Avatar feed
Responses: 4
SFC John D.
15
15
0
Edited 3 mo ago
88fa351b
LTC Eugene Chu I know your first reaction is to believe whatever someone tells you, but it really would help if you did some fact-checking of your own before you add your personal stamp of approval onto something.

Let's start with the NATO claim as that's something I researched recently.

"Though Trump has complained for years that the European countries are not contributing their fair share to NATO—a common gripe of President Obama’s as well—and despite Trump’s threats to let “Russia do whatever the hell they want” to NATO free-riders, Trump largely failed in his quest to get the E.U. countries to contribute meaningfully more to their own defense, and ironically, only Putin has been able to succeed where Trump failed.

The degree to which Europe is now stepping up to the plate after Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and sharing the burden with the U.S. is striking. Prior to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, only two European countries spent more than 2% of their GDP on defense spending."

Trump largely failed in his quest to get the E.U. countries to contribute meaningfully more to their own defense. Let's see what the numbers straight from NATO say.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2023/7/pdf/230707-def-exp-2023-en.pdf

When Trump came onboard, NATO (less the US) was paying an average of 1.44% of GDP. In 2017 and every year after that until 2021, it increased – 2017: 1.48%, 2018: 1.51%, 2019: 1.54%, and 2020: 1.72%.

So, to the stories claim that Trump failed – False (but it matches the rhetoric of the left, so they believe it). It is noteworthy that after Biden came onboard that funding started dropping again: 2021: 1.67% and 2022: 1.65% until the year after Putin invaded Ukraine in early 2022.

What about Germany and France, the ones that Trump specifically called out? Germany was at 1.2% in 2016 and did a 26% increase in spending to 1.51% when Trump left office. France was at 1.79% when Trump came into office and had meet it’s 2% agreement when he left. Again, it’s noteworthy that after Biden, both countries decreased their percentage until the year after Putin invaded Ukraine.

The other claim - “Prior to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, only two European countries spent more than 2% of their GDP on defense spending.” While the author wrote it in a way to fiddle with the numbers (not ‘at the end of Trump’s term” or something like that, “prior to Putin’s invasion” which was two years under Biden), it is still factually wrong.

At the beginning of 2022, the European countries that exceeded 2% of their GDP spending were Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Poland and the United Kingdom.

What were they at when Trump came onboard? Estonia, Greece, Poland and the United Kingdom.
What were they at when Trump left the first time? Estonia, France, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, and the United Kingdom.

So False in both accounts – trying to tie the slide under Biden to Trump and factually wrong in the claim that only two European countries spent more than 2%.

As to the 90% of spending staying within the US. I haven’t looked at it, but I’m skeptical of whatever the claims are because of the author’s dishonest/sloppy ‘facts’ regarding NATO.
(15)
Comment
(0)
LTC Self Employed
LTC (Join to see)
3 mo
I know this is bullshit!
9 countries spent 2% or more.

https://images.app.goo.gl/WaNZjUj6b3QoWuy89

I know stupid President Biden was bragging saying 'we're back.'

We know that everything president buyden has done has gone in the Toilet.

I will never forget when the Vice President was giggling. When talking to refugees from Ukraine that were in Poland.

A shit- for- brains VP Showing no empathy.

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel LTC Eugene Chu
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter Lt Col Charlie Brown Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen CPT Jack Durish LTC Stephen F. CSM Charles Hayden 1SG Russell S. 1SG Patrick Burke SFC Dr. Jesus Garcia-Arce, Psy.D SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL SFC John D. LTC Trent Klug CDR Andrew McMenamin, PhD Col (Join to see) 1st Lt Padre Dave Poedel CPT (Join to see)
(9)
Reply
(0)
PO2 Builder
PO2 (Join to see)
3 mo
Eisenhower knew what he was talking about!
(6)
Reply
(0)
SGT Stephen Rowland
SGT Stephen Rowland
2 mo
LTC (Join to see) - sir that was an estimate not actual paid.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SGT Stephen Rowland
SGT Stephen Rowland
2 mo
The 90% staying in US is an obfuscation. I wonder if the money the defense industries pay to lobbyists to solicit votes for more defense spending is part of that sum. To me it is grifting plain and simple. The campaign coffers of our elected representatives are quite substantial and upon retirement or leaving office are not to be used for personal expenses. Here is a link that uncovers some of the misuse of these funds . https://youtu.be/4qkiBS3Wxt0?si=sI_rIrb0FYCyEVw5

Who knows who might be rewarded with an autobiography ( book rights ) 100 million dollar Netflix contract . Real estate deals, Board seats on Raytheon, General Dynamics.
Niki Haley joins Boeing board of directors for her expertise or possibility of being President and swaying foreign policy.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Joe Anderson
6
6
0
"The US War Machine" never changes. The same people and contractors that made money in Vietnam, Desert Storm, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq are the ones benefiting from this deal. This "Aid" doesn't change or create new jobs. It keeps the ones in existence going. One can argue this is good for the worker and the average person. However, the CEOs and majority stockholders of the usual military contractors are the ones who are truly profiting here. They continue making billions a year off military sales, arms, and munitions and are the real beneficiaries of this deal. These contractors no longer make money from wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. So, they must fill the void from somewhere, and this "Aid" fills that gap. It looks like Ukraine will do fine in feeding "the US War Machine." It's a nice pyramid scheme, considering it's all funded by you and me. All these jobs and munitions are being created and paid for with our taxpayer dollars. At what point does this pyramid scheme collapse? It would be one thing if the money came from other countries, buyers, and places. But, it is not, it comes from our government/yours and I's taxes.
(6)
Comment
(0)
LTC Joe Anderson
LTC Joe Anderson
2 mo
MAJ Byron Oyler Ike was good. But, I felt he was a little timid and too political at times. We definitely would have had less casualties and more victories had he not given Monty the lead on many campaigns. For example Market garden. Everybody advised Monty he stretched things too far and the time was unrealistic. But on more than a few occasions for political reasons he gave Montey the lead. Sometimes he was politically Savvy were he should have been more aggressive. But at least I can't say, at other times, he was more aggressive when he should have been politically Savvy.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Byron Oyler
MAJ Byron Oyler
2 mo
LTC Joe Anderson - One of the areas Ike has been credited as being great was keeping the Allies on the same page and I can only imagine how many sleepless nights he had keeping Monty and Patton on the same side. Growing up in the same state and culture as Ike I am sure he was much more a fighter than politician but like with my nursing job, sometimes you have to suppress that fight for the greater good. At the end of the day winning is winning and if that requires me to be a bit passive aggressive, so be it.
(1)
Reply
(0)
LTC Joe Anderson
LTC Joe Anderson
2 mo
MAJ Byron Oyler He was a good General. But, O would have prefered be made a few less political decisions. But, in the end he won the war and that can't be taken from him. But, hind sight being 20/20 we can see where he should have zigged instead of zagged... It is funny just before Ike was ran for President most thought MacArthur was the one who would run for president and was politically inclined. But, in the end it was Ike. Patton had his flaws. But he was a war General. He would have gone stir crazy had the accident not taken his life. But it is to bad that happened to a great war General.
(0)
Reply
(0)
LTC Joe Anderson
LTC Joe Anderson
2 mo
MAJ Byron Oyler that should have said, I would have preferred he (not be) made a few less political decisions...
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Lyle Montgomery
1
1
0
I don't have a problem with supporting Ukraine but some accountability needs to be done first. The same goes for Israel. Both countries need our support. However Our southern boarder should be protected first, before the others. Biden and his democrat/comunist minions don't care about the United States security. I hope that there is a drastic change come November and Bidens policies are totally rejected forever.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

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

close