I’m glad you’ve brought that up ninfan, I’d forgotten about it. Outofbreath never did answer my question, which was, I’m sure you remember :

“Can you explain how because I point out that ninfan is only interested in scoring points and mocking people it means that I give a monkeys about his opinions? Can you do that?”

I guess he couldn’t think of an answer.

And where is he btw? He’s the first, and only one, to defend you. Has even he given up on you?

go home America, you’re drunk

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/326915/bruised-us-diplomat-leaves-new-zealand

(not Trump related in any way other than that Trump recalled his ambassador to NZ and hasnt replaced him yet)

It’s strange how quiet he goes over the weekend now, maybe his phone has been taken off him or he just had some really good games of golf on the tax payers expense.

I’ll rephrase, why is trump such a turd?

I’ll take that as a rhetorical question, but just in case…

Trump is spot on about NATO, too many freeloaders Germany being one of the worst. He’s been asked to “back NATO 100%” by UK and others to give others a chance to respond and work up plans to increase their spending and/or the pace of those increases. Sooner or later he’s going to light a rocket under NATO members not oaying their way, Obama declined to respond to Russia’s invasion / annexation of Crimea saying it was Europe’s problem, Trump is just more overt – pay up or we won’t dabe your arse when Russia comes knocking.

Trump is right, there arent enough tanks, bombs and killing devices in the world, we should all tool up coz he says its a good idea….

and Killary was the one that was definitely gonna start some wars 😆

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/now-nato-works-officials-reject-donald-trumps-claim-germany/
Spending commitments in place, moving in the right direction already so why is Trump complaining?
The the reasoning behind it all
https://twitter.com/IvoHDaalder/status/843105839091273728
From the former US ambassador to Nato.

mikewsmith – Member
From the former US ambassador to Nato.

They really still don’t get it do they? 😆

Basically there is a new rule being set by President Trump. It is simple, Nato alliances now have to contribute more as demanded by USA. They have been Told, they are not asked nor negotiate. They are told to contribute more simple. 😆

It is Not what the rules say but it is simply cough up or fight for yourselves.

If Nato alliances want keep messing about the solution is simple, all President Trump needs to do is to say USA is pulling out Nato with several of those alliances in addition to stopping arm supply to those remaining Nato alliances.

On top of that impose on Germany the WWII terms and conditions so they are not to develop arms again.

Then sit back and see all of them bow.

Spending commitments in place, moving in the right direction already so why is Trump complaining?

All NATO countries, including Germany, have committed to spend 2% of GDP on defense by 2024. So far 5 of 28 NATO countries do.

Let’s get this straight, the 2% was agreed in 2006 as an achievable target since it was already the median spending amongst NATO members from 1993-2003

Nato alliances now have to contribute more as demanded by USA. the amount they agreed to over a decade ago

FTFY

The fact that ten years later only five countries are meeting it is utterly ‘king shameful (actually even worse than this, since the agreed target is 2% GDP spend, of which 20% of which is investment, which IIRC only two countries have met, UK and US, and Poland will meet this year)

The fact that the Germans are shimfing over even this, claiming it will take them till 2024 to meet the target, despite being the biggest and richest Continental European economy, and a direct neighbour of those countries most at threat from a resurgent Russia, is an utter joke. Germany and the German economy rose to its prominent position entirely on the back of the security offered to it by the occupying powers, and has the rest of NATO to thank for unification.

Does it create a direct fiscal debt, no, does it create a moral debt whereby we and the US have been shelling out while they have freeloaded off the rest of us, and should now pay their dues and pay back what is owed by securing their neighbours – damn strait it does.

I’m going to leave ^THAT^ well alone.

I have been wondering why he’s doing this (Trump, not Chewkw). The only reason I can think of is that The Donald is trying to build a rationale for cutting US defense spending.

The narrative will be that the US is being RIPPED OFF into paying more, because those nasty Germans aren’t paying their way. Donald has negotiated a NEW DEAL which saves Americans millions of dollars.

Obviously that’s totally nonsense – US military spending is completely independent of what anyone else (including the Germans) is doing. However – the hard-of-thinking will lap it up.

batfink – Member
I have been wondering why he’s doing this (Trump). The only reason I can think of is that The Donald is trying to build a rationale for cutting US defense spending.

Whatever rationale there is President Trump has his own reasoning.

The narrative will be that the US is being RIPPED OFF into paying more, because those nasty Germans aren’t paying their way. Donald has negotiated a NEW DEAL which saves Americans millions of dollars.

Obviously that’s totally nonsense – US military spending is completely independent of what anyone else (including the Germans) is doing. However – the hard-of-thinking will lap it up.

