trump claims he told NATO country he would not protect them if Russia attacked them

[SavannahMann]

You stand with a friend whose ready to give 100% not those begging for help when they chose other things.

There is an old song, about an old saying. God Forbid you have to walk a mile in their shoes.

Poland just spent hundreds of millions to cut a canal through the spit of land to deny Russia canal fees for access. It is going to take Poland a hundred years to pay off that work with the fees they’ll charge.

This upset Russia who demanded Poland abandon the canal. Poland is putting their money up to oppose Russia. Trump is handing Poland to Russia on a silver platter.

What makes you think they aren’t paying? You are the worst sort of friend. The kind that demands an explanation and accounting for any favor asked of you.

 

[AntonToo]

Last I checked the US was still member of NATO.

Last I checked Trump got ejected out of the White House in 2020.

 

[AntonToo]

Cancel your job as a spy for Russia. It failed. Do you believe Russia wants to pay to be in NATO? Trump only likes those who pay into NATO.

Dummy nobody pays to be in NATO, 2% is a guideline spending on THEIR OWN ARMY.

Russia spends 5%+ of their GDP, more than just about anyone with respect to their relatively small economy.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[jc456]

Change the channel, brainwashed functional moron ignoramus seditionist pos conspiracy nut job.....

70% of Americans hate this economy, you sheep

 

[Kruska]

No they are NOT, nor were they in 2017 when Trump made an ass of himself in Brussels.

They were and still are:
Unfortunately, Trump is correct in stating this matter - which is in regards to a common agreed upon "GUIDELINE". Nowhere is it stated that NATO members MUST pay 2%.

Even though (excluding the USA budget) the European NATO alone, outspends Russia by 5 times.
Which brings in rightfully the question - why does NATO need to spend 2% of it's GDP at all? so that they can outspend Russia by 7 times?

 

[Nobody911]

Trump Says He Gave NATO Allies Warning: Pay In or He’d Urge Russian Aggression

Speaking in Conway, S.C., Donald J. Trump said as president he had told NATO allies that he would urge Russian aggression against countries that had not met unofficial financial commitments.

www.nytimes.com

If they had not paid their fee into NATO. The Russian asset is at it again. trump does not even try to hide is allegiance to Putin anymore. He doesn't have to. The repub party has become a Putin/Russia loving cult, who only greater allegiance in to the Russian asset, trump. You think trump ' won't leave NATO is re-elected. Think again....

Former President Donald J. Trump said on Saturday that, while president, he told the leaders of NATO countries that he would “encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to countries that had not paid the money they owed to the military alliance.

There are several reasons why NATO still exists despite the end of the Cold War.

First, NATO provides a forum for member countries to discuss and coordinate on security issues, as well as to conduct joint military exercises and operations.

Second, NATO serves as a deterrent against potential aggression from non-member countries, as it demonstrates the collective military strength of its members.

Third, NATO also plays a role in promoting stability and security in regions outside of Europe, such as through its involvement in peacekeeping operations and counter-terrorism efforts.

Moreover, the alliance has also taken on new roles and missions in recent years, such as cybersecurity and countering hybrid warfare, which are relevant in today's security environment.

If America were to leave NATO, it would likely have significant implications for the future of the alliance. NATO was originally formed as a collective defense agreement among Western nations, and the United States has historically been a key player in the organization.

If America were to leave NATO, it could potentially weaken the alliance and diminish its ability to respond to security challenges in Europe and beyond. It could also lead to increased tensions and uncertainty among NATO member countries, as they may feel less secure without the backing of the United States.

However, NATO is not solely reliant on the United States, and other member countries could potentially work to strengthen and maintain the alliance in the absence of American participation.

Additionally, the United States leaving NATO does not necessarily mean the end of the alliance, as other member countries could potentially continue to work together on security issues.

NATO is obviously not a for-profit organization and the US president is not the CEO. Trump will probably fail if he keeps acting just like a Wolf of Wall Street! lol.

 

[Robert W]

Dummy nobody pays to be in NATO, 2% is a guideline spending on THEIR OWN ARMY.

Russia spends 5%+ of their GDP, more than just about anyone with respect to their relatively small economy.

This then is the lie told by NATO according to you.


NATO is resourced through the direct and indirect contributions of its members. NATO’s common funds are composed of direct contributions to collective budgets and programmes, which equate to only 0.3% of total Allied defence spending (around EUR 3.3 billion for 2023). These funds enable NATO to deliver capabilities and run the entirety of the Organization and its military commands.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Fuck you life is all about choices get that free health care or take money and spend it on self defense. Why are leftist devoid of truth and always depends on someone else to protect them?

