to offer free health care and free college tuition to their citizens if they were at 4%, but we don’t offer it either and have to protect those delinquents.
Inconceivable? Well let’s put it to the test and threaten to pull out of NATO if they don’t hit the target. We currently gain nothing from this military alliance - we can protect ourselves and they add close to zero real military capacity.
3
Health care is not free and university tuition varies by country. But please tell me what the usa gets for its outrageous military spending beside millions of sick and homeless people. Please feel free to use Iraq as an example.
Reduce the - shared envelope - of NATO military spending.
Reduce the - shared envelope - of US and Allies military spending.
Reduce US Military budget to 2% - total - for all military spending.
Raise All NATO members to 2% of their federal budgets.
Raise US Allies military spending to 2%.
Reduce global footprint of military arms, etc. Including all manufactured weapons, including guns, etc.
Increase US Federal budget to Infrastructure, Education, Research, Health, and all Domestic spending. And State, Diplomacy, Aid.
7
Trump calling out the Euro leaders on defense spending makes them squirm. They are so used to it being overlooked by etiquette and by protocol ignored with the handshake and smile. Does not work so well with Trump. Thankfully. They've got to carry some water too.
7
From what I have read, both W Bush and Obama pressed for the Europeans to increase their NATO spending.
And the European countries have been increasing since before Trump.
Trump is correct to continue to press the European countries.
The difference between W Bush, Obama, and Trump is whether Trump is more on the side of our allies or more on the side of Putin.
5
"Germany spends about 1.2% of GDP, well below the previously agreed upon rate of 2%"
We agreed, along with other NATO nations, to wait until 2024 for members to spend 2% of their GDP on their defense. You agree presumably that the US should keep its word and give them the agreed upon term, correct?
7
There was an agreement put in place in 2014 under which all NATO members promised to get their defense spending up to 2% of the GDP by 2024.
Last I looked, it was still 2018, and there's six more years until 2024. Trump tweeted that "Must pay 2% of GDP IMMEDIATELY, not by 2025."
Then Trump really went off script and demanded NATO members to raise their defense spending to 4% of GDP. Sarah Huckabee Sanders had to walk that one back.
Can you imagine a bank president demanding you pay off your mortgage IMMEDIATELY and announcing that the interest rate would be doubled?
5
People are asking why we spend more than European countries on NATO.
I worked in the defense industry and have a hypothesis.
It is good for the defense industry for us to spend more?
34
A part of Trump unspoken agenda at NATO is to drive US arm sales, coming off a globe leading and record 2017 when $76 billion in sales were booked. Sales take place under the Arms Export Control Act that governs sales and subsidies from the US, and many of the contracts are subsidized by US taxpayers up to 95%. The US is the global leader in arms sales and Trump's Defense Department is expanding that market.
Overall, Trump's balance sheet approach is a still life. It ignores the flow of trade in the global supply chain and the economies of scale that make markets efficient and reliable.
Name achievement of Trump's matching Obama's removal of lifetime limits and protection of pre-conditions in healthcare.
Obama also focused on the middle class doubling by 2028, expanding in Asia/below the equator. (Trump has no plans/for the mega-trend.)
Trump can only think of value and pricing as blocks, not as flow as modern managers and nations do; trade is moving money, not income or profit, a cash flow glimpse of the supply chain.
Trump hates everyone but the Nigerian “hard man,” corrupt, narcissistic, above the law, misogynistic, a messenger of evil and deception. His hate has it own hierarchy, clued by his actions, witnessed in his silence: no grief or compassion for the urban victims killed unarmed; not a word of sorrow for Claudia Patricia Gomez Gonzalez, shot in the head by a border agent; silence greeted crying children Trump exploited to blame Democrats without cause.
11
According to CNN, we spend about 3.6% of GDP on defense, whereas Germany spends about 1.2% of GDP, well below the previously agreed upon rate of 2%. Why are we, at this day and age, still spending so much more than any of our allies? Just how much $ would we be able to direct to health care and education if we spent the NATO guideline of 2%?
11
You have a good point. Our military spending ($647 billion) is more than the next ten countries in the world combined. China is number two at $151 billion. Russia spends $47 billion. In 2017, the EU spent a combined $258 billion on defense, the majority of which is spent on resisting Russia. It would appear to be sufficient. We have approximately 800 foreign military bases in 70 countries around the world. The public doesn't even know about some of the small secret bases. No other country has more than ten. We have more than 30 bases in Germany. Where would we put those if we didn't have NATO?
5
You spend too much. Far more than necessary (and not all of that money is to protect Europe). Is it true that the US spends four times as much as China and Russia combined? Europe alone spends far more than Russia.
1
The 2% goal was for 2024. Your most smart el presidente most conveniently forgets that...or most likely he has never read the briefing note.
1
Translation: Trump wants NATO allies to buy more US weapons - and natural gas, apparently.
No thanks.
How about the US lowers its military spending to 2% of GDP and invests in infrastructure and education instead?
83
Agreed, but good luck with that when even so-called "progressive" Senators, in totally safe seats, such as Vermont's Bernie Sanders, put the military Keynesianism of Lockheed's budget-busting F-35 fighter jet and its basing ahead of the health and home values of thousands and thousands of his own constituents. Including, unfortunately, the very demographics people like Bernie and Democrats like Patrick Leahy pretend to champion, i.e., the working poor; immigrant refugees; the elderly; and veterans.
1
No doubt Trump had to sign the declaration, otherwise he would completely reveal his cards of who is allies and enemies really are.
Why do I get the feeling that behind closed doors, Trump and Putin's initial greeting on July 16 won't be a handshake but rather a high-five.
31
If Trump wants to fault Germany as "captive of Russia" for energy needs, clearly in the same breath he must acknowledge America is captive to China and other large purchasers of our national debt because we can't get our own house in order with spending.
27
If you look at the numbers of dollars each NATO country spends vs. the USA, either in terms of dollars or as percentage of GDP, Trump is overwhelmingly correct. If speaking the truth to power is a good thing when people confront Trump, isnt it also a good thing when Trump confronts EU with hard irrefutable numbers? I think that it is way overdue. These are our friends, cant they hear the financial truth without our relationship being damaged? If not, they are not the friends we pretend.
12
If Dems and Reps can't agree on Europe or the French to pay more, were doomed.
4
France is a power with enough nuclear weapons to pretty much take out either the US or Russia. If you think they need us you are wrong.
1
Much ado about nothing.
NATO members should be paying 4% GDP.
13
Why?
The US spends less than 4% (current spending about $660B or ~3.25%
The agreement is 2% and the US for its own reasons spends more.
Also the combined spending of Russia and China is only ~$300B so already NATO outspends them by about 3:1
7
More like 1.5%. Reasons- world spending on military has been dropping, year by year, since 1960 when it was 6% to around 2% now. By 2024 it will average about 1.5%. That percentage of rich Western economies with our technology edge will be unbeatable for all practical **defensive** purposes. 2% of a Latvia or Estonian economy will buy nothing, but 1% of a German economy can move mountains. For offensive purposes, probably more money would be required, but NATO is not supposed to be an expeditionary force of privateers.
3
Arguably the Crimea annexation is a direct result of the $5bn that the US covertly spent to flip Ukraine, so more money spent by hostile outside actors does not necessarily benefit people, either inside NATO or outside (like Ukrainians).
3
Russia would be a great relationship and I want to get along with Russia , well why is that when he is trashing his allies.
Has he ever said it would be great to have a great relationship with Canada or the EU. No he has not , probably because the Russians helped him get elected and they will help him get elected in subsequent elections
7
This emperor continues his program of naked greed: And which country will benefit most from NATO's increased military budgets? That's right!
15
Trump's aggrieved based does realize, don't they, that even if every one of those NATO allies meets his defense spending demands, it wouldn't put a dime in American taxpayers' pockets? That's because Trump himself demands that American taxpayers spend billions MORE on defense, including our European bases, and almost every member of Congress will vote for every increase in military spending their colleagues and the Pentagon beg for. If Trump was proposing a dollar for dollar decrease in our own military spending for every dollar more our allies spend on their own defense, I could go along with his bully talk to NATO. But it's all just bully talk now. No payoff for American taxpayers.
6
US 5 percent of world population. 1 percent of that controls 50 percent world economy. Very unfair!!!
9
The last several administrations complained about the same thing. But they were wise enough to know that there must remain this interdependence within NATO nations. It is far from "obsolete." It is my understanding since the 2% ruling went into effect I believe under President Obama, our allies have been honoring it. Trump is a bully and a thug. He is playing to his base whom I believe are ignorant of the facts, real ones, not the skewed or exaggerated spins and opinions on FOX News.
Keep in mind, too, that he will be meeting with his mentor of all things corrupt and oppressive in but a few days. He has to kow tow to Putin for whatever reasons to stay in his good graces. Perhaps he figures impugning words toward our allies will work. However, Putin knows that words are no more worth his while than a dried dandelion weed. Trump may huff and puff, but it is Putin who will do the blowing.
10
The other members of NATO with the possible exception of Britain and France have allot of catching up to do. When you think about it, they benefit in an incredibly distorted way and should probably pay more that a flat rate. Membership in NATO means the USA with by far the most powerful military on earth will come to their aid. The USA has a military that has developed incredible superiority starting during Word War II and ever since. The real question to ask other NATO members is what is that worth to you. It cant be a flat rate. They get way more security by being in NATO than we do. Lets face it, we can go it alone. Most of the other countries can't with the possible exceptions of Briton and France. But they prefer us to be there also. The question to be put to other NATO members is what is it worth to you to have the USA backing you up
5
Trump is a puppet president. He doesn't have an original intellectual thought in his head to share. He uses verbal bully tactics that put others on the defensive to give him an edge. His point about percentages makes no sense... he wants more money on the table to defend agains the dictators he's befriending?? Please, folks, read between Trump's lines.
8
Separate from how Trump handled the issue.
1. With Germany having the strongest econ ol my of Europe, and some other nations already meeting the 2 % minimum guideline, should Germany pay at least 2 %?
2. Should Germany support a pipeline from Russia that enters no other Nato countries on the basis that it give Russia influence over Germany?
While President Trump may not handle these issues the way you would like, it is more important that he is the only Nato country to significantly high light Germany's behaviors.
What is more important here, feelings or Western Security?
5
Either that or he just wants them to pay commensurate with the benefit they get by being in an alliance with the USA. Seems like that would be worth allot more than they pay now. After WWII we took care of Europe because it couldn't take care of itself. That was 70 years ago and they have been playing us all these years pretending they just could't pay up. The USA swallowed it hook line and sinker for our own reasons. It allowed us to basically dictate terms to other NATO members. But we shouldn't be doing this anymore. Europe is wealthy and should be taking on their share of the burden unless they really want to go it alone.
2
The rest of the world needs to realize and understand that they are dealing with an ignorant, clueless man in Donald Trump. Ignore the cretin, get on with what needs to be done. He is irrelevant and counts for nothing. In this way, the world can move on, and this infantile little baby can be ignored. He's a sad, insecure, and a very stupid man. He is a passing clown, a joke, pie in the sky. Forget him and he'll soon go away. A bad dream, a nightmare.
Rest easy, there is still hope for this world without Donald Trump.
11
There is no easy way to discuss hard topics. Quiet diplomacy in the past regarding this issue has yielded vague promises from allies matched by no action whatsoever.
Trump's bluster is a negotiating tactic, and the only way to negotiate meaningfully on meeting mutual obligations is to threaten departure if those obligations aren't met. This is so obvious that it shouldn't be be controversial, but of course the New York Times exercises its opposition to all things Trump by amplifying the noise around even the most trivial diplomacy.
8
Other NATO countries don't need to raise as much as the U.S. for defense spending because they don't start as many wars.
28
Great point. Their priorities seem to run more to infrastructure, education, etc., for their citizens. We, on the other hand, would rather put our money into the military industrial complex as Eisenhower warned about decades ago. The uber-wealthy here don't have to worry about our rotting bridges, inner city poverty, hungry kids, and all those pesky problems like us little people do. It's really sad watching us become a third-world country because of pure unadulterated greed.
2
Absolutely. Now since China and Russia are trump's good buddies, the US can stop worrying about world domination and most Americans can now worry about the future increase in the price of food.
4
Really Trump is proving to be the advocate of plutocratic policies. They lTrump is trying to increase the global arms trade, it seems. The percent of GDP spent on the military is not a true measure of military preparedness but it does mean more money going into arms industries. Trump’s misrepresentation of how this commitment affects how much any of the nations are contributing to the alliance is pure Trump lying to his gullible base, it does not. NATO countries allow the U.S. to keep bases on their territory and contribute to the costs of the U.S. troops deployed. This agreement to spend 2% on their own forces is represented as their obligations to the alliance, it’s really more symbolic that material to it. Now he’s using his malarkey to promote more arms trade amongst NATO allies.
10
"Mr. Trump was primed for confrontation before the gathering was ever called to order here in a large glass-and-steel NATO headquarters building that he has complained looks overly lavish."
Good grief, if the king of overdressed buildings thinks it was too snazzy, I'd love to see it, but next he'll be recommending they meet at Mar-a-Lago instead (and expect them to pay for the privilege).
7
Forget those sitting at NATO. Now that Trump has planted the seed in the minds of the American public that the reason we spend so much here on military and less on benefits like Medicare-for-all is so that Germany and France get to give it to their citizens for free and on our dime, and see what that grows into? For a developer he knows a lot about farming.
6
Hogwash. The citizens of those countries earned those benefits by paying taxes and those countries aren't the ones starting senseless wars like the ones in Iraq.
3
The Europeans pay for their medical,education, and social services through much higher taxation just like we do in Canada. There is no FREE there. The USA could have social services 1. if you wanted them 2.if your tax dollars were not subsidizing the poor, starved multi billionaires.
1
Talking tough before the Honeymoon in Helsinki.
Just saying.
8
Trump isn’t concerned about the cost of NATO to American taxpayers. Trump has a simplistic view of money matters, namely that if others can pay more, Trump can pay less. His bottom line is based in dollars, while the value of NATO is greater to all its members than can be summed on a simple bottom line.
He isn’t a good negotiator or a good economist. He need to be removed because he is doing damage to a great international asset.
7
Even when Trump does something that I might agree with, such as getting the NATO countries to increase their defense spending, he still manages to come off like an obnoxious boor. His incredible statement that "Russia controls Germany" because of their energy deal, given the fraught history between those two countries, is just one more indication of his almost willful ignorance. Also, given that DT is Vladimir Putin's puppet, irony just abounds.
12
Irish, how many things have you ever tried billed as “world’s greatest” even came close? Face it, obnoxious boors sell all the stuff that we buy specifically because they are and we do. Maybe on the stuff you buy it’s labeled “organic” instead.
Thomas Watson, the founder of IBM, famously said:
“…it's very difficult to build and very easy to destroy.”
Since the Bully in Chief came to power, he has chosen the easy path to destroy rather than work the tough road to build.
He first decided to destroy the legacy of Obama. He imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum imports on America’s industrial allies. Recently he plans to destroy America and the Western World through a trade war by imposing various rounds of tariffs on China. And now he demands that US’s NATO allies double their military spending targets to 4% of GDP.