The narrative is simple just pay coz this is business as usual not charity nor some ideal view of the world. Pay up. Pay. Do business etc.

Hah, all this talk of the “2% commitment” but til now I just assumed that we were all supposed to be doing it already. Now I know that it’s a pledge to “aim to move towards the 2% guideline within a decade with a view to meeting their NATO Capability Targets and filling NATO’s capability shortfalls.” Since it’s not 2024, nobody’s failing to meet it, and though certainly some will, they won’t be breaking a commitment either.

(that’s not to say they shouldn’t be doing more of course; different issue)

Aside; the only reason the UK met the 2% last year was by moving stuff from other budgets into defence- we’re preserving our position with accounting not spending. This is always an issue, exactly what constitutes defence, and different countries have different definitions. For instance, I know a VA-sponsored student whose brewing course is officially defence spending.

And obviously it makes no comment on effectiveness of spending either- you could fritter it away on aircraft carriers with no planes, or vast ww2-era infantry forces with no transport, or porkbelly contracts designed to make defence companies rich, and say “well we spent 2%”

So I knew it was a shitty metric, but it’s interesting to discover what the 2% actually is, and how false the dialogue is about ut.

And obviously it makes no comment on effectiveness of spending either- you could fritter it away on aircraft carriers with no planes, or vast ww2-era infantry forces with no transport, or porkbelly contracts designed to make defence companies rich, and say “well we spent 2%”

So I knew it was a shitty metric, but it’s interesting to discover what the 2% actually is, and how false the dialogue is about ut.
Or more simply put.
It’s way more complicated than anyone thought (well the tweeting idiot though) everyone else knows how complex the issue is a small knows outcomes are a better measure than if Luxembourg has enough aircraft carriers.

The narrative is simple just pay coz this is business as usual not charity nor some ideal view of the world. Pay up. Pay. Do business etc.

Ok…. or just spout some random drivvel?

Why does he want them to pay? What difference does it make to him? The US spend on defence is VAST compared to every other country. If Germany spends a bit more on defence, what difference does it make to Donald?

Why pick a fight on this at all?

It only makes sense if Donald is looking to reduce US defence spending.

It only makes sense if Donald is looking to reduce US defence spending.

Which also doesn’t align with his budget does it. Massive cuts to arts, science etc and massive boost to military spending.
Makes more sense if we was trying to find a way to reduce the potential of US confrontation with Russia and having to have any involvement with the goings on in the Ukraine, balkans and other parts of the world. Also I’m sure Vladimir would like a lot less us military presence near his borders.
Of course nobody’s suggesting that Vladimir is influencing us policy…

Which also doesn’t align with his budget does it

Agreed – it doesn’t make sense. And I agree that another possible explanation is that the objective is to weaken Nato – but to what ends? So that Russia can continue their expansionism unopposed? Seems like that happening anyway – Obama didn’t intervene in Crimea (or Georgia) and he didn’t need to p*ss-off the Germans in doing so.

I suppose he could be doing it so he has a reason to oppose further NATO expansion – but again, it seems like there are hundreds of ways of doing that, which would be more effective.

Of course it’s possible that he just saw something on Fox about countries not yet spending 2% on Nato, and now he’s got a bug up his ar*e about it. It’s also possible that his issues with women prevent him from being able to have a professional relationship with Merkel, and so he’s chosen to define their relationship on this one issue (in which he feels comfortable).

or, he could just be a petulant man-child, with no idea what he’s doing.

The latter sounds reasonable to me. On a few things it seems when bannon isn’t operating the puppet it doesn’t behave well and is prone to straying off message.
My other thoughts on the spat with Nato was its part of the America needs to come first stuff, it’s no real policy objective but plays to the groups who think the US looks overseas too much (however they probably also like being top dog where the military is measured)

we and the US have been shelling out while they have freeloaded off the rest of us,

Perhaps, to paraphrase the orange one “that makes the Germans smart” 😆

Oh, and name those two countries which are 1. claiming other countries should buy more weapons, and 2. are making them?

Obviously that’s totally nonsense – US military spending is completely independent of what anyone else (including the Germans) is doing. However – the hard-of-thinking will lap it up.

And right on cue:

chewkw – Member

if Luxembourg has enough aircraft carriers.

I can confirm that we have exactly enough. Zero. AWACS though, I think we have too many. Nato is sponging off us.

It’s also possible that his issues with women prevent him from being able to have a professional relationship with Merkel,

Speaking of which…

Mummy.

How low can he go?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-gallup-poll-new-record-low-approval-ratings-russia-healthcare-wiretapping-twitter-a7638601.html
Reckon 20s are possible? A lot of tweets coming back about Obama and golf days and low approval ratings.
In a week where people will learn how little health care they have left get an answer on the made up wire taps and much more I think he has a solid 29 in him…

Incredulous isn’t it, that over a third of American voters approve of the way Donald Trump is acting as US president.

