International [NATO News] What Sweden brings to NATO as its Newest Member

[sloppypie]

I love how every time trump,says something ridiculously stupid the nitwits come out to try to defend it.

Who needs a college education or knowledge when you got a big fucking mouth, no morals and no shame.

 

[BruceLeeOnTRT]

If these countries spent their 2%, the US military industrial complex wouldn't need to sell its arms to Saudis/ISIS.

 

[Metusalemi]

I love how every time trump,says something ridiculously stupid the nitwits come out to try to defend it.

Who needs a college education or knowledge when you got a big fucking mouth, no morals and no shame.

I think you're making things up.

I saw one joke about Trump.

 

[kickboxjh]

Why are Greece spending so much? Historic fear of the turks and nationalistic nature? Turkey's not gonna attack Greece, nor anyone else.

1. Well their GDP is next to nothing, so 2% of $0 seems like a fair contribution to NATO.

2. I wouldn't be trust those gobbling snackbars.

3. NATO is without a doubt the most pathetic international organisation. At least the EU are achieving some of their goals (destroying Europe).

 

[slivercord]

Lol I bet my Country contributions are close to none, we'll maybe not, it was here in Portugal at the us base of lages, that the us and allies formalized the deal to invade Iraq, I'm shameful of that. And our prime minister at the time (barroso) dindt even finished his term and went to be the head of EU. geez I wonder how that happened. Now the son of a bitch is a highly paid adviser for a big American bank. And I'm sure in a couple of years he's going for the presidency, fuck Barroso!

 

[Orgasmo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus

Mostly because of that. Turkey is a backstabbing country. The trojan horse of NATO.

Also, like Poland, they are ones that would face a Russian Invasion if it happened. They would need to hold the sea against Russia if Turkey failed/backstabbed NATO.

Greece actually has very good relationship with Russia both presently and historically. They share the same Eastern Othodox lineage, and Russian Empire used to call itself the Third Rome since the Czars considered themselves successors to the Eastern Roman Empire. Greece also operates many Russian military hardwares.

In short, Greece is the Russian sympathizer in NATO. Russia isn't going to touch it.

 

[irish_thug]

Nice to see Canada stepping out of our shadow.

There are many of us who are quite ashamed of our lack of contribution.

 

[irish_thug]

as a canadian - one that sees money pissed away in refugee support, arts, aboriginal payments and other ridiculous spending, this is shameful shit.

seconded.

 

[Arkain2K]

as a canadian - one that sees money pissed away in refugee support, arts, aboriginal payments and other ridiculous spending, this is shameful shit.

There are many of us who are quite ashamed of our lack of contribution.

Trudeau defends Canada’s military spending record
By Lee Berthiaume

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defends Canada's military spending by pointing to the Liberal government's decision to have Canada lead a 1,000 strong NATO force in Eastern Europe.
​

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau defended Canada’s record on military spending Tuesday by pointing out that the country has consistently done more than many allies in other ways — most recently in Eastern Europe.

NATO reported this week that Canadian defence spending hit record lows last year, falling to 0.98 per cent of gross domestic product. That is less than half the two per cent target that all NATO members, including Canada, agreed to in 2014.

Asked during a press conference in Montreal on Tuesday whether he would commit to the two per cent target when he travels to Poland later this week, Trudeau instead referenced the Liberal government’s decision to have Canada lead a 1,000-strong NATO force in Eastern Europe.

“We have always stepped up well above many other NATO partners to engage, and that’s actually highlighted by our engagement around Operation Reassurance,” Trudeau said.

“We continue to be a valued and valuable partner in NATO,” he added, “and I look forward to productive discussions in Warsaw with our NATO partners about how Canada can continue to contribute to peace and security in the world.”

Trudeau will travel to the Polish capital later this week for meetings with the 27 other NATO leaders. Allied defence spending is expected to be one of the major topics of discussion, alongside the threat posed by Russia and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

All NATO countries, including Canada, agreed in 2014 to stop cutting military budgets and work towards spending two per cent of GDP on defence. The goal was intended to ensure all alliance members were doing their fair share, which includes investing enough to field a modern military.

The target has taken on added importance thanks to Russia’s own military buildup, as well as criticisms in the U.S. from senators and Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump about some members not pulling their weight.

Obama was also seen to have gently rebuked Canada on the issue in his address to Parliament last week, saying: “As your ally and as your friend, let me say that we’ll be more secure when every NATO member, including Canada, contributes its full share to our common security.”

