Trump charges allies for US protection "Cost + 50%"

[CowboyTed]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

I'll take that bet, Japan needs to build up their own military to help police the Pacific, especially NK.
The US military budget is 10x Russia's, and more than the next 15 military budgets combined. That is way more than we can afford. As for "projecting military power", that's what submarines are for. Even Trump was impressed with their capabilities. When we parked 3 carrier battle groups off NK, that got their attention. So I'm not sold on too many military bases, especially in the EU, when the NATO military budgets aren't keeping up.

Rank Country Spending 2018 (US$ Bn.)
1 United States 643.3 ($714b 2019 & $750b 2020)
2 China 168.2
3 Saudi Arabia 82.9
4 Russia 63.1
5 India 57.9
6 United Kingdom 56.1EU
7 France 53.4 EU
8 Japan 47.3
9 Germany 45.7 EU
10 South Korea 39.2
11 Brazil 28.0
12 Australia 26.6
13 Italy 24.9
14 Israel 21.6
15 Iraq 19.6

NATO 2% of GDP Military Spending Guideline (US is pulling the NATO wagon, EU countries riding in it!)

Always knew you Trumpsters are pro Russia...

When US got attacked by Russia, Trump just rolled over...

No point paying for a defence and having the President surrendering

 

[kyzr]

Bullshit. But either way, we simply can't afford so much protection. Time to reallocate military spending where it will do the MOST good.

are you really that naive that you think we are just there out of the goodness of our hearts? Who does Japan have to worry about an invasion from?

Same country that wants Taiwan probably wants Japan. Remember all those peaceful islands they built in the Sea of Japan?
What part of "we need to spend less on Defense" don't you understand? If they want us there they can help pay the freight.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Bullshit. But either way, we simply can't afford so much protection. Time to reallocate military spending where it will do the MOST good.

are you really that naive that you think we are just there out of the goodness of our hearts? Who does Japan have to worry about an invasion from?

Same country that wants Taiwan probably wants Japan. Remember all those peaceful islands they built in the Sea of Japan?
What part of "we need to spend less on Defense" don't you understand? If they want us there they can help pay the freight.

but we are not spending less on defense, even if they pay us more, Trump is pumping up the defense budget, by a lot. I think he wants to spend more than the next 30 countries

 

[kyzr]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

I'll take that bet, Japan needs to build up their own military to help police the Pacific, especially NK.
The US military budget is 10x Russia's, and more than the next 15 military budgets combined. That is way more than we can afford. As for "projecting military power", that's what submarines are for. Even Trump was impressed with their capabilities. When we parked 3 carrier battle groups off NK, that got their attention. So I'm not sold on too many military bases, especially in the EU, when the NATO military budgets aren't keeping up.

NATO 2% of GDP Military Spending Guideline (US is pulling the NATO wagon, EU countries riding in it!)

Always knew you Trumpsters are pro Russia...

When US got attacked by Russia, Trump just rolled over...

No point paying for a defence and having the President surrendering

WTF does Russia have to do with US bases? duh.
What planet did Russia attack the US on? duh.
Like the EU? duh.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

I'll take that bet, Japan needs to build up their own military to help police the Pacific, especially NK.
The US military budget is 10x Russia's, and more than the next 15 military budgets combined. That is way more than we can afford. As for "projecting military power", that's what submarines are for. Even Trump was impressed with their capabilities. When we parked 3 carrier battle groups off NK, that got their attention. So I'm not sold on too many military bases, especially in the EU, when the NATO military budgets aren't keeping up.

NATO 2% of GDP Military Spending Guideline (US is pulling the NATO wagon, EU countries riding in it!)

Always knew you Trumpsters are pro Russia...

When US got attacked by Russia, Trump just rolled over...

No point paying for a defence and having the President surrendering

WTF does Russia have to do with US bases? duh.
What planet did Russia attack the US on? duh.
Like the EU? duh.

why do you think we have bases and troops in Europe if not to counter Russia

 

[kyzr]

Bullshit. But either way, we simply can't afford so much protection. Time to reallocate military spending where it will do the MOST good.

are you really that naive that you think we are just there out of the goodness of our hearts? Who does Japan have to worry about an invasion from?

