TexasTiger 12,600 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Who thinks it has outlived its usefulness? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 6 hours ago, TexasTiger said: Who thinks it has outlived its usefulness? Nope....but good that DT is pushing Europeans to pay what they agreed to pay....three previous presidents pressured them with little success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 18 minutes ago, AU64 said: Nope....but good that DT is pushing Europeans to pay what they agreed to pay....three previous presidents pressured them with little success. Seems to have spooked the senate. http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/396399-senate-overwhelmingly-passes-resolution-supporting-nato-as-trump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 7 hours ago, AUDub said: Seems to have spooked the senate. http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/396399-senate-overwhelmingly-passes-resolution-supporting-nato-as-trump That is fine but I get the sense that DT is mostly critical of the freeloaders and pushing them ....if they think NATO is important, then step up to the p!ate financially. I view his comments as a negotiation tactic with EU.... Everyone is happy with a great benefit that someone else is paying for....time for them to pay what they have pledged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 1 hour ago, AU64 said: That is fine but I get the sense that DT is mostly critical of the freeloaders and pushing them ....if they think NATO is important, then step up to the p!ate financially. I view his comments as a negotiation tactic with EU.... Everyone is happy with a great benefit that someone else is paying for....time for them to pay what they have pledged. Relevant thread. Dan makes some good points here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Does he mean that Europe would be responsible for its own defense. ? JMO but I doubt they are willing to pay the price....socialists to the core.....fifty years of mostly free military defense paid for by someone else...living the good life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 23 hours ago, TexasTiger said: Who thinks it has outlived its usefulness? It may not have outlived it's usefulness but if some countries aren't going to pay their minimum share the let them defend themselves. We have saved their butts in two world wars and if they can't pay 2% then let the ones who won't band together and see how long they last when the going gets tough. But it looks like they got the message from Trump and know he means business since they signed and agreement to pay at least 2%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUloggerhead 2,184 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 On 7/10/2018 at 1:33 PM, TexasTiger said: Who thinks it has outlived its usefulness? Well, the original purpose was to provide collective security against the threat of USSR expansion. In the immediate aftermath of WWII, European countries weren't militarily strong enough to resist any Soviet mischief ... without US help. But today? Hordes of Warsaw Pact tanks coming through the Fulda Gap isn't a realistic threat anymore. Since the USSR collapsed about 27 years ago it would appear that specific threat is no longer relevant. Yeah, I know -- but Russia, Russia, Russia! I think it's correct & proper to reassess NATO today and modernize the alliance to identify & counter realistic threats to member countries. We don't have to get rid of NATO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 5 hours ago, AU64 said: Does he mean that Europe would be responsible for its own defense. ? JMO but I doubt they are willing to pay the price....socialists to the core.....fifty years of mostly free military defense paid for by someone else...living the good life. You nailed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 hours ago, AUloggerhead said: Well, the original purpose was to provide collective security against the threat of USSR expansion. In the immediate aftermath of WWII, European countries weren't militarily strong enough to resist any Soviet mischief ... without US help. But today? Hordes of Warsaw Pact tanks coming through the Fulda Gap isn't a realistic threat anymore. Since the USSR collapsed about 27 years ago it would appear that specific threat is no longer relevant. Yeah, I know -- but Russia, Russia, Russia! I think it's correct & proper to reassess NATO today and modernize the alliance to identify & counter realistic threats to member countries. We don't have to get rid of NATO. The Germans seem to have forgotten how much Russia hates them. I wonder if they even teach WW1 and WW2 history in schools. I wonder if we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 21 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said: The Germans seem to have forgotten how much Russia hates them. I wonder if they even teach WW1 and WW2 history in schools. I wonder if we do. Russia pretty much owns Germany.....in winter they can close a few valves and freeze a good many of them. Merkel has voluntarily allowed Putin to get control of their energy supply.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 1 minute ago, AU64 said: Russia pretty much owns Germany.....in winter they can close a few valves and freeze a good many of them. Merkel has voluntarily allowed Putin to get control of their energy supply.? They will pay in due time. The socialist Germans won't even know they are in trouble until they see Russian tanks rolling down the streets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTiger 7,675 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 14 hours ago, AU64 said: That is fine but I get the sense that DT is mostly critical of the freeloaders and pushing them ....if they think NATO is important, then step up to the p!ate financially. I view his comments as a negotiation tactic with EU.... Everyone is happy with a great benefit that someone else is paying for....time for them to pay what they have pledged. Looks like Trump is doing a great job of making that point....and he should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,600 Posted July 12, 2018 Author Share Posted July 12, 2018 5 hours ago, AUloggerhead said: Well, the original purpose was to provide collective security against the threat of USSR expansion. In the immediate aftermath of WWII, European countries weren't militarily strong enough to resist any Soviet mischief ... without US help. But today? Hordes of Warsaw Pact tanks coming through the Fulda Gap isn't a realistic threat anymore. Since the USSR collapsed about 27 years ago it would appear that specific threat is no longer relevant. Yeah, I know -- but Russia, Russia, Russia! I think it's correct & proper to reassess NATO today and modernize the alliance to identify & counter realistic threats to member countries. We don't have to get rid of NATO. So how would you reform it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUloggerhead 2,184 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 13 hours ago, TexasTiger said: So how would you reform it? Per Article 12: Link Quote Article 12 After the Treaty has been in force for ten years, or at any time thereafter, the Parties shall, if any of them so requests, consult together for the purpose of reviewing the Treaty, having regard for the factors then affecting peace and security in the North Atlantic area, including the development of universal as well as regional arrangements under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security. Google 'Reform NATO' and there are all kinds of articles with specific details. It's now going on 70 years since the inception of the treaty and as I've already pointed out, the main threat evaporated nearly 3 decades ago. The European countries are definitely more prosperous than they were in 1949 so, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect them to either: pay their fair share according to the treaty or decide if belonging to the treaty is actually worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 10,994 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Welp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Would the western European countries fight to defend a Poland from Russia? I get that we don't want them fighting each other but the sweetheart energy deals with Russia guarantee that Putin pretty much can do what he wants... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,365 Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 NATO is a great org. But, grudgingly obvious point Trump is making, they do need to step up. There, now got to brush my teeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.