Immigration and border issues

[Caballus]

NATO is on the field of battle--AFG, Iraq being the main ones. Operation Sea Guardian being another example.

Saying nations are not paying their fair share is a huge oversimplification, particularly when you look at the effects the EU is achieving in the economic and security sectors.

Sponsored

 

[Caballus]

What laws?

 

[Caballus]

Ok, thanks.

 

[Qcman17]

NATO is on the field of battle--AFG, Iraq being the main ones. Operation Sea Guardian being another example.

Saying nations are not paying their fair share is a huge oversimplification, particularly when you look at the effects the EU is achieving in the economic and security sectors.

Indeed it is sir it's where the rubber hits the road.

 

[kz]

Ok, thanks.

You expect way too much from him. He sources his knowledge from idiotic memes which exactly shows why this country is where it is. People are so easy to manipulate by narrative that lets them hate others - one way or another.

 

[watisthis]

"Trump falsely said that the amount other NATO member countries spent on defense “was really heading in the wrong direction — three years ago was heading down.” Before Trump took office, NATO Europe and Canada had increased defense spending in 2015 and 2016.

He also claimed that “a lot” of countries are “delinquent” in their payments. But countries make their own decisions on what percentage of their gross domestic product to spend on their own defense. They don’t owe NATO money if they spend less than other countries choose to do.

The president made his claim about overall defense spending during his appearance with Macron and similarly said in his meeting with Stoltenberg that defense spending for NATO members “was going down for close to 20 years. If you look at a chart, it was like a rollercoaster down, nothing up. And that was going on for a long time.”

Here’s the chart from the most recent NATO report on defense spending, published on Nov. 29. It does not show defense spending for NATO countries, other than the United States, “going down for close to 20 years.” Instead, it shows spending declining for most of the 1990s, before rising or staying level for most of the next decade. Spending declined from 2009 to 2014, before rising again from 2015 to 2019." -

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/12/factchecking-trumps-nato-remarks/

 

[Caballus]

That is absolutely false. Nowhere does U.S. SOF fight alone (or conventional forces for that matter). Whether under the NATO flag in RSM (NSOCC-A) or as part of a coalition in many other places around the globe, we fight alongside our NATO Allies.

The pay more argument is not new. Secretary Gates put it best in his farewell address to NATO back in 2011. Sec Mattis put it very well during a summit too.

Problem is that it has been oversimplified to the point that politicized narrative is no longer true. The fact that some would not realize that Allies who write checks are investing the blood treasure alongside (and sometimes instead of) us is an example. Look at what's being invested in Ukraine and there's another example.

 

[Caballus]

I don't spin, Sir.

Nations pay into NATO based on their GDP. All nations are making their required payments and then some.

The 2% GDP is about how much they spend on their OWN defense not how much they pay into NATO.

If you're insinuating that political leaders themselves have to be on the battlefield to legitimize the sacrifices their warfighters are making, then that puts us (Americans) in a pretty vulnerable position.

1. Only 1% of Americans put on a uniform, regardless to how much the other 99% pay for the 1% to protect them.

2. Sadly few American political leaders have ever put on a uniform and many who have were reservists and/or in low risk support jobs. Many who haven't had a weak excuse to avoid service.

3. No, Amb Kay Bailey Hutchinson has not fought in combat.

 

[kz]

LOLOL

NATO is about the weakest it has ever been, thanks to Trump. Did you not how he ran away because - wait - others laughed at him (hard not to) ?
He fired about the most competent person that could lead armed forces (Mattis) for idiotic reasons. He keeps directing armed forces funding to the nonsense wall. He's the worst president for the military that could possibly elect, primarily because he gives no shit about them as he doesn't about anything and anyone else.

Sponsored