Same country that wants Taiwan probably wants Japan. Remember all those peaceful islands they built in the Sea of Japan?
What part of "we need to spend less on Defense" don't you understand? If they want us there they can help pay the freight.

but we are not spending less on defense, even if they pay us more, Trump is pumping up the defense budget, by a lot. I think he wants to spend more than the next 30 countries

The dems are going to cut defense spending by a lot. Trump wants $750b for 2020, the dems might give $650b.
Trump wants to make up some of the loss, otherwise he needs to shrink our footprint.

 

[kyzr]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

I'll take that bet, Japan needs to build up their own military to help police the Pacific, especially NK.
The US military budget is 10x Russia's, and more than the next 15 military budgets combined. That is way more than we can afford. As for "projecting military power", that's what submarines are for. Even Trump was impressed with their capabilities. When we parked 3 carrier battle groups off NK, that got their attention. So I'm not sold on too many military bases, especially in the EU, when the NATO military budgets aren't keeping up.

NATO 2% of GDP Military Spending Guideline (US is pulling the NATO wagon, EU countries riding in it!)

Always knew you Trumpsters are pro Russia...

When US got attacked by Russia, Trump just rolled over...

No point paying for a defence and having the President surrendering

WTF does Russia have to do with US bases? duh.
What planet did Russia attack the US on? duh.
Like the EU? duh.

why do you think we have bases and troops in Europe if not to counter Russia

The EU is funding the Russian military with their gas purchases, via pipelines, and the US taxpayer is supposed to borrow to defend the EU from Russia? Think again.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Bullshit. But either way, we simply can't afford so much protection. Time to reallocate military spending where it will do the MOST good.

are you really that naive that you think we are just there out of the goodness of our hearts? Who does Japan have to worry about an invasion from?

Same country that wants Taiwan probably wants Japan. Remember all those peaceful islands they built in the Sea of Japan?
What part of "we need to spend less on Defense" don't you understand? If they want us there they can help pay the freight.

but we are not spending less on defense, even if they pay us more, Trump is pumping up the defense budget, by a lot. I think he wants to spend more than the next 30 countries

The dems are going to cut defense spending by a lot. Trump wants $750b for 2020, the dems might give $650b.
Trump wants to make up some of the loss, otherwise he needs to shrink our footprint.

I am confused as to how 650b is a loss, and how that would be a cut in spending...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

I'll take that bet, Japan needs to build up their own military to help police the Pacific, especially NK.
The US military budget is 10x Russia's, and more than the next 15 military budgets combined. That is way more than we can afford. As for "projecting military power", that's what submarines are for. Even Trump was impressed with their capabilities. When we parked 3 carrier battle groups off NK, that got their attention. So I'm not sold on too many military bases, especially in the EU, when the NATO military budgets aren't keeping up.

NATO 2% of GDP Military Spending Guideline (US is pulling the NATO wagon, EU countries riding in it!)

Always knew you Trumpsters are pro Russia...

When US got attacked by Russia, Trump just rolled over...

No point paying for a defence and having the President surrendering

WTF does Russia have to do with US bases? duh.
What planet did Russia attack the US on? duh.
Like the EU? duh.

why do you think we have bases and troops in Europe if not to counter Russia

The EU is funding the Russian military with their gas purchases, via pipelines, and the US taxpayer is supposed to borrow to defend the EU from Russia? Think again.

I have been saying pull them out for years, so welcome aboard. But we will not because we are not there for Germany or Italy, we are there for the US. It is all about what is in our best interest.

 

[sparky]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

If we, the USA, want a world where we are safe then WE must pay the cost. If you want to force someone else to pay for us to be there then you are not much of a conservative.

You can call me anything, but I refuse to borrow to protect another country. We simply cannot afford to borrow any more. As the interest rates rise the interest on that Debt will kill the US Budget. We're done (or should be). I support Trump, pay us or we're gone. Have a nice life.

We are not protecting other countries, we are not there for their well being, but for ours.

so few get that gator.....~S~

 

[candycorn]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

I’m a liberal and I vote yes charge them. Free rides over.

