Article

2019-11-28 Europe

Merkel vows to hit 2% NATO spending target 'by early 2030s'

I’m sure she really means it this time.

[DW] Chancellor Angela Merkel on Wednesday underscored her commitment to NATO, pledging to raise Germany's defense spending to the alliance's 2% target "by the early 2030s."
Russia, in a spectacular outbreak of European solidarity, promises no hostile action against European countries until at least the early 2030s.
"The preservation of NATO is in our own interest, more than during the Cold War," Merkel said while addressing lawmakers in German parliament.
As protesters chanted "USA fascists out of Germany!"
"At the moment, Europe is unable to defend itself," she added, urging the bloc to stay together.
If only there were some kind of way for European countries to defend themselves. Some kind of...armed force. That countries could spend money on. Just a pipe dream, I guess.

Ouch.

Merkel said NATO has been a "bulwark for peace and freedom." Highlighting Washington's changing role in foreign policy, she said that "the United States no longer automatically takes up responsibility when it's burning around us."
And it was about goddamned time. Europeans sneering at us for having a military, and expecting us to do everything for them despite being wealthy First World nations that can easily afford it. The broomstick industry is now considered as part of their military spending.

I've been looking at comments by Europeans and they think they shouldn't have to spend the money. They don't see why a military is important and think they might as well just flush the money down the toilet. They should spend instead on things they like for themselves, like social welfare and infrastructure. Ungrateful assholes, the lot of them. Cut 'em loose. Disband NATO, bring the boys home.

Posted by Herb McCoy 2019-11-28 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11136 views ] Top

#1 If it takes you that long to spend 2% on defense, you ain't serious. Let the Germans rot on their migrants.

Posted by DarthVader 2019-11-28 00:10|| 2019-11-28 00:10|| Front Page Top

#2 pledging to raise Germany's defense spending to the alliance's 2% target "by the early 2030s

"Naturally, that means I shall have to remain in office to ensure that."

Posted by Dron66046 2019-11-28 00:56|| 2019-11-28 00:56|| Front Page Top

#3 Trump administration to cut its financial contribution to NATO

The Trump administration has moved to substantially cut its contribution to NATO's collective budget according to several US and NATO officials, a symbolic move that comes as many continue to question President Donald Trump's commitment to the transatlantic alliance as he prepares to attend a summit to mark its 70th anniversary in London next week.

Previously the US provided some 22% of NATO's direct funding, which covers the cost of maintaining the NATO headquarters, joint security investments and some combined military operations.
It's a largely symbolic move as NATO's direct budget is relatively small, at about $2.5 billion, and is separate from national defense budgets that NATO recommends should stand at 2% of GDP.
US defense officials tell CNN that the Trump administration sought to reduce its contribution to about 16%, bringing it in line with Germany's, which provides 14.8% despite the US having a larger economy.

Posted by 3dc 2019-11-28 02:12|| 2019-11-28 02:12|| Front Page Top

#4 "Naturally, that means I shall have to remain in office to ensure that."

The first thought that occurred to me while reading the article.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2019-11-28 02:38|| 2019-11-28 02:38|| Front Page Top

#5 NATO’s European Allies Won’t Fight for Article 5

But when it came to committing to upholding Article 5—the alliance’s sacred cow, which requires NATO members to defend an ally if it is attacked—the results were devastating. The Pew poll showed that among Europeans, a median of 49 percent of respondents thought their country should not defend an ally, a response that exposes a lack of commitment to collective defense. Not only that: the majority of Europeans (67 percent), with the surprising exception of the Poles (49 percent), believed the United States would come to the defense of its allies.

Once again, the Europeans take the United States as their security guarantor for granted. Why successive U.S. administrations ever tolerated this is hard to fathom. Europe is prosperous. It has the means both to take care of its own security and to contribute to a greater role in burden sharing.

It does neither.

Posted by Herb McCoy 2019-11-28 02:53|| 2019-11-28 02:53|| Front Page Top

#6 Replace NATO with bilateral deals w Poland, Romania, Sweden, Denmark, UK, Germany Italy Spain.

Posted by Lex 2019-11-28 04:29|| 2019-11-28 04:29|| Front Page Top

#7 No different than never occurring climate change predictions

Posted by Uleck Spererong9442 2019-11-28 07:55|| 2019-11-28 07:55|| Front Page Top

#8 Why successive U.S. administrations ever tolerated this is hard to fathom.

I believe the original purpose of NATO was "to keep the the Germans down and the Russians out". And by NATO, we mean the US presence in Europe.

Posted by SteveS 2019-11-28 10:41|| 2019-11-28 10:41|| Front Page Top

#9 No problem. Trump can take Germany's contribution out in import duties. 25% is a good start. 35% is better.

Posted by Unaitle Panda6599 2019-11-28 12:30|| 2019-11-28 12:30|| Front Page Top

15:04 NN2N1
15:03 NN2N1
14:55 NN2N1
14:09 Grom the Affective
14:04 Super Hose
14:02 Super Hose
13:37 Procopius2k
13:35 Grom the Affective
13:34 Procopius2k
13:27 Grom the Affective
13:21 NN2N1
13:18 Grom the Affective
12:50 Remoteman
12:45 Secret Master
12:24 Matt
12:07 Abu Uluque
12:03 Grom the Affective
11:59 Grom the Affective
11:35 Super Hose
11:33 Super Hose
11:29 Besoeker
11:28 Besoeker
11:28 Super Hose
11:27 Besoeker