Avatar feed
Responses: 10
CPT Stephen Smith
5
5
0
It is fairly obvious that you fall within the group described in the media as either a "Never Trumper" or a Liberal Democrat, and that's your right as an American citizen. As a Trump critic you want to paint a picture that diminishes the President, but if that is your goal, it does NOT parallel with the facts. First, which alliances are you referring to, that have stood for a hundred years or more, and how have they been "weakened" by the President's policies? NATO, itself, has existed for 69 years and at its formation each of its 28 of member nations agreed, in writing, to contribute at least 2% of their GDP's to the cost of the NATO mission. As of 2016, only 5 of the 28 nations were living up to their agreed to contributions, with the U.S. leading at 3.61% of GDP. Of the 23 nations not living up to their agreement were Germany, one of NATO's wealthiest nations, contributing only 1.19% and our neighbor Canada contributing only 0.99% of GDP. So, in the matter of financing our defensive posture facing Russia, if our alliances are weakening, then don't you think that the actions of our partners have more to do with any "decline" than the USA? OBTW, President Trump's putting pressure on our NATO partners has resulted in their agreements to meet their promised contribution levels. Is that in Putin's favor? I'm assuming your use of the word "investment" when making a comment about Putin getting good value for his investment in Trump, that you're one of the diminishing number of American's that believe Russia interfered in our Presidential election. I wonder if Putin is happy about the economic sanctions placed on Russia by the Trump administration? How about the pressure on Russia trying to maintain their relative military force levels, vis a vis the U.S., based on the current defense rebuilding program that has been undertaken at the President's urging. Russia is not a rich nation. Based on recent figures published by the World Bank, Russia is number 27 out of 80 countries, while the U.S. ranks #8. Their leading source of wealth is the sale of oil and natural gas. With the U.S. having now become the world's largest exporter of oil, that means, based on supply and demand, their future does not look good when they have to figure in a larger portion of their GDP for defense spending to try to keep up with the U.S. That competition is what led to the fall of the old Soviet Union in '90-'91. Mr. Trump's leadership has allowed the U.S. to expand their production and export of oil. Yes, I'm sure Mr. Putin is REAL PLEASED with his "investment" in Donald Trump.
(5)
Comment
(0)
LTC Multifunctional Logistician
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
PO2 Robert Aitchison So you are against another nation meddling in the affairs of another nation. Am I understanding correctly?
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Radio Operator Maintainer
SGT (Join to see)
4 y
Sorry for the long delay. My pocket calculator doesn’t have enough digits. However in response to your incredibly astute question. The number would be 3 million. Thank you!
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Radio Operator Maintainer
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Radio Operator Maintainer
SGT (Join to see)
4 y
More treaty’s dumped. Let’s pull out of nato. Ya looks good to me.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MCPO Roger Collins
4
4
0
So, aside from the ignorant post leading into the Merkel article, we have a situation where many EU members will not adhere to the small 2% investment in military spending, but will form their own military complementing the NATO. Works for me. This from Germany’s leader that has permitted her country harmed by an invasion of illegal aliens. What’s next, put Germany in charge and practice saying “Seig Heil”?
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Ken Landgren
3
3
0
I support their solidarity.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
SPC Erich Guenther
>1 y
I do too but they tried this in the 1980's and it failed precisely because Germany and France would not contribute enough money or resources to keep the concept going......so it fell apart. Same issue with NATO contributions. Nobody in our press is asking if they can't find the will to keep NATO funded how are they going to find the will to fund a European Army? The answer is they won't.
(2)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
MAJ Ken Landgren
>1 y
SPC Erich Guenther - Collectively Europeans spend around 240 billion annually on NATO. I want them to take the lead and become less independent as they evolve.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close