I have come to the conclusion that he is fundamentally LAZY as well as being very STUPID.
If he and America have a legitimate complaint against China for theft of intellectual property, the correct route to resolve that problem is through the WTO and registering a complaint through the international court on trade of the WTO. This would take time, and I believe that the US would win the court’s decision against China. But the Bully in Chief is impatient and wants results NOW … but he has no tolerance for negotiation and diplomacy. The guy has NO allies domestically or internationally. He has isolated himself in a silo and accepts advice or counsel from no one.
The Deal Maker in Chief tried to game the system many times and went bankrupt four times !!!
The only course of action is impeachment. The two houses will have to focus on his destructive and damaging actions against America.
9
We ain’t seen nothing yet.
Wait till he threatens to renege on our national debt.
11
$618B * 3.57% = 2.00% * ??? :: the answer is the United States would save $272B if we would just contribute 2% to NATO rather than demanding every one else pay more. The list of domestic expenses currently below the line could be chopped down significantly. Our leader is sharp as an arrow WAY OVERSHOOTING the target.
3
Well Well Well..... How long did he make it without mentioning "Russian collusion"?
He thinks making the accusation at Germany isn't the same thing as his constant mentions of it until I pointed out that he literally mentioned it in every single public appearance regardless of topic or audience since his inauguration. So what was it? 3 weeks and he broke down?
So maybe I am wrong about him after all and he can't change he can only white knuckle it until his willpower breaks.
The knowledge is satisfying but I can't use it to get rid of him and his cabal. Can any of you? We need an honest president again. Lets do a grass roots write in campaign for Jimmy Carter!
Apparently Mr trump is going to make our economy robust by selling military hardware to our bullied allies. I long for the day when a world leader tells this buffoon to step off and tend to his own problems.
6
simple why he would like the non warrrior, Trump his a warrior, trump would like to sell more arms to kill people and none of these country carry guns like in the State.
1
Hypocritical that NATO must pay up when Trump has stiffed so many NY & NJ contractors/suppliers/vendors.
3
We need to cut our defense spending, not encourage others to spend more. We need to devote funds and people to education, scientific research, infrastructure, health care, etc.
65
Trump has the ability to pick valid issues, the twist them in invalid ways. He conveniently leaves out any assessment of the value of NATO.
The real question should be, why doesn't the US scale back defense? Don't we have better things to spend the extra borrowed money on?
34
Absolutely not. We are a force of good with a global military presence. It's very important for global stability that we keep that up, especially as China and Russia begin to modernize and expand militarily.
8
Let us recall that the founding of NATO was motivated by allying together to stand up to an aggressive Soviet Union which already occupied vast tracts of Eastern Europe, and to bring Germany into the fold so that it wouldn't once again go to war with The World.
Perhaps we can cut defense spending now that it appears that the Soviet Union is not so much of a threat anymore. As to our second motivation,,,,, we'll see.
5
What did you just step out of a time machine from 1990?
Russia AKA the USSR is still and has always been the greatest threat to world peace and Europe since 1917. have you not been reading or watching the news?
3
The old USSR had an ideology, Communism, that it was pushing. That is done now, even by China and North Korea. The only place where it is still a little bit alive is Cuba, and as soon as Castro drops dead, it'll be done there too.
Trump wants NATO gone because Putin wants it gone.
The U.S. spends 4% of their GDP on defense spending because it is big business and is an integral part of the U.S. economy. Nothing to do with NATO.
What Trump doesn't understand is that if he stops spending 4% of GDP on defense spending, he will end up with millions of unemployed servicemen and women, the GDP will actually shrink, and a recession will start.
But Putin will be happy. Defenseless borders in places like Latvia and Estonia will be overrun by Russia like the Crimea was in Ukraine. Trump's government will let it happen since some of the population of these countries speak Russian?
Most of the population of Canada speaks English so I guess that will be the rationale for the U.S. invading Canada?
16
The absolutely most wasteful government agency is the department of defense. My brother and I have both been employed in the aviation industry working on government projects and we both have stories to tell of incredible amounts of money being wasted on foolish projects that are often scrapped after billions are spent. I worked on the X47B prototype that cost billions, it was flown a few times and then parked.
My brother worked on a “top secret” project, the secret was it was a KC135 that was being converted to a luxury plane to tote a general around.
The military that spends a few nights in the Virgin Islands transiting to South America stays in the most expensive hotel on island.
I go go on and on and I only spent a few years working government projects. A visit to Gulfstream in Savannah would show numerous luxury airplanes in government livery. Scott Pruitt is not alone in thinking a government job is all about perks.
29
For a moment, imagine that we are reviewing the Captain of The SS USA, the largest and most potent Ship of State in the world.
History shows that this Captain had cut his teeth on smaller ships, 4 of which foundered and were less than seaworthy as the records show.
In such terms, the Captain is the one responsible, especially if mistakes in navigation and seamanship were involved, and the experts in the crew were ignored.
By such rules, the Captain has failed, and that anything he then does should be suspect to be in such a role.
Moving not only to history but now to battle issues where other member nations with whom the Ship of State is allied, are publicly chastised by this failed Captain.
Not only is this inappropriate, but is clearly not the way to reinforce the alliance.
Could this be what the flawed Captain intended all along?
As a crosscheck, it would seem that the success of the decades long coherent alliance comes in a very distant second to the Captain's assessment and behaviour with decades long enemies, whose actions and records are unreliable, and disruptive to a stressed alliance. Evidence a'plenty shows that the enemies both lie and declare that their agenda is intended to attack the alliance, overtly, or more likely covertly..
Why are we cozying up to enemies and publicly flogging the members of the alliance?
6
With the U.S., as currently personified by Trump, NATO has no need of an enemy.
11
“... the more tradtionally minded... “. As in, the more unacceptably deficient in their NATO financial support? Their more insulting, evasive ducking of responsibility for security in their hemisphere?
While his predecessors fumbled their way through years of dodging NATO nations’ cheating support, President Trump demands equality.
5
Trump's biography will be titled "Babbitt With a Bomb".
4
Trump's insisting EU nations spend 3.5% of GDP on defense is like an insane man insisting everybody has to share his delusions.
If he wants a safer world, Trump ought to stop supplying weapons to everybody, and scale back our own spending significantly.
Maybe pay for the occasional school or health clinic instead. Or a new bridge here and there.
23
Trump says we're paying to defend Europe. Yes. And no. We are paying to defend Europe, but we're really paying for our own security, ultimately. An unstable and violent Europe has cost the US much blood and treasure. NATO, US forward-based forces, and our security guarantees provide ballast to ensure that doesn't happen again. While I agree that NATO underfunds defense, it is not the simplistic notion Trump trumpets. Loudly. Nonstop. And why he trashes our allies and cozies up to autocrats...I guess I've given up trying to understand that one.
10
I wish the NYT asked sources in the Intelligence Community and Pentagon what they think of this Manchurian Candidate in the WH. It's obvious Trump plans to pull the US out of NATO, and let Putin seize the Ukraine, Baltics, and more.
I also want to hear from current Trump supporters on these latest developments, along with European voters.
America is as reliable an ally as whichever party controls the White House and Congress. The post-WW2 order is nearly shattered. The UK, France, and Germany (and hopefully the EU) may have to spend on their militaries as much as we do, to counter the threat from Russia -- possibly China.
3
I think one would have to be living under a rock not to understand why asking Germany to amp up its military spending could be problematic.
6
There is no method to Trump's madness. He is an unstable personality who uses conflict to make himself feel like a big man. That was fine when he was a sleazy real estate mogul and a second-string TV personality. But we are talking about the stability of the world here. Trump's need to tell people where to go is not something to be admired. It's trouble for the sake of stoking his fragile ego, while the peace and stability of the planet hangs in the balance. Such a danger to the world.