“As with much foreign policy, the Republican frontrunner radically misunderstood the nature and purpose of this relationship. NATO is not an alliance based on dues: it is the largest military bloc in history, formed to face down the Soviet threat, based on the collective defense that an attack on one is an attack on all – a principle enshrined in Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty.
[…]
Trump’s comments come at a devastatingly bad time for Europe. The rogue rump of the GOP which supports him is persistently trying to derail vital aid to Ukraine. If the desired $60 billion does not arrive, or is delayed much longer, it will have an irrevocably detrimental impact on Ukraine’s practical defenses at the frontlines, political cohesion in Kyiv, and nationwide morale.

Damage is already being done. And it is Putin who benefits.”

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/12/europe/trump-nato-putin-europe-analysis-intl/index.html

Trump is comprehensively ignorant and wrong when it comes to foreign policy – another Trump term would be a disaster.

 

[Kruska]

Plebiscites are a favorite tool of dictators, occasionally useful for democratic societies but in themselves hardly the defining quality of modern democracy. There were no “plebiscites” in our Founding Constitution or in U.S. federal law historically, but historic plebiscites did take place in Nazi Germany and other dictatorships.

As we used to joke about communism: “One man, one vote, one time.” A real democratic Republic depends on a multiparty system with responsible parties and leaders, guarantees for private property and minority rights, traditions of peaceful and regular transfers of power (not “lifetime presidents”) , democratic norms, free speech, a free press, free non-party-controlled non-state enterprises — none of which exist in Russia, China, North Korea, the Islamic Republic, etc.

“Free societies” require far, far more than “plebiscites.”

There isn't a single dictatorial country that allows or has ever allowed for plebiscites - that I talk about "free" plebiscites is understood. And not some forced upon "peoples statement" as in e.g. N-Korea.

As for your US example - just a mere constitution doesn't guarantee a "real" democracy, if plebiscites are not the basis of "making laws" and decisions by a respective government.
The general provision and requirement of a plebiscite in view of amending, introducing and relinquishing of a law - is the only safeguarding mechanism in politics, that is essentially controlled by the people. Anything else is simply and only controlled by the respective parties and their respective lobby's for at least 4 years.

The only thing a fake democracy offers - is to cast a vote once every 4 years, and then having to watch and accept as to whatever the respective government decides/implements in those 4 years. Even making political alliances amongst those parties that supposedly represent different ideologies and policies - just for "politicians" and Lobbyists to pass a law that solely suits them.

Therefore if someone voted for e.g. the Republicans or Democrats in a national election - did he/she also give consent that his/her "representative" is free to vote in favor of an opposition parties program aka law initiative?

What US or German citizen was ever asked to cast a ballot, to decide upon e.g. migrant policies? NONE
Whilst Swiss people decided upon that issue via a plebiscite !!! therefore they do not have a pressing migrant issue.

Swiss people even decide onto the fines regarding parking and speeding tickets - right up to defense spending's incl. what supplier or weapon system is to be chosen. Why isn't there a single Swiss Army combatant outside of Switzerland? because the people aka the plebiscite voted against sending them out.

How many US or German citizens were asked if they are in favor of sending their national armed forces outside of their national territory?
NONE.

Therefore the introduction aka "requirement" for a plebiscite, is the primary tool to uphold a "true" democracy. And politicians that are aware of this "tool" are therefore required to make a "convincing" case for their respective law ideas to the "people" - and not just pass/enforce them through a corrupt and manipulation riddled Parliament/ Congress/Senate.

In conclusion, the only party that I would ever be willing to vote for - is the one that beholds a plebiscite clause. Till then I will prefer to vote for an autocratic system such as Singapore and China - who both clearly decide in favor for their respective populations best interests.

I can guarantee you, that if the Chinese or Singaporean government would blatantly disregard and ignore their peoples wishes and demands - as in the USA or e.g. Germany - there would be a massive and violent revolution in both countries. Especially in China, since Chinese people in contra to Western bullshit articles, are far more aggressive and self-determined then Westerners, and do NOT simply follow like sheep, the CPC.
As a matter of fact, both the PAP in Singapore and the CPC in China are instructed to "convince" their respective population about the positive aspects of a law - and not just pass them ad-hoc as they like, see e.g. USA or Germany.

This "social