Seems some do agree with Trump - privately

[jimnyc]

Donald Trump has spent much of his campaign deriding NATO allies for “ripping off” the American taxpayer and failing to contribute to the world’s most powerful military alliance. But on Wednesday, his fellow Republicans joined the chorus during a closed-door meeting with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Capitol Hill, according to sources inside the room.

For under an hour, senators grilled Stoltenberg, a former prime minister of Norway, about why only five members of the 28-nation club spend at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense, the official amount NATO recommends each nation set aside. Some expressed particular dissatisfaction with Germany, the fourth largest economy in the world, which does not meet the 2 percent threshold.

“They’re being laggards. I can’t think of a better word for it,” Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Foreign Policy after exiting the meeting. “I have expressed this in Munich, I have expressed this in Davos, I have expressed this in every forum where Europeans are listening.”

For years, Corker and other U.S. officials have blasted European allies for taking for granted the disproportionate amount the U.S. contributes to the transatlantic organization. But what once was an esoteric concern confined to the halls of think tanks and embassies is now a red-hot campaign issue. Corker said Trump’s campaign rhetoric speaks to a concern he’s heard from his own Tennessee constituents, which he relayed to Stoltenberg.

“I did mention to him that there’s a populism that is taking place within our country right now, both sides of the aisle,” said Corker. “The American people know that we are a nation spending way beyond our means and when our European counterparts are not honoring their obligations as they should, at some point, there’s going to be a breaking point.”

Last year, the U.S. accounted for more than 72 percent of NATO members’ total defense expenditures, spending about $649.9 billion. The other 27 NATO members combined to spend less than 28 percent, or about $251 billion, of the total.

After exiting the meeting with Stoltenberg, Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, added his dismay that defense spending for “very few” of America’s allies is “where it ought to be.”

“The issue of the other countries paying their full share is not an outlier view at all,” he said.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/06/senators-slam-nato-free-riders-in-closed-door-meeting-with-secretary-general/

[fj1200]

Last year, the U.S. accounted for more than 72 percent of NATO members’ total defense expenditures, spending about $649.9 billion. The other 27 NATO members combined to spend less than 28 percent, or about $251 billion, of the total.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/06/senators-slam-nato-free-riders-in-closed-door-meeting-with-secretary-general/

Incorrect comparison; We don't spend the entirety of our defense budget in Europe and we're the largest country in NATO by far. Nevertheless it's either in our best interest to help defend Europe or it's not.

[jimnyc]

Incorrect comparison; We don't spend the entirety of our defense budget in Europe and we're the largest country in NATO by far. Nevertheless it's either in our best interest to help defend Europe or it's not.

Doesn't change the fact that the majority don't contribute what they could and should.

[fj1200]

Doesn't change the fact that the majority don't contribute what they could and should.

Your OP presented erroneous facts. And your statement is an opinion.

[jimnyc]

Your OP presented erroneous facts. And your statement is an opinion.

That's wonderful.

[NightTrain]

Incorrect comparison; We don't spend the entirety of our defense budget in Europe and we're the largest country in NATO by far. Nevertheless it's either in our best interest to help defend Europe or it's not.

What?

He's talking about NATO, not the entire defense budget of other countries or ours.

NATO.

[fj1200]

That's wonderful.

:salute:


What?

He's talking about NATO, not the entire defense budget of other countries or ours.

NATO.

I know he's talking about NATO but as far as I can tell he's talking about the entire defense budgets of each nation.


...

Last year, the U.S. accounted for more than 72 percent of NATO members’ total defense expenditures, spending about $649.9 billion. The other 27 NATO members combined to spend less than 28 percent, or about $251 billion, of the total.

...

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/06/senators-slam-nato-free-riders-in-closed-door-meeting-with-secretary-general/

They spend less but we spend it globally which is probably by and large not true when it comes to the other countries.

[NightTrain]

I know he's talking about NATO but as far as I can tell he's talking about the entire defense budgets of each nation.

No, he specifically said what each country was contributing and the bare minimum was 2% of GDP of EACH country.

Where are you getting entire defense budgets?

[Gunny]

No, he specifically said what each country was contributing and the bare minimum was 2% of GDP of EACH country.

Where are you getting entire defense budgets?

I happen to agree with Trump on NATO. Antiquated. The way Putin is acting I'd say new lines need to be drawn and we need to quit funding the majority of it. Especially since we can't get a European country besides the UK to help us with shit. But they want us to continue covering their asses?