18
Thank God Angela Merkel has the well...let's just say temerity, that she does, to push back against our Bully in Chief. This meeting serves as yet another reminder that elections have consequences and now one of our consequences as Americans, is to feel an almost continuous wave of shame wash over us every time our President makes an appearance on the world stage. Can we all admit--I'm talking most specifically to you non-voters, and Bernie Bro's, that this would not be the case were a President Hillary Clinton sitting there. Come November, and in 2020, can we please all remember to vote-not for the perfect candidate (who does not exist), but for the one who believes in human dignity, and in tolerance, who is bright, qualified and respects the law, science and women? The one who is not racist? Can we do that please so this horror and embarrassment can end?
21
Eastern Block Countries should meet the 2% rule. They are the most vulnerable. Given their support for Trump, I would give them to Putin if they don't meet the minimum contribution to their defense.
The military-industrial complex has been getting a free ride on the taxpayers dollar. Europe was bribed, cajolled, and bullied into accepting whatever America thought was good for them.
8
time to get out of nato and bring all troops home; nato does nothing but feed the war machine and actually makes war more likely.
shut it all down and all nuclear powers should let it be known that tactical nukes will be used in its place. use brutal and completely crippling unified economic sanctions instead for anyone who strays.
1
Canada should meet its NATO spending obligations, of course, but Trump labelled Canada as a national security risk in justifying the start of an unnecessary trade war against the best neighbor the US could ever ask for. We were in two world wars long before the USA signed up, and we fought alongside the US in Korea and Afghanistan.
13
Fair share of what? The Pentagon budget?
3
Rarely if ever is any one issue, entity sitting all alone.
When countries consider such challenging issues like global partnerships, they consider everything at stake. To just blindly say that other countries don't step up their contribution to a military alliance is meaningless.
Somehow, I don't believe Trump & cronies understand this. It for sure is not as simple as 'twitter diplomacy' which the rest of the world considers to be garbage.
So will China just blindly come out and say, gee, USA, you never pay us back. Are we ever going to be paid? Ok, that's it. No more business, ever.
3
I guess it no longer means anything when our European NATO allies fight and die beside us in the Middle East and elsewhere when we have asked them for their help and blood. But why bother mentioning that? To the president, sacrifice and coming through for your allies mean nothing.
13
Per capita the US spends more than 10x as much money on the military as compared to Germany.
Free ride is over.
3
Do you really want Germany to become a military superpower again? That didn’t work out so well for the 455,000 American soldiers and the 105,000 Canadian soldiers who died in the last century’s two world wars.
1
Didn't trump just raise spending on our military? Last time I checked, NATO had nothing to do with this reckless decision.
"Germany in the grip of Russia".....This is so funny that I could roar with laughter. What does the Fifth Ave entertainer think of when he is throwing such a ridiculous argument in the direction of Ms. Merkel?
I remember well the research of sociologists ca. 30 years ago when the question came up: which group of immigrants made the United States great. The result: Germans. President Clinton presented this fact personally to the public.
So why is Trump cultivating such a hate against the country he himself is related to?
5
NO! NEVER!
We rather spend that money to educate our children, to give our people a proper health care, to help the poor & the hungry of the world, to take care of the environment!
3
Everything about this man is so beyond the pale that all one can do is immerse in the irony. e.g., the king of gold and glitter complaining that NATO headquarters looks overly lavish.
11
Go Trump!! Long overdue and needed. Post WW 2 order order needs to be updated.
4
The Europeans and NATO are milking us. Germany is a very powerful country and can handle any Russian threat. Why should they: when the have Uncle Sap. Wake up American taxpayers and military service man and women.
4
Trump demands that our allies double their military spending this year. Doesn't he know that our world already has nine countries with a total of 16,300 atomic bombs, not counting a few more countries we don't know about (if you don't believe this, you can, as the immortal Yogi Berra used to say: "you could look it up". One of these days a leader who is angry at his neighbor, or has had a touch too much to drink, will shoot off a nuke, and the other party will shoot one back in return, and there go any hopes to ever visit Mars, or even swim in the Great Lakes. Doesn't he know that the only two A bombs previously used against real targets DESTROYED two big cities in Japan?
Actually, he probably doesn't know, because, having been a draft dodger during a previous war, he never had the pleasure of fighting in real combat, the kind that kills people. He doesn't know that nuclear war in today's world would surely result in the death of a billion people, and destroy our environment for many, many years, if not destroy the whole world.
Trump is an arrogant, incompetent nitwit with an oversized view of his knowledge and ability. I believe that a man like him could destroy our world. And the nuclear buttons are at his beck and call in the White House. Pray that I'm wrong!
1
4
Let the Europeans pay their fare share to protect their borders
2
The bully lets his mask down at the cost of public approval. But what is behind Trump's mask? Nothing admirable. How long will McConnell and Ryan tolerate this buffoon strutting on the international stage?
4
The U.S. should reduce its military spending across the board. But we should maintain a formidable navy but not the vast armada we now sustain. We intervene in every conflict around the world because we want to, not because we have to.
7
We also intervene because we can, and the huge military expenditures and large standing military force from all branches means it is more likely to influence or even determine policy. In a take-off on the Field of Dreams mantra, "build it and he will come," we say "build more weaponry and foreign policy will follow." Not a good strategy for long-term societal health -- just ask the Romans. And when in the hands of our Caligulia-Nero-man-child president, that formula will keep me awake at nights.
3
Trump is still a moron and his 'disruption' is getting old. There are plenty of ways to press NATO allies on spending--as President Obama did more than 5 years ago-- without being a complete jerk. He truly is clueless in so many ways and just not that smart. The damage he is causing will long outlast him.
48
President Obama ultimately failed to get our NATO allies to meet their voluntary spending targets. After years of trying, in April 2016 out of frustration he called our allies "freeriders." Being polite did not solve the problem.
Russia could not be happier with Trump's performance in Brussels.
Whether through ignorance or malice, most likely a blend of the two, he has painted a false picture of the NATO Alliance for domestic consumption. Knowledgeable domestic observers are appalled at his failure to grasp the fundamentals of a multi-lateral mutual defense pact. The simple-minded "USA! USA! crowd are delighted at his fierce punching of a straw man of his own construction...they love a good show.
Let's make this simple. We have a major military presence in Europe because, if the bell should ring for a European conflict, we want personnel, equipment and facilities pre-positioned. It beats trying to air-lift a sufficiently potent force into place in time to make a difference. In the meanwhile, those facilities serve an important forward operating base function for activities we are carrying out (for better or for worse) in the Middle East and Africa.
We're not doing members of the NATO Alliance a favor from the goodness of our hearts. They're going us a favor, and reaping some benefits, by helping us ensure that the forward edge of the battle area will be in Europe and not in Massachusetts.
Contrary to the Trumpistas preferred casting...we are not exactly the "victim" here.
28
In addition, the security of NATO creates a safe haven for economies that welcome US businesses and US investment that turns a profit. The purpose post-war was to create a US-friendly sphere that was sympathetic and largely accommodating to US interests. It remains like this.
Threatened places do not really create good business, and vacuums always get filled. If the US sphere decides to retreat into the middle of the Atlantic, then maybe the power sphere of a Bear will fill that void. But maybe that’s the intention.
Mr.Trump should stay away from international gatherings.He is only happy when he is the center of attention and getting his way.He has never learned to cooperate or be conciliatory.The docile Republicans have given him a by so that he thinks he can bully Europe.He does not know the meaning of the word, "diplomacy".It is a sophisticated art which he will never learn.We have a lot to be ashamed of as Mr.Trump visits our friends around the world.
23
"our friends around the world" are rapidly dwindling in number.
