Should the US match the EU NATO members funding schedule? (Poll)

[kyzr]

We pay 4% because we also have obligations in the Middle East, East Asia and the Americas.

Europe only has to worry about Europe, so 2% or less is probably fine.

The commitment is a minimum of 2%. Less is NOT fine.

 

[blackhawk]

I remember when Democrats used to be against endless wars. So in regards to Ukraine I have a straightforward question what is the endgame here? We seem willing to send endless amounts of money to Ukraine with no real plan or goal it looks like the powers that be are content to continue this status quo slog for the foreseeable future.

 

[JoeB131]

The commitment is a minimum of 2%. Less is NOT fine.

Where is this commitment written down, because it was set as a goal.

Some countries just don't have that capability, such as Italy or Spain, which are just grappling their way out of major economic downturns.

 

[JoeB131]

I remember when Democrats used to be against endless wars. So in regards to Ukraine I have a straightforward question what is the endgame here? We seem willing to send endless amounts of money to Ukraine with no real plan or goal it looks like the powers that be are content to continue this status quo slog for the foreseeable future.

well, first, it's not our war, we aren't fighting it. So the question of when this should end is really up to the Ukrainians and Russians.

 

[blackhawk]

well, first, it's not our war, we aren't fighting it. So the question of when this should end is really up to the Ukrainians and Russians.

We are helping fund it so what are wanting to get out of it? Just because we don’t have troops on the ground does not mean we aren’t involved.

 

[JoeB131]

We are helping fund it so what are wanting to get out of it? Just because we don’t have troops on the ground does not mean we aren’t involved.

We want to contain Russian Aggression and give democracy a chance to flourish in former Soviet Republics.

Seems like a pretty good deal to me.

That said, we probably need to at some point discuss what peace might look like, which will mean some territorial concessions.

 

[kyzr]

Where is this commitment written down, because it was set as a goal.

Some countries just don't have that capability, such as Italy or Spain, which are just grappling their way out of major economic downturns.

2% is a commitment. A commitment is a promise.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49198.htm

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness. This guideline also serves as an indicator of a country's political will to contribute to NATO's common defence efforts since the defence capacity of each member has an impact on the overall perception of the Alliance's credibility as a politico-military organisation.

 

[blackhawk]

We want to contain Russian Aggression and give democracy a chance to flourish in former Soviet Republics.

Seems like a pretty good deal to me.

That said, we probably need to at some point discuss what peace might look like, which will mean some territorial concessions.

All I see right now is we have done just enough to create a standstill Russia cannot overrun Ukraine and Ukraine cannot drive them out. This looks like the modern version of the trench warfare of WW1 neither side makes any gains but the death, destruction and suffering continues.

 

[JoeB131]

All I see right now is we have done just enough to create a standstill Russia cannot overrun Ukraine and Ukraine cannot drive them out. This looks like the modern version of the trench warfare of WW1 neither side makes any gains but the death, destruction and suffering continues.

I agree. So what's your solution?

If Ukraine gives up these territories and gets nothing in return, their own people will throw out the current government.

If Putin gives up territory, he'll probably be overthrown by his own military.

My solution would be that Russia keeps the Donbas and Crimea, returns the "land bridge", but also acquiesces to Ukraine joining NATO and the EU.

Good luck getting either side to agree to that.

 

[JoeB131]

2% is a commitment. A commitment is a promise.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49198.htm

In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness. This guideline also serves as an indicator of a country's political will to contribute to NATO's common defence efforts since the defence capacity of each member has an impact on the overall perception of the Alliance's credibility as a politico-military organisation.

You've kept every promise you've ever made?

I'm honest enough to admit I haven't, despite my best efforts.

Since 2006, 11 countries have hit the 2% goal, including the UK. Only one country is below 1% (Luxembourg!) and most are close to 2%.

Defense expenditures of NATO countries as a percentage of GDP 2023 | Statista

In 2023, Poland's defense spending as a share of gross domestic product was 3.9 percent, the highest of all NATO member states, followed by the United States at 3.49 percent.

www.statista.com

 

[blackhawk]

I agree. So what's your solution?

If Ukraine gives up these territories and gets nothing in return, their own people will throw out the current government.

If Putin gives up territory, he'll probably be overthrown by his own military.

My solution would be that Russia keeps the Donbas and Crimea, returns the "land bridge", but also acquiesces to Ukraine joining NATO and the EU.

Good luck getting either side to agree to that.

I have two neither great either stop getting involved in any way and let the two sides fight it on their own or go all in and really help Ukraine drive Russia out. As things stand now I truly don't see another viable option.

 

[BluesLegend]

Excuse me but the last report out of Ukraine, by a Ukraine official was that Ukraine is robbing us blind. He said everyone is stealing. WTF another 6,000 million dollars?

 

[kyzr]

You've kept every promise you've ever made?
I'm honest enough to admit I haven't, despite my best efforts.
Since 2006, 11 countries have hit the 2% goal, including the UK. Only one country is below 1% (Luxembourg!) and most are close to 2%.

Exactly. Some people need a gun to their head to keep their promises.

The US needs to wean the EU off of US taxpayer money always paying the bill for defense.

If Russia sends paratroopers to Luxumberg or any other small deadbeat country and takes it over, they maybe should have spent more on defense, huh?

 

[kyzr]

Excuse me but the last report out of Ukraine, by a Ukraine official was that Ukraine is robbing us blind. He said everyone is stealing. WTF another 6,000 million dollars?

$60b is $6,000 million. Got a link proving US weapons are being stolen?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

So why is the US paying more a year than the EU? Its their back yard.

Bigger economy. Bigger portions of funding. Status quo. Duh.

 

[Desperado]

No American taxpayer money should ever go to NATO or for that matter the UN, both organizations have outlived their usefulness . Both have lived off the US dollar for way too long.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

$60b is $6,000 million. Got a link proving US weapons are being stolen?

$60 billion is NOT 6000 million. That would be $6 billion.

60,000,000,000 =/= 6,000,000.000

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Exactly. Some people need a gun to their head to keep their promises.

The US needs to wean the EU off of US taxpayer money always paying the bill for defense.

If Russia sends paratroopers to Luxumberg or any other small deadbeat country and takes it over, they maybe should have spent more on defense, huh?

The countries which make the 2% threshold almost all border Russia. The deadbeats are in western Europe.

 

[JoeB131]

Exactly. Some people need a gun to their head to keep their promises.

The US needs to wean the EU off of US taxpayer money always paying the bill for defense.

If Russia sends paratroopers to Luxumberg or any other small deadbeat country and takes it over, they maybe should have spent more on defense, huh?

That's the most retarded thing you've said yet.

It amazes me the lengths you cultists would go to rationalize Trump.

 

[kyzr]

Bigger economy. Bigger portions of funding. Status quo. Duh.

The US is tapped out, duh.
We can't afford to borrow to protect the EU when its time they stepped up and defended themselves.
We have the ME and China to deal with.
The status quo is becoming a new paradigm.