[NightTrain]

I happen to agree with Trump on NATO. Antiquated. The way Putin is acting I'd say new lines need to be drawn and we need to quit funding the majority of it. Especially since we can't get a European country besides the UK to help us with shit. But they want us to continue covering their asses?

It is antiquated, but the Russians and Chinese are still scared of that alliance.

But yeah, the USA paying 72% of NATO? BS.

Then there's the useless UN that we're also paying the lion's share on.

[Gunny]

It is antiquated, but the Russians and Chinese are still scared of that alliance.

But yeah, the USA paying 72% of NATO? BS.

Then there's the useless UN that we're also paying the lion's share on.

Yeah, the Useless N is my other pet peeve. What a bunch of worthless f*cks. Thank you Woodrow Wilson.

I doubt the Chinese are afraid of NATO. They weren't even afraid of SEATO after Truman backed down to them, and Nixon sealed the deal. The Russians don't fear NATO. What is it going to do? Wait until Russia occupies all of Europe to do something?

We have the ability just not the will.

[DLT]

Donald Trump has spent much of his campaign deriding NATO allies for “ripping off” the American taxpayer and failing to contribute to the world’s most powerful military alliance. But on Wednesday, his fellow Republicans joined the chorus during a closed-door meeting with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Capitol Hill, according to sources inside the room.

For under an hour, senators grilled Stoltenberg, a former prime minister of Norway, about why only five members of the 28-nation club spend at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense, the official amount NATO recommends each nation set aside. Some expressed particular dissatisfaction with Germany, the fourth largest economy in the world, which does not meet the 2 percent threshold.

“They’re being laggards. I can’t think of a better word for it,” Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Foreign Policy after exiting the meeting. “I have expressed this in Munich, I have expressed this in Davos, I have expressed this in every forum where Europeans are listening.”

For years, Corker and other U.S. officials have blasted European allies for taking for granted the disproportionate amount the U.S. contributes to the transatlantic organization. But what once was an esoteric concern confined to the halls of think tanks and embassies is now a red-hot campaign issue. Corker said Trump’s campaign rhetoric speaks to a concern he’s heard from his own Tennessee constituents, which he relayed to Stoltenberg.

“I did mention to him that there’s a populism that is taking place within our country right now, both sides of the aisle,” said Corker. “The American people know that we are a nation spending way beyond our means and when our European counterparts are not honoring their obligations as they should, at some point, there’s going to be a breaking point.”

Last year, the U.S. accounted for more than 72 percent of NATO members’ total defense expenditures, spending about $649.9 billion. The other 27 NATO members combined to spend less than 28 percent, or about $251 billion, of the total.

After exiting the meeting with Stoltenberg, Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, added his dismay that defense spending for “very few” of America’s allies is “where it ought to be.”

“The issue of the other countries paying their full share is not an outlier view at all,” he said.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/06/senators-slam-nato-free-riders-in-closed-door-meeting-with-secretary-general/

Make no mistake. I agree with most of what Trump is saying that he believes in (now). I just don't trust that he really believes all that stuff "now". Considering how liberal he was just a few years ago. I am convinced that he is merely saying what he thinks he needs to say in order to win.

[fj1200]

No, he specifically said what each country was contributing and the bare minimum was 2% of GDP of EACH country.

Where are you getting entire defense budgets?

From the article. I quoted it twice. Did I read it wrong? Here's another link that shows total defense expenditures:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO#Military_expenditures

All I'm saying is we have a global defense budget while most NATO countries are concentrated locally; It doesn't seem to be an accurate comparison. We also have almost half the GDP of NATO countries so it would make sense that we contribute a higher amount. But that still leaves my original question of whether it's in our best interest to have the largest defense budget of NATO countries and have a multitude of bases in Europe?

Should they be meeting their 2% minimum? Of course but it's not going to make much difference to our budget.

[Gunny]

From the article. I quoted it twice. Did I read it wrong? Here's another link that shows total defense expenditures:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO#Military_expenditures

All I'm saying is we have a global defense budget while most NATO countries are concentrated locally; It doesn't seem to be an accurate comparison. We also have almost half the GDP of NATO countries so it would make sense that we contribute a higher amount. But that still leaves my original question of whether it's in our best interest to have the largest defense budget of NATO countries and have a multitude of bases in Europe?

Should they be meeting their 2% minimum? Of course but it's not going to make much difference to our budget.

Indeed.