The NATO secretary-general pointed this out to Trump today. Trump didn't get it, and went on in his usual arrogant, bullying manner.
I hope that the US will not need NATO assistance again, as in the case of 9/11.
3
"Nice little country ya got here, Latvia. It would be a shame if something happened to it. Ya need to trade more with the US. Gotta make a deal...a beautiful deal...with the best words. It's my touch, my feel; it's what I do."
Protection racket rhetoric. Stormy Daniels heard it (allegedly).
Every spending to make the world a better place should be considered. That includes development aid, refugee support, trade support.
That way we also would expand our influence in other parts of the world. And this is essential, since we face another competition for hegemony with countries like china or russia.
Trump only knows bombing into submission (like vietnam or iraq) or making buddies with people who may become tomorrows failed dictators (like Auguste Pinochet or Mohammad Reza Pahlavi).
Despite all his military muscle, the influence of the US in the world is waning. The US will become the mobster you call for some brawl, but who will be excluded from the daily life.
Lets hope europe stands strong to a more holistic approach for world safety.
7
The only fear for increasing the military budget of NATO members is Russia.Why can't all NATO embers sit with Russian leaders and have peace and friendly posture. Escalating and confrontational approach only will escalate and waste money depriving the poor and needy who needs it most. This is a failure and misuse of democratic processes when government leaders do not work with all and the one's who need most to survive.
How does significantly increasing the amount of guns, tanks and fighter jets in Europe make Americans any safer? It seems to me Trump's demands are only going to make things less safe in Europe and do nothing for America.
3
Trump tells NATO, "double your defense spending," knowing that no such thing is remotely possible. But if Russia's plans include moves against any of the Baltic nations, he can say, "I told you to increase your spending, this is what you get, you deserve it, and the US is not going to be part of the response."
1
The US defense budget currenty sits at 3,5%. Why would the NATO countries consider doubling their share, if not even the US is meeting this threshold?
1
We need to CUT defense spending, and narrow that "debt gap", of which our fake president seems so obsessed. There is NO NEED to spend any more on defense. NONE.
12
Fiction in film,
The Manchurian Candidate,
and in literature,
The Plot Against America,
feels frighteningly and
hauntingly truthful.
Trump, his base and
the Republican establishment
are on their way to repealing
Roosevelt's "New Deal". They
will have their conservative
Supreme Court and recent
judicial appointments
to change America. The poor
will be poorer, the unhealthy
will be sicker.
It is incomprehensible that
NATO and our Allies are
targets for Trump's bombast
as he prepares to meet Putin,
his "easy" meeting.
Let Trump visit Poland, Latvia,
the Czech Republic and Hungary
to learn of the citizen's lives
when their countries
were Soviet satellites.
My quote of the day,
from Philip Roth, "...the
unfolding of the unforeseen
was everything. Turned wrong
way round, the relentless
unforeseen was what we schoolchildren
studied as "History," harmless
history, where everything
unexpected in its own time
is chronicled on the page
as inevitable. The terror
of the unforeseen is what
the science of history hides,
turning a disaster into an epic."
(The Plot Against America)
I fear for our future.
8
Increase their military spending...now who could possibly benefit from that?
7
All of the free world could benefit. The folks in Crimea would agree.
5
Trump is demanding protection money! This is the way it’s done in the New York - New Jersey area! This reflects his Bully mind set.
He has no idea what an alliance is, and how it benefits all the members.
18
The current US military, rather than being exploited by Europe, seems to be of no use to the rest of NATO whatsoever.
We are hardly secure in relying on being defended by a country that isn't even prepared to defend itself from blatant foreign interference. The chances of the current administration actually taking any action to defend its allies under its NATO obligations must be slight, given the utter disregard for international treaties and the complaisant attitude towards aggressive dictators. It may, regrettably, be time to reconstitute NATO as a smaller but more reliable organisation for countries that take their treaty obligations seriously and leave the US's 'huge' military for its president to play toy soldiers with.
4
Diplomacy over decades of common cause and blood sacrifice is being shredded by a sociopath who is reduced to defense by scorched-earth offense as he flails desperately, way over his pay grade and irrelevant but for the nuclear codes given him by 29% of the US electorate.
Trump has no clue that the courtesy and deference he's accorded as US President is a direct result of the role we seized after WW2 as global hegemon. We wanted a bulwark against Russia and China so we recruited Western Europe to be our body-shields against the Soviets (with Germany hosting 34 US military facilities), and set up permanent forward bases in the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Indian Ocean, Kuwait, Bahrain et.al., to contain China. We also maintain weapon and munition stocks in numerous countries.
It's reasonable to say the US weaponized much of the world for its own security as well as to protect its access to raw materials essential as the world's reference economy.
Our other agenda was to block Germany and Japan from re-militarizing with their own ambition as alphas, like the US, to do as they want without having to be nice.
The lie was the world wanted us to protect them when what we wanted was to dominate them. Worked well for both, with a few nasty hiccups.
NATO should wise up and deal directly with Putin. Trump's just a middleman on commission.
13
"... Mr. Trump made it clear that he had come to Brussels as a virtual pariah among allies, and was perfectly happy to be seen that way."
That's the same bad attitude Trump took to the G7, where he was gratuitously offensive and standoffish. The inane, petty fights which Trump picks will leave him with no credibility should there be a legitimate grievance - and few allies to rely on when catastrophe strikes.
17
This is what the 34th President of these United States warned us in his farewell speech to the nation on January 17, 1961 General Dwight D Eisenhower (Republican) warned us against these mega entrepreneurs of the Military Industrial Complex taking shape throughout the world particularly in our country, he said,
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."
http://bit.ly/2LajApy
We are being guided by the Military Industrial Complex, whose only product is the manufacture of killing machines of all sorts, MIC was responsible for the elimination of draft as it was hampering its growth, MIC now controls the standing Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. MIC ensures that their product are used constantly. Although the US is not technically at war for the last 50 years but we are fighting in over 120 countries worldwide.
NATO is just a part of that elite MIC group which keeps on pushing people of the world towards war so that they keep using the products of the MIC.
Maybe some of the EU countries are correct in reducing their Military spending and increasing their social services spending as it benefits their population and is not used to kill others.
We as a nation must oppose war in all its forms. Give peace a chance.
4
NATO was formed to protect Europe against Russia. Our president seems to be a great friend of Putin. When he meets with him next week he should have him sign a piece of paper and make a hand shake to not do any more bad things. The need for NATO gone. Everyone saves money. Winning.
1
Agreed except that NATO was formed to protect Europe from the Warsaw Pact 1955-1991. That Pact was dissolved shortly before the Soviet Union disappeared, which was when NATO lost its mission and became another floundering bureaucracy. Invite Russia to join NATO.
1
This is classic Trump: Berate your allies, political or international, then do nothing to correct the "situation" he's attacked.
It's an empty drum that makes the most noise.
9
Every day is a new low. I feel like the country is in a war, but our own president is the enemy. Can not wait until November to stop this monster. Do nothing Democrats not working for Russia to actively harm the country sounds great at this point.
8
Time for Russia to join NATO! Makes more sense than continuing the original mission 1955-1991: confronting Warsaw Pact tanks with tactical nuclear weapons.
1
Weapons mean big bucks. Trump is just trying to fill the pockets of his elite friends.
1
Well Donald, you could cut our defense spending.
8
The president's attacks on NATO allies to pony up more money for military spending are designed to win brownie points from his comrade when they meet in Helsinki. His embrace of Putin and his withdrawal from our traditional and trustworthy allies is a pattern that began with the G-7 summit when he trashed the Canadian Prime Minister on his own soil. He's making America obsolete on the world stage.
9
Trump is way way over his head in these scenarios, as a failed real estate tycoon (5 bankruptcies), failed casino operator and laughable reality tv host with zero military, government or foreign policy experience. A tragic situation.
I'm not aware of any way to insure that candidates running for president are qualified to be president. Obviously the party nomination process - which Trump turned into a theatrical freak show involving threats, insults and outrageous pronouncements - failed this country miserably - as did the Electoral College which exists to protect us from having an unqualified person or nut (Trump is both) from becoming president.
How do we reach the millions of Trump voters who watched Trump during the ridiculous GOP primaries & watched Trump stalking Hillary Clinton while turning their debates into something resembling WWW wrestling - with Trump threatening Clinton with imprisonment & calling her insulting names - & convince them that voting for Trump as a 'protest' or way to 'stick it to the elites' has resulted in the most dangerous and unqualified president in our history?
Are we trapped in this mess now because these voters triumphed in 2016 and may re-elect Trump as a protest against ways they believe they've been slighted? Because honestly, who else voted for Trump?
This is deeply depressing and discouraging. You would hope people would always vote to protect our democracy. But apparently there's no longer a guarantee.
9
I hope that the NATO nations at the meeting didn't share anything sensitive with Trump. He will be reporting everything to his boss, Putin soon. I'm counting on the CIA bugging Trump so that someone looking out for America will know what he's talking about and plotting with Putin.
Laughable to hear Trump, Putin's puppet, chiding Merkel for being controlled by Russia.
7
What a great idea, the world needs so many more guns, bombs and weapons. This Stone Age thinking from Trump echoes his NRA alliance and I'm sure is also motivated by the belief that the USA presumes much of this money will flow to its arms dealers and manufacturers. It's so sad that this man has put the world on a path of aggression and distrust based on his endless threats and lies. America is no longer the beacon on the hill, playing a stupid short term game while much smarter people and countries patiently build a much more powerful and sustainable future.
3
Or...how about we start spending less on defense? Heck, at least stop the projects that the military doesn't want, for crying out loud!
6
I agree nato should go. and almost all udefence spending too. talk about corporate welfare. imagine the health care and infrastructure we could have. wait, nah. let’s just kill people so corporations can profit.
4
The underlying premise of America's call for its allies to pay more is that "this is our common defence." There is nothing common about it. America decides who it is going to attack, who it is going to provoke, and who it is going to support, with no concern for the what other countries might be injured in the fallout. When the US built 30,000 nuclear warheads, we were all in harm's way, but no one asked us whether that many warheads was safe or sane. If the US president starts a nuclear war, we all die, but none of us outside the US get to vote for president. When Kennedy invaded Cuba, no one asked us if we were prepared to accept the risk of a nuclear show down. When Johnston and Nixon bombed N Vietnam, no one asked us if that reflected shared values. When the US attacked Iraq, we were all less safe from terrorism, but we were all ignored, and none of us got to vote on whether Bush II would be rewarded by re-election. When the US backed Georgia against Russia in Osetia and S. Osetia, no one asked us whether poking Russia was a good idea. When Trump provokes N Korea, or attacks whoever he is going to attack, we can be damn sure he will not consider anyone but himself -- certainly not us.
So, if America wants to spend 4% of its GDP on weapons, that is your decision. But don't expect us to be equally wasteful, especially not on the theory that we are all in this together.
7
Trump will be gone soon enough. NATO should tell him to take a flying leap, or at least politely ignore him until his dreadful presidency comes to an end.
" ... believes that attacking Europe and NATO play well with his political base." Mr. Trump seems to think he is the president of about 40% or less of the United States. "Never in modern times has an occupant of the Oval Office seemed to reject so thoroughly the nostrum that a president’s duty is to bring the country together. Relentlessly pugnacious, energized by a fight, unwilling to let any slight go unanswered, Mr. Trump has made himself America’s apostle of anger, its deacon of divisiveness." (Peter Baker, NYTimes) Add in his narcissistic and histrionic personality disorders, plus a growing god complex, and it gets appalling.
6
He is trying to create a backlash. He wants to give ammunition to the far left so they can cut off spending entirely. A gift to the Kremlin.
" largely reaffirmed existing commitments"
All this posturing and crazy theatrics, and nothing? Just like with Kim Jong Un summit?
3
He wants them to spend more so the good ole usa war machine can profit more from being by far the leader in arming the world. Blood for profit.....so much winning!
1
Not much stuff in this for a new John le Carre novel. It is far too evident who the mole/traitor is.
4
The European NATO countries are already spending more than 4 times as much on their military as their enemy the Russians. It is an absolute idiotic thing for them to spend any more on feeding the American military industrial complex. The problem is that US is trying to have an aggressive military presence in the whole world and, therefore, spend a lot more than any country would need to spend on its defense. Now we are demanding that NATO should shoulder the cost of that lunacy. Sad that they are nice enough to not just give us the finger.
5
trump has an innate paranoia that everyone is out to get him and unless he has a clear upper hand in dollars it's not a win. He's not very intelligent. Only a couple more years before Biden eats his lunch.
3
To all present and future NATO Members; Americans do not believe anything Trump says and neither should you.
4
NATO allies press America to stop wasting so much bloody needless money on the Military Industrial Complex.
1
How about all countries agree to a defense cut. An arms race is such a waste.
13
Precisely. While we Americans can be easily duped into enabling bloated military budgets exceeding the next ten or twelve biggest spenders combined (though screaming bloody murder at any suggestion to spend even a fraction of that amount on universal access to health care), it does not follow that people living in countries with a proportional, collective approach to national defense should surrender their good sense and inflate their military budgets to match ours, just because our current Bloviator-In-Chief does not play well with others.
Trump, a national embarrassment. a while ago he said Russia had every right annexing Crimea since it was disputed land and Russian speaking. IMO, he was actually right, but will change his mind like on this issue on every other day to make himself look good.
I don't like to use slang dissing words but Tillerson his ex. sec. of state had it right when he called him a moron.
All Nato members pay their dues. Dispute a non binding commitment re military spending they really don't want to have a bloated military like we have. They want to give included higher education and health care to their citizens while we live in the Middle Ages re these issues.
12
typo despite not dispute...
1
Trump's claim that Germany is somehow held hostage by Russia is absurd. An evaluation I read today stated that about 12% of Germany's energy needs are being met by the natural gas coming from Russia; significantly more is from the burning of coal as Germany has moved away from nuclear power plants; and a growing healthy portion is coming from renewable energy.
Another evaluation of Trump's recent speech to his adoring fans in Montana revealed that 76% of his statements were either totally false or misleading. There is no reason to believe anything this man says. His goal, among others, is to ensure that each of his inane and ignorant remarks is plastered on the front page of every world newspaper every day.
Whatever claims The Donald makes about other nations in the European Union should be met with skepticism, if not outright disbelief.
Time to call the Carnival Barker for who he is, a salesman and an experienced conman.
54
Agree with Tim 100% except for the term salesman. Top people in sales build trust by using a logical presentation of features and benefits to persuade someone to meet a need. Trump knows lies and bullying, not selling.
3
That is a good distinction, Mike, between Trump and ethical sales people. Trump in his simplest form is just a seller of all things Trump.
The United States spends much more on the military because of our effort to dominate the world. The best solution would be for the USA and other NATO members to agree all of the countries should meet the 2% of GDP target on military spending - both as a minimum and maximum target. The USA should reduce military spending spend the funds on health care, infrastructure, education, and social programs, which would do much more to enhance security for US citizens.
35
This is coming from a guy who thinks building a wall is a defensive action worthy of expending ten's of BILLION'$ on. America's expenditures on NATO isn't a result of their lacking the will or desire to defend themselves, it's the result of the US wanting the best and the most of everything for our adventures in places other than Europe.