It makes you wonder what he actually has to do to lose their confidence.

I think this one might answer it…
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/19/opinions/trump-taxpayer-injustice-opinion-obeidallah/
Cut meals on wheels – used by lots of vets…
At least with the protected rights to bear arms and form a militia he could actually end his days looking at a basket.

mikewsmith – Member

It’s way more complicated than anyone thought (well the tweeting idiot though) everyone else knows how complex the issue is

To be fair he’s not the first US president to obsess over the 2%- Obama did the same, though not so crassly or ill-informedly.

Of course it’s possible that he just saw something on Fox about countries not yet spending 2% on Nato, and now he’s got a bug up his ar*e about it.

Trump has been talking about the US footing the defence bill on behalf of other countries for decades:

Indeed, the whole issue was core to his election campaign:

[video]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4mgYmViCtjc[/video]

Though you maybe didn’t hear much of this if you just relied on the Guardian and Buzzfeed for your understanding of US politics

He also said the US was going to do less foreign meddling, surely he can’t up the defense budget, ask countries to pay more while promising to do less. That wouldn’t? make any sense, anyway off to play some golf you can sort this out for me.

Trump has been talking about the US footing the defence bill on behalf of other countries for decades

Getting someone else to pay for something you benefit from is Trump’s business model, you would have thought he’d be impressed with the German’s savvy 😆

Though you maybe didn’t hear much of this if you just relied on the Guardian and Buzzfeed for your understanding of US politics

He also told everyone to buy American and put first and to buy American to support American industry. Which is why his daughter landed 50t of imported goods during his inaguration speach
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ivanka-trump-china-clothing-import-donald-father-buy-american-a7626471.html
It’s good that he talks a lot but most of it will come back and bite him.
How many times has he played golf this year and how many times did he tweet complaining about Obama playing golf?
Then there is the bill for going south that would have funded programmes he wants to cut…

I’m not surprised that Saudi wouldn’t lend their minesweepers for use in the “Persian Gulf”. They don’t accept that term – it’s the “Arabian Gulf” to them. Little things like that demonstrate his lack of understanding of diplomacy.

Trump has been talking about the US footing the defence bill on behalf of other countries for decades:

So he’s been wrong for decades, and it’s not just a recent thing. Phew!!

I thought this might amuse both sides in the #fakenews world:

oh and John Oliver is back…
“Trump is the stopped clock of arseholes”
[video]https://youtu.be/IQkP3tzmf1Y[/video]

Trumps presidency is going far better than I could have hoped, with every tweet, every meeting (or non-meeting) with a world leader and every passing week he reduces American political influence and destroys the credibility of the right wing agenda the US pushes onto the world.

As a bonus he is also destroying the myth that success is built on hard work and intelligence, never has there been a clearer example that privilege and luck are the real platforms for success.

He will be the greatest diving force for socialist principles since the second world war. As long as the world manages to survive the next 4 years, the world will be much better off in 20-30 years time, just not in the way his fan boys think it will.

He will be the greatest diving force for socialist principles since the second world war. As long as the world manages to survive the next 4 years, the world will be much better off in 20-30 years time, just not in the way his fan boys think it will.

Down side is most of the American left are not really socialist and as I’ve said before left is a coalition of diverse people, some of whom are intolerant and backward thinking on a lot of things and have no regard for the environment.
I’d predict a reaction but no real guarantee of a good one

He will be the greatest diving force

Very good

Down side is

Gets better.

In America Liberal is a dirty word, don’t even suggest Socialism. Goddamn commie reds.

slowoldman – Member

In America Liberal is a dirty word, don’t even suggest Socialism. Goddamn commie reds.

Amazing that this still has traction, surely the last election blew it all out of the water?

The ones who loose are stuck doing left and right, you have business liberals supporting free markets and equality then you have protectionist union types opposing equality and diversity. It’s a mix people need to get hold of or the centre ground as most call it

DrJ – Member

Obviously that’s totally nonsense – US military spending is completely independent of what anyone else (including the Germans) is doing. However – the hard-of-thinking will lap it up.

And right on cue:

The cue is this Nato alliances have no negotiation power if America were to say pay up. Nothing, nil, zil. They simply have no power to negotiate whatsoever because they rely heavily on USA.
How many aircraft carriers do the alliances have combined?

Just this point along will be enough to hammer the alliances to pay up. 😆

Note to mods, can we remove emoticons I’m getting a headache.
Anyone checked Trump’s approval rating recently, did someone say worst ever. Guess he must be doing something right then…….