The alliance does estimate that Canadian defence spending will increase slightly this year, to 0.99 per cent of GDP. However, that will still leave Canada 23rd out of 28 NATO members.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...nding-record-points-to-nato-contribution.html

 

[Videer]

Why are Greece spending so much? Historic fear of the turks and nationalistic nature? Turkey's not gonna attack Greece, nor anyone else.

They'll team up with Poland to enslave the weakling germans and the war reparations will finally be paid.

 

[Hans Gruber]

I love how every time trump,says something ridiculously stupid the nitwits come out to try to defend it.

Who needs a college education or knowledge when you got a big fucking mouth, no morals and no shame.

You care a lot about morals obviously? Who are you voting for? Johnson? Couldn't be Hillary or that would make you a hypocrite with no shame.

 

[Ice That Jaw]

We don't need it. Our worthy allies will back us if we need their help. No need for a treaty. It just makes things worst because we have 20+ countries that we must defend even if they start shit. I mean we have to help out fucking Turkey.

 

[Victor Maitland]

What "defence" are we ( the UK) getting from NATO?
they are about as useful as chocolate fire guard. Time for the organisation to be disbanded....
When you see the likes of Turkey in there as members ,openly supporting and backing terrorists.

 

[Arkain2K]

Can NATO Pay Up?
Elisabeth Braw
November 10, 2016

If adherence to the 2 percent benchmark is not a good measurement of commitment, what is?​

In recent years NATO has been showing renewed signs of vitality. But with challenges ranging from Russia to refugees, it’s also struggling to strengthen its cohesion. And despite promises of more spending on defense, most of NATO’s members lag on their commitments to defense spending. With Donald Trump in the White House, the issue of European allies’ defense spending will almost certainly acquire new urgency.

A security alliance needs credible security resources: NATO asks its members to spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense. But this year, only five countries—the United States at 3.61 percent, Greece, the United Kingdom, Estonia and Poland—are meeting NATO’s 2 percent benchmark.

Despite recent defense spending increases in several countries, including Latvia and Lithuania most, of their allies don’t even come close to the 2 percent mark. Canada, for example, is spending 0.99 percent of its GDP on defense. Germany is spending 1.19 percent, Italy 1.11 percent and Spain 0.91 percent. The United States accounts for 70 percent of NATO’s defense spending.

“There has been a shift in attitudes among European allies over the past several years,” said Ian Brzezinski, deputy assistant secretary of defense for Europe and NATO policy under George W. Bush. “We shouldn’t overstate it, but we also shouldn’t understate it. The question is whether it will continue. There’s emergent recognition in Europe that it has to do more and spend more to sustain the transatlantic bargain.”

In 1985, during the height of the Cold War, West Germany spent 3.3 percent, Italy 2.7 percent and Canada 2.2 percent, while Greece spent a whopping 7.1 percent of its GDP on the military. Spain was not yet a member. (As is the case today, Greece’s defense spending had more to do with Turkey than a commitment to NATO benchmarks.) In the United States, defense spending made up 6.9 percent of GDP. Defense spending made up an average of 5.6 percent of NATO members’ GDP, according to official NATO statistics.

Just like a subway train that drives even if some of its passengers have dodged the fare, NATO is functioning. But some allies’ perceived lack of willingness to share the joint burden is irritating some allies, especially the Americans.

Last month at the Riga Conference, a major security conference, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense Michael Carpenter again reiterated U.S. calls for more allies to increase spending. And this summer, Trump said that under his leadership the United States would defend the Baltic states only if he deemed that the countries had “fulfilled their obligations to us.”

Marko Mihkelson, chairman of the Estonian parliament’s defense committee, told me that “the U.S. accounting for 70 percent of NATO defense spending is firmly out of balance. What sort of alliance is it where all the allies depend on just one country?” In Estonia’s parliamentary defense committee, Mihkelson said, members of all the parties show a “rock-solid” commitment to 2 percent defense spending. “We take our commitment to the alliance extremely seriously,” he explained. “It’s our key defense. We can’t have all military capabilities, and even if we did, we would not be able to deter threats alone.”

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/can-nato-pay-18362

 

[Arkain2K]

NATO chief says Donald Trump is RIGHT to demand members states increase defence spending
By Lizzie Stromme
Wed, Nov 16, 2016

The secretary-general said he is certain the President-elect would honour the US' commitments to Nato, but echoed Mr Trump’s call for members to contribute more towards the alliance.

During his campaign Mr Trump said he could abandon the guarantee to protect fellow states if they have not “fulfilled their financial obligations”.