Its a fun laboratory experiment for the guy who “knows more than the generals”.

Here is what the fucking idiot thinks happened one day. Nation X called up the US and said, “Station troops here” and we said, “Yes, right away”.

Many of those deployments are a strategic investment made by the US. They not only protect our allies but they offer us an operating base from which to conduct operations, resupply our ships, allow soldiers to get medical attention faster, etc… Its not as if we’re getting nothing out of the deal. The blob doesn’t under stand that because he never knew anyone who sacrificed or served.

Now, do we need as many deployments as we currently have? Almost certainly no. That should be looked at by actual professionals in either 2 to 6 years when the blob has oozed out of the oval and we have an actual commander in chief once more.

 

[kyzr]

The US defense budget has two components, the base budget and the war/supplemental budget.
I'm not sure if the dems' 2020 budget includes the supplemental war spending or not?
So the $650b would be less than the $700b and the $714b, the most recent budgets.
In 2018 defense spending was $700b + war funding
In 2019 defense spending was $714b + war funding
In 2020 defense spending is TBD, but Trump requested $750b.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The US defense budget has two components, the base budget and the war/supplemental budget.
I'm not sure if the dems' 2020 budget includes the supplemental war spending or not?
So the $650b would be less than the $700b and the $714b, the most recent budgets.
In 2018 defense spending was $700b + war funding
In 2019 defense spending was $714b + war funding
In 2020 defense spending is TBD, but Trump requested $750b.

do you agree we need to be spending 750b in 2020?

 

[kyzr]

The US defense budget has two components, the base budget and the war/supplemental budget.
I'm not sure if the dems' 2020 budget includes the supplemental war spending or not?
So the $650b would be less than the $700b and the $714b, the most recent budgets.
In 2018 defense spending was $700b + war funding
In 2019 defense spending was $714b + war funding
In 2020 defense spending is TBD, but Trump requested $750b.

do you agree we need to be spending 750b in 2020?

No, $750b will never happen. Trump is padding the bill so he can move money around.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The US defense budget has two components, the base budget and the war/supplemental budget.
I'm not sure if the dems' 2020 budget includes the supplemental war spending or not?
So the $650b would be less than the $700b and the $714b, the most recent budgets.
In 2018 defense spending was $700b + war funding
In 2019 defense spending was $714b + war funding
In 2020 defense spending is TBD, but Trump requested $750b.

do you agree we need to be spending 750b in 2020?

No, $750b will never happen. Trump is padding the bill so he can move money around.

but if it did, you would be ok with it, since Trump asked for it?

 

[Hossfly]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

So do you really want to speak Russian?

No, he wants to pray to Mecca 5 times a day.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

So do you really want to speak Russian?

you are a fucking moron. What the hell is Russia going to do?

so let us guess you flunked out of History 101 you stupid fucking ignorant clown.

 

[BS Filter]

Good for him. God bless America and President Trump.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

So do you really want to speak Russian?

No, he wants to pray to Mecca 5 times a day.

I wouldn't doubt if he is a dot head and thinks like his messiah did a bunch of Camel jockeys came over on the Santa Maria and discovered America

 

[BS Filter]

Big debate on the Sunday morning talk shows, Trump wants to charge US allies the actual cost plus 50% for US forces stationed in their countries.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...91378986dbb_story.html?utm_term=.6de5012523a8

I can see both sides of this debate:
1. Why should US taxpayers borrow money to protect other countries, such as the EU from Russia, South Korea from NK, Japan from China, ME countries from Iran, etc.? Italy, WTF?? Lets say the cost of the major bases and not the small "lily pads" needed for local access all over.

2. The generals argue that the US bases secure our allies loyalty, and in today's world we need all the allies we can get. We are spending $24b a year to keep US troops in the EU. Trump wants $36b a year to keep them there, otherwise we bring most of them home because we can keep borrowing, the US is tapped out.

Lets take a poll...

It is kind of cute how you think we are there to protect them and not project our own power across the globe.

I want to see Trump pull all the troops out of Japan after they tell him to pound sand...he does not have the balls for such an action.

So do you really want to speak Russian?

No, he wants to pray to Mecca 5 times a day.

Gator loves Islam.