Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?
-
No, it's not. The ones that would be affected are all coughing up their share. It was the stupidest thing he has said to date.
"The intelligent man who is proud of his intelligence is like the condemned man who is proud of his large cell." Simone Weil
-
I have a file full of letters I have written to federal government politicians going back to 20 years or more starting in the Chrétien era to just this past September petitioning the government to clean up its defence procurement practices and at least meet its NATO spending commitment. Personally I would like to see at least 3 or 4% spending in Defence and Security. I also have attached the assinine replies from both Liberal and Conservative politicians telling how wonderful a job they are doing to meet Canada’s NATO commitments and supporting the Canadian Armed Forces in its duty to defend our shores. As of late they have also added their determined commitment towards building a military that celebrates diversity, equity and inclusion in addition to keeping Nato strong.
Doesn’t matter whether it’s the limp wristed, rose crushing Liberals in or the blustering and chest beating Conservatives that form the government in Ottawa, the Defence and security files remain forever near the bottom of the priority heap.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
With the exception of the US and UK, there's kind of a noticeable pattern to that map
Maybe Trump ginning up a little fear is not a bad thing.
@Jolly said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
With the exception of the US and UK, there's kind of a noticeable pattern to that map
Maybe Trump ginning up a little fear is not a bad thing.
Sure. Welcoming a Russian invasion. Trump, master strategist and diplomat par excrement, as the French say.
-
Trump doubled down on TS and he ain't backing up.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
No, it's not. The ones that would be affected are all coughing up their share. It was the stupidest thing he has said to date.
@Mik said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
No, it's not. The ones that would be affected are all coughing up their share. It was the stupidest thing he has said to date.
And that is saying A LOT.
-
@Jolly said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Trump doubled down on TS and he ain't backing up.
TS?
Wasn’t there talk sometime last year to put through a bill in Congress that would prevent any president from unilaterally pulling out without the consent of both houses?
Elbows up!
-
TS = Truth Social. It's an ironic name, I believe, since so few people go there, and those who do, well....
-
TS = Truth Social. It's an ironic name, I believe, since so few people go there, and those who do, well....
Got it, thanks. I never go there. No reason or desire.
-
Got it, thanks. I never go there. No reason or desire.
@Renauda said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Got it, thanks. I never go there. No reason or desire.
+1. How the fuck did we wind up here?
-
@Jolly said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Trump doubled down on TS and he ain't backing up.
TS?
Wasn’t there talk sometime last year to put through a bill in Congress that would prevent any president from unilaterally pulling out without the consent of both houses?
@Renauda said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Wasn’t there talk sometime last year to put through a bill in Congress that would prevent any president from unilaterally pulling out without the consent of both houses?
Even if he didn't pull out of NATO, he could still do a lot to really hurt the US involvement.
-
@Renauda said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Because, according to Jolly, Trump bore down on TS.
He did. You're welcome to go read what he wrote, but it's pretty much the same thing.
This is nothing new. Trump bitched about NATO member contributions the entire time he was in office. He didn't pull out of NATO, but he sure did some arm-twisting.
Putin has actually been more effective than Trump or Biden in getting NATO members to pony up. Sadly, it's the countries closest to the Russian (exception UK) border that are committing the necessary funds.
-
This is nothing new
Seems to me every US President since Reagan with the possible exception of Clinton and possibly G H W Bush, has raised the issue. True though more than anyone Putin has forced some governments to put some more money into defence budgets, but there is also recognition (even in Canada) that obsolete systems need to be replaced with new technology. That alone requires large expenditures especially if aircraft and ships are involved and need considerable operational upgrades or outright replacement.
Trump’s rants and crass threats are more for the benefit of his US support base than for the notice of NATO membership. Of course those of us on the outside find his words unacceptable and over the top. But the bluster revs up his base by presenting a scenario that America’s good will and global largess is being ruthlessly and continuously exploited by a world full of foreign shirkers claiming to be friends and allies.
So for the most part Trump recent episode of dramatic outbursting is best ignored. If he become POTUS again, the rest of us will just have manage the chaos he creates as we did the first time around.
-
@Renauda said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Wasn’t there talk sometime last year to put through a bill in Congress that would prevent any president from unilaterally pulling out without the consent of both houses?
Even if he didn't pull out of NATO, he could still do a lot to really hurt the US involvement.
@taiwan_girl said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
@Renauda said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Wasn’t there talk sometime last year to put through a bill in Congress that would prevent any president from unilaterally pulling out without the consent of both houses?
Even if he didn't pull out of NATO, he could still do a lot to really hurt the US involvement.
Found it. Yes there is legislation now in place requiring Congressional consent to withdraw from NATO.
https://thehill.com/homenews/4360407-congress-approves-bill-barring-president-withdrawing-nato/amp/
Elbows up!
-
@taiwan_girl said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
@Renauda said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Wasn’t there talk sometime last year to put through a bill in Congress that would prevent any president from unilaterally pulling out without the consent of both houses?
Even if he didn't pull out of NATO, he could still do a lot to really hurt the US involvement.
Found it. Yes there is legislation now in place requiring Congressional consent to withdraw from NATO.
https://thehill.com/homenews/4360407-congress-approves-bill-barring-president-withdrawing-nato/amp/
@Renauda said in Who in NATO is meeting their 2% commitment?:
Found it. Yes there is legislation now in place requiring Congressional consent to withdraw from NATO.
Yes, but
Rather than attempting to withdraw from NATO, a second Trump presidency could allow his allies to pursue a policy of making NATO “dormant,” an idea pushed by at least one Trump-allied think tank.
Nobody knows exactly what that would look like, Volker said, but the president has immense power over how the US interacts with its allies.
“There’s lots of things that you can do administratively as the commander in chief that would still be very disruptive for NATO,” Volker said.
A president could reduce the number of exercises Americans take part in with NATO allies, further reduce troop presence in Europe, withhold payments to the NATO infrastructure or cut down on the US military budget.
The US would still be bound, under this type of scenario, by the pledge to defend other NATO nations, but it would not be prepared.
“It’s not just enough to say, yes, we will fight together,” said Volker. “You actually have to have the capabilities.”
-
Thank you for the CNN article.