I would really be interested in knowing where, exactly, that money ends up getting spent. The defense of Europe or the defense and upgrades for American actions in other places, including the continental US.
46
And placing Tariffs on Imports from Canada is for National Security. Canada is our best friend.....at least it was until Trump made them the enemy because Trudeau is young and handsome.
3
Our bases in Africa, the Middle East, and Europe made the war for freedom possible in Iraq, and have given us almost two decades of winning in Afghanistan. Mexico is paying for the Wall, what's the downside of spending somebody else's money?
1
I agree that our bases all over the world are not only necessary but are desirable from the standpoint of America's security ...but that doesn't answer the question of why Trump is denigrating our European allies by claiming they "aren't holding up their end". They are not only holding up "their end" they are helping us hold up OUR end while we spend money on doing other things.
btw ... Mexico is not paying for the wall. Anyone who still believes they are is far more gullible now than when they initially voted for Trump.
It is a protection racket. Europeans are rich enough to pay more for their own defense.
12
Europeans are already are paying over 4 times as much for defense as their only enemy - the Russians. They are even carrying a fairly large amount of the expenses for letting US have forward bases for its projection of power into North Africa and the Middle East. You are right its a protection racket - Trump demanding protection of the American weapons manufacturers. Just like his attack on Germanys import of about 35% of its natural gas from Russia was a protection racket for the uncompetitive liquid natural gas operations in the US. Drain the swamp - drain Trump!
5
How about this idea. Stop provoking conflict all over the world and you don't need a super military. Apart from creating more human misery than it's purports to prevent, the USA with all it's might hasn't won a war in decades. Time to consider peace and alignment of interests and sharing of wealth might deliver better results with fewer casualties.
5
If it's a protection racket, then consider where the money is going.
Military spending feeds directly into the US military-industrial complex.
His personal qualities aside, Trump is shining a harsh light on a reality that probably can't be sustained and should be looked at as coldly and honestly by Europe as it is by Trump.
NATO was created to prevent Soviet Russian encroachment on more of Europe. The Soviet Union is no more, and despite energetic efforts by Western governments and media to make us believe that the threat still exists, it's clear to most of us that Russia under Putin doesn't present anything like a similar threat (every single thing he has done militarily has been defensive in nature, from Ukraine to Syria--and would be done by the USA faced with similar situations).
The question NATO members dare not ask (with the exception of Trump) is: "Why continue with NATO as it is, with all its expenses and questionable goals? Would not the EU be better off creating its own defensive pact and getting rid of its humiliating and frustrating dependence on the USA?" (and there's no need for Canada to be involved either).
European leaders shouldn't wait to be abandoned even more humiliatingly by Trump; they should tell him (and the USA): "Thanks for all you've done to protect us in the past. Times have changed and we now need to forge an independent European military alliance. Once we've done that, we can talk about a new military alliance with any other country that shares our interests."
43
Are you kidding me? Does either Croatia or Ukraine ring a bell? Or the fact that Russia has interfered in European and American elections? And continues to support Assad? All of these are huge threats to the US as well as to other democracies around the world. And let's not forget to mention that I, and many others, believe that Trump is beholden to Putin due to blackmail, loans, or money laundering. Go NATO!
1
With no NATO Russia will invade adjoining countries. Then you will see U.S. spending exceed our NATO contributions by 100-fold to pay for multiple wars.
Annexing Crimea was defensive??
1
The US spends more on defense than NATO members (or any other country for that matter) because it wants to. it is considered macho to increase defense spending, sometimes beyond even what is needed, and it is also a form of defense - industry welfare. Obviously European countries do not feel that same need. And although the US spends more than the 2% called for, let's not pretend that it all goes to NATO. The US has armed forces spread throughout the world an at home, and no one can argue that all of our defense spending is earmarked for NATO.
173
US defense spending goes directly to US military contractors and weapons factories. It's money injected directly into the US economy - economic stimulus.
Of course the US would like other, smaller countries to spend a similar percentage of their own GDP on US-made weapons. Of course the US would like everyone to commit 2% of their GDP to the US arms industry.
How "fair" that is or not really depends on who's selling the hardware.
24
I don't hear anyone saying that all of our massive defense budget is for NATO. We spend 3.5% on NATO while the EU is at 1.5% and they have been increasing their spending over the past four years to target 2% in five years. We do spend far more on NATO than the EU. They should spend a bit more and we should spend less.
1
The president needs to start cooperating more with our NATO allies instead of seeming to so often being intent on disrupting, dismantling, and pulling apart this important coalition which is vital to our national interests. It is positive that he signed the NATO declaration agreeing to the basic principles and goals since it is a mutually beneficial alliance that continues to keep peace.
The president needs to stop playing to his base and do what is beneficial to the whole country and start operating with real governance, planning and analysis, and acting less impulsively while following the advice of Congress and the resolution they passed yesterday 97 to 2 supporting NATO.
70
It is true that the US spends more. Thus, there is a better to communicate this info than under the camera, That is not the way to communicate or negotiate out in the open. This attitude will influence the BASE of every nation.
The president needs to start; change; improve ; etc.which is impossible. Change your president before it's too late!!!
4
If a decade ago, Putin had sat down to write a script about how to destabilize NATO and neutralize American power, he could never have come up with a character so well suited for the role as Trump. The damage is irreparable. Even after this joke of a president is gone, the Western allies will always be forced to wonder whether the U.S. is only an election away from lifting another psychotic to our highest office.
42
Putin is Russia's mob boss and Donald Trump was kept afloat by Russian mob money for a lot longer than ten years.
1
I.m wondering what the UK needs with more than two (one more comes in 2020) carriers to defend itself and its NATO partners in Europe.
Germany is not captive to Russia, but it does appear more clearly everyday that Mr. Trump and his family interests align with Russian interests.
Separately, the NATO commitment is a problem. To confirm 2% of your GDP on defense spending, without a war to fight and for the sake of readiness would represent a surmountable arms buildup. 4% even more so. Who are we collectively planning to attack? It would make more sense for the US to decrease its spending to 2% and spend the billions normally spent on defense and apply it to infrastructure projects the US needs to maintain a robust economy.
140
They say in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king. After the 97 to 2 vote in the Senate I wonder how many Republicans understand that Russia is functioning on the GOP model for the economy and social and political norms.
From here it looks like your police, military, courts and religious beliefs the GOP wants for the USA the society Russia has developed since the communists were thrown out in 1991.
It seems it is only Donald Trump and his team of would be oligarchs who understand the game plan but maybe the GOP thinks the cold war still makes Russia a dirty word.
The Christian right in Russia the Russian Orthodox Church is the official State religion, the Russian Courts take their marching orders from Putin and racism is not only condoned but encouraged from the highest office in the land. Money is ever more concentrated in fewer and fewer hands and elections become less credible with each passing year. Am I not to believe my lying eyes or is there something I am missing that would make me believe that the USA is an evolving liberal democracy?
May be I am wrong but I believe a large number of Americans are fed up we the complexities of democracy and would prefer a Trump, McConnell, Pence, or Cruz to tell them how to live their lives and that might be Obama's and the Democrats real problem.
23
"US to decrease its spending to 2%"
The military-Industrial complex would veto this.
1
He is right on this, particularly given Merkels naive and dangerous decision to allow millions of thirdworld immigrants some from radically Muslim countries to destroy Europe.
Why should we pay our tax money to defend such crazy policy?
6
Ask yourself why so many from the Middle East are fleeing their countries. It's all because your country illegally and unconscionably invaded and destroyed and otherwise stable country, Iraq. This created a power vacuum and fro this IS and the Syrian conflict were born. Instead of criticising Merkel for taking in refugees from this mayhem, how about your country does something too and uses its money to pay for the damage and suffering it caused in creating this. Your country owes the world a great debt, and it should not be paid in weapons.
6
The US spends 3.5% of GDP on defense because we maintain a global military presence and deterrent. NATO allies do not. NATO allies only maintain a North Atlantic defensive posture. Germany not maintaining sufficient fighter jets to meet their share of the NATO defensive plan means we must, and we do. President Obama recognized this and negotiated the change to the Treaty requiring the 2% spending requirement. our NATO allies agreed and quietly ignored it. Trump is calling them out on this.
President Obama chided Germany for building a dependance on Russian oil and gas. Germany has ignored President Obama's expressed concerns, Trump is calling them out on it.
Sure Trump is crass in his delivery but substantially Trump is perfectly aligned with President Obama on these issues.
39
Mmmmm - a bit of background about NATO's activities OUTSIDE that "North Atlantic defensive posture".
NATO did lead the original intervention in Afghanistan, where " NATO led the UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) from August 2003 to December 2014".
and currently leads
"The Resolute Support mission (RSM) is a new NATO-led mission to train, advise and assist the Afghan security forces and institutions. The
mission was launched on 1 January 2015, immediately following the stand-down of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)."
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_8189.htm
I counted at least 14 NATO members involved in Operation Enduring Freedom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participants_in_Operation_Enduring_Freedom
and current countries in Afghanistan are here https://www.bbc.com/news/world-41014263
Again I counted at least 14 who are members of NATO.
As an aside - Australia is the eighth-largest contributor there.
NATO operatives are elsewhere on the planet beyond Europe...Afganistan...Canada is going to Mali and Iraq. Trump just wants everybody else to waste their social capital on munitions. Think of early in his so called presidency...I.forget who it was...leader of Japan or China at mira lago .when he burned through mega millions firing multiple missiles on Syria to show his potency.
One thing for sure after he is gone...hopefully soon...he will serve as a text book for abnormal psychology...not just malignant narcissism and sociopathy...Accusing Merkel.and Germany of being run by Russia...a textbook example of PROJECTION!
1
What is the argument against NATO countries paying their fair share?
14
It begins by questioning what you mean by "fair share." Can you define it?
MIKEinNYC asks "What is the argument against NATO countries paying their fair share?"
Good question, Mike. Simple, but a good question. Yet to answer it, we need to get some clarification on some things.
For example, what total is to be divvied up to determine "fair share?"
Do we count gross expenditures or net expenditures? Net expenditures would be (e.g.,) American taxpayer dollars spent less the revenue collected by US defense contractors (which pay little or no taxes due to tax policy and good lawyers). After all, our economy benefits from our NATO allies buying our systems and equipment, don't we?
How do we allocate the enormous costs of the US Navy, deployed around the world, to NATO? We have more carriers (e.g, the new $16 billion USS Gerald Ford) than the next seven blue water navies in the world combined. How much of their cruising cost should be charged to NATO? What about our two new Virginia Class submarines ($2.7B a pop). Is NATO responsible for their construction or just operation costs during the time they are assigned to the North Atlantic?
With an eye on word count, going back to gross or net...do we credit our NATO allies with the costs of supporting the United States optional military adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq? Shouldn't they be able to deduct at least the former since they waded in on the strength of the NATO common defense clause?
Trump doesn't count it because he ran out of fingers and toes.
Simple?
One of the reasons Europe spends less on arms is their generous expenditure on national health.
Copying that would really make America great.
107
And they can do that because we provide for their defense. How about if Europe spends 3.5% of its GDP on defense so we can divert more money to social programs?
1
I am fairly much in agreement with Mr. Trump's objectives, however, I would respectfully recommend that he adopt a more conciliatory and respectful tone than he has thus far exhibited.
7
How about America raise its defense spending against election computer hacking and fake news assaults from domestic and foreign enemies of free and fair elections.
More traditional defense spending will just bankrupt everybody while Putin and Russian-Republican types rig elections worldwide.
Less tanks; more anti-cyber-terrorism spending, research and development.
The TrumPutin Dynamic Duo continues to wreck the free world.
146
Guys, put your bias aside for a second and think about what he's actually saying. I typically disagree with everything Trump says, but a broken clock is right twice a day, and Trump is 100% right on this issue.
First, NATO countries all need to adhere to the agreement set forth and contribute 2% of GDP to defense. The entire point of NATO is: if one member nation is attacked, ALL respond. How is it fair, then, if the US contributes 4% of its GDP but Germany only contributes 1.5% (not quoting actual numbers here, just guessing). All member nations are supposed to operate under a single defense umbrella, and therefore, the alliance would be even more formidable if all members built up a stronger military presence to counter Russia and China military R&D.
Second, Germany is extremely dependent on Russia for energy, with over 50% of its oil coming from Putin's state. If Russia were to cut off crude oil access to Germany in a time of war, it would absolutely decimate the local economy and military. This DOES undermine the goal of NATO - Germany would not be able to pull its weight in a time of war with Russia due to its energy reliance.
Yes the man is incapable of explaining why his points are valid, but in this case, he is actually pushing for a stronger NATO alliance and a stronger defense umbrella for the Western world, and this liberal is in agreement with Donald Trump!
16
This is hardly a subject where bias interferes with judgment. NATO's role containing Russia presents a longstanding and complex geopolitical assemblage. It fairly shouts for penetrating analysis, as it has -- and has received -- since Eisenhower's White House. Trump mouths memorized accusations, unnecessary to launch and barren of promise. We are not called upon to forgive that he is incapable of better.
And yet some of those countries Trump is attacking for not meeting the 2% threshold have already come to America's defence after 9/11. Germany and Canada, two of Trump's favourite targets both sent men and materials to Afghanistan and both had soldiers die in America's defence.
So come again how Trump is right?
6
Wow, you would think Germany, France and the UK didn't help after 9/11.
So far the only recipient of actual help as dictated by NATO (an attack one is an attack on all) has been the US.
If Europe and Canada want to spend their money on their own citizens instead of tools for war, it's not up to Trump or anyone else to tell them otherwise.
5
We have been subsidizing Europe since WWII. The reason they can afford the social programs they have is because they don't have to spend money on defense. They know we'll come to their rescue if needed. How fair is that? These are not Third World countries. It is time they pull their weight. Trump has the guts to tell it like it is.
9
You know what? We don't have to spend so much on defense either. We have no business approaching 4% of our GDP--who is going to attack us--and we too could afford any social programs we like if the political will were there. We aren't spending that much money just for Europe: how about the Middle East, Afganistan, and the Pacific?
1
Let's clarify some points:
First. The EU Nato members spend more on defense than Russia does.
Second. The EU military is larger than that of Russia, more planes, more naval capabilities, more manpower. Only lacking in tanks and nuclear weapons. But the EU has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world. Enough is enough I guess.
Russia is no longer the Soviet Union.
The main beneficiary of the Nato is the US. They get to sell weapons to the EU and their military presence in Europe is paid for by the EU countries.
So far the only one to ask for support from the Nato members has been the US. For illegitimate wars against for example Iraq and Afghanistan. European lives are lost to help the US wage their oil wars.
Also, the US lives on debt. Trumps tax reform is causing debt to rise, while at the same time planning to increase the US defense budget. Who do you think is going to buy that debt? Currently China and the EU are the biggest buyers of US debt. Therefore the US is getting money from the EU (and China) to increase their military spending.
As a EU citizen I would love that the EU stops being a member of Nato and starts their own Atlantic Treaty Organization, with Canada, without the US.
The US has been a danger to world peace by toppling democratically elected governments to advancing their own plans, for example in Vietnam, Iran and Iraq. Mostly to secure the flow of oil.
13
Excellent comment...the best I have read on this article. Totally agree.
1