Nato members are asked to maintain a level of spending two per cent of their GDP on defence, a target only four European members currently meet

Speaking ahead of a European Union defence minister’s meeting in Brussels on Tuesday, the secretary-general said: “President-elect Donald Trump stated during the election campaign that he is a big fan of Nato.

“I am certain he will be a President of the United States that will live up to all the commitments of the United States in the alliance.”

The former Norwegian Prime Minister added a strong Nato was in the interest of all member states, so the President-elect was right to demand increased defence contribution.

Mr Stoltenberg said: “A strong Nato is important for Europe but it is also important for the United States.

“He also pointed out the importance of increased defence spending, that Europeans are stepping up their efforts to invest more in defence and I absolutely agree with him.

“That has been the message from US leaders for many years and the good thing is that we now see that Europeans are actually investing more in defence, they are investing more in defence in Europe and therefore contributing to fairer burden sharing.”

Despite claiming he was sure Mr Trump would honour the alliance, the secretary-general last week issued a cautions warning for the Republican to not abandon America’s allies.

Mr Stoltenberg said: “All allies have made a solemn commitment to defend each other. This is something absolutely unconditioned.”

He also reminded Mr Trump the only time Nato’s all-for-one alliance-wide defence commitment had been triggered was when America suffered the Al Qaeda terror attacks on September 11, 2001.

The Nato chief’s assurance comes as President Barack Obama on Tuesday vowed Mr Trump would honour the alliance.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...ight-demand-members-increase-defence-spending

 

[Pale Man In Black]

What's the point in spending more if the biggest threat to peace is Ur ally?

Well, they are always welcome to leave NATO.

 

[Stoic1]

What if Trump kicked the UN out of the US and left NATO in his first year of office?

 

[jimbob27]

0.1% of Iceland's GDP is still $20million. What the fuck did they spend 20 million on if they don't have an army?

 

[Arkain2K]

0.1% of Iceland's GDP is still $20million. What the fuck did they spend 20 million on if they don't have an army?

Don't you have access to the same internet as the rest of the world?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Iceland

 

[Arkain2K]

Trump’s Fair NATO Spending Demand Would Break Denmark’s Welfare State
Peter Levring
November 20, 2016

Meeting Donald Trump’s demands on fair defense spending could allow NATO-member Denmark to buy a dozen F-35 fighter jets and four frigates. It could also damage the cherished welfare state.

During his presidential campaign, the victorious Republican candidate raised alarm among allies by suggesting that the U.S. would think twice about defending a North Atlantic Treaty Organization member that failed to live up to the group’s commitment to spend 2 percent of gross domestic product on defense.

This is a long-standing source of frustration for the U.S., since only a handful of NATO’s 28 members regularly meet the target. But Trump is the first to have raised existential questions about the alliance since Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Denmark last met the NATO spending target in the final years of the Cold War, when Soviet forces were stationed across the Baltic Sea. Since then, the ratio of Danish spending has dropped consistently and totaled 23.2 billion kroner ($3.31 billion), or 1.2 percent of GDP, in 2015.

Welfare Trumps Defense
Helge Pedersen, a Copenhagen-based chief economist at Nordea Bank AB, estimates that meeting the 2 percent mark again would require about 15 billion kroner in extra defense spending.

That’s how much Denmark spends each year on supporting its universities, or five years of child support for its families.

After the Cold War, Denmark raised its participation in military operations abroad, with Danish soldiers and pilots fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, Libya and Syria. But military spending is still a fraction of the cost of its welfare state -- less than one-twenty-fifth, according to the Finance Ministry’s 2017 budget draft -- and certainly less popular.

Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has pledged to add 800 million kroner in security spending starting next year. Finding the money isn’t easy. Defense Minister Peter Christensen has said the government is struggling to gain support for its economic policy amid competing demands for tax cuts and more welfare from its parliamentary allies.

In any case, Denmark’s “budget deficit is already close to the EU’s budget limits," Pedersen said. "There’s really no way we can increase defense spending without cutting costs elsewhere.”

Aging Equipment

Raising taxes is also an unpalatable option for a country with the highest overall tax burden in Europe. And since Christensen has already ruled out Denmark meeting the 2 percent target any time soon, Trump is set for a disappointment.

Still, the president-elect has succeeded in casting the spotlight on an issue that rarely gets much public attention in the small Scandinavian nation. After his first conversation with Trump, Rasmussen reiterated his pledge to boost his country’s defense capabilities.

“We need money for international operations and Danish military equipment is more worn down than most people realize,” Johannes Riber Nordby, deputy director at the Institute for Strategy at the Danish Defense College, said in a phone interview.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ng-demand-would-break-denmark-s-welfare-state