Register to Comment
Page 2 of 41 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 410
Like Tree201Likes
  1. #11
    Nebuchadnezzar Nebuchadnezzar is online now
    Nebuchadnezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    10,159

    Quote Originally Posted by Old Mr Grouser View Post
    NATO's role now seems to be bombing Muslims: Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan.
    Would you rather that the USA, Russia or whatever else big power should be bombing without reference or consideration of any allies? ....because that is the prospect that we face if Trump disengages the US from NATO.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #12
    NYCKY NYCKY is offline
    NYCKY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    14,561

    Quote Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar View Post
    IMO as part of managing the Trump problem Europe needs to up its defence capabilities. Give Trump something that he can claim as a personal success at this meeting and so keep the USA committed to NATO. Donít give him the justification to walk away.
    IS it a Trump problem or a Europe problem?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #13
    NYCKY NYCKY is offline
    NYCKY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    14,561

    European countries need to do more when it comes to spending on their defense budgets. The 2% of GDP used to be a target now it's a requirement, agreed at the Wales NATO summit in 2014. That said, they gave themselves 10 years to achieve the targets i.e. 2024 and we are six years away from that.

    Three more countries will meet the target next year, bringing the total to eight countries. Obama and Bush have scolded European leaders many times about this and it was Bob Gates, the Defense Secretary who served under both of thems parting words to European leaders.

    European NATO countries used to spend over 3% in the 80s, this had dwindled lower and now is about 1.5%. Only five countries meet their obligation, including oddly Greece.

    In the Libya campaign, they ran out of munitions after just three months. When the Brussels airport was attacked by terrorists in 2016, Belgium had to acquire military gear for their soldiers, from who? The US of course.

    For all Trump gets wrong, which is plenty, he is spot on about this but a bit more patience would go a long way.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #14
    Lumpy Talbot Lumpy Talbot is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    20,706
    Twitter
    @

    I for one would like to be the first to welcome our new Russian oligarch overlords. Mind you they have been around for a while.

    Lord John Browne, formerly of BP, leads the Russian investment group LetterOne which has been investing over £14 billion around Europe in proceeds of the Sakhalin gas fields for the Russian government untroubled by sanction, notably.

    Quite funny watching the news about how seriously serious everyone was about sanctions on Russia a few years back. Turn the channel and around the pitch in a Champions League game you get 'Gazprom', 'Gazprom', 'Gazprom' beaming repeatedly at you from the advertising ident.

    I know which way the wind is blowing. City of London makes nish out of NATO spending. It makes a lot out of Russian oligarch spending.

    I reckon Budapest is next for the sudden influx of Speznaz cunningly disguised as AirBnB tourists.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #15
    blinding blinding is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    15,393

    Its time the Krauts Paid there way . Free Loading bar-stewards !
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #16
    parentheses parentheses is offline
    parentheses's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    13,035

    Hasn't Ireland signed up surreptiously to some agreement which means it will have to triple its military spending?

    Looking forward to voting against this sh!te government!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #17
    Justinian Justinian is offline
    Justinian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6,177

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCKY View Post
    European countries need to do more when it comes to spending on their defense budgets. The 2% of GDP used to be a target now it's a requirement, agreed at the Wales NATO summit in 2014. That said, they gave themselves 10 years to achieve the targets i.e. 2024 and we are six years away from that.
    The 2% spending guideline is (perhaps unfortunately) not legally binding upon NATO member states. That is to say, it's not a requirement.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #18
    Catalpast Catalpast is offline
    Catalpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    24,015

    Quote Originally Posted by parentheses View Post
    Hasn't Ireland signed up surreptiously to some agreement which means it will have to triple its military spending?

    Looking forward to voting against this sh!te government!
    We agreed to it in Lisbon II IIRC?

    ADD
    Together with other 24 EU member states, Ireland joined the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) in December 2017. PESCOís overall objective is to increase defence capabilities and co-ordination between member states with an end-goal of a better capability to respond to security threats.
    https://www.rte.ie/eile/brainstorm/2...n-for-ireland/
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #19
    darkhorse4 darkhorse4 is online now

    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,629

    Why should the US pay for Europe's security?
    It makes no sense in 2018
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #20
    The Field Marshal The Field Marshal is offline
    The Field Marshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    48,357

    Trump will make the grasping stingy Europeans step up to the plate on defense expenditure.

    They have been freeloading on the coat tails of the USA since 1945.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 2 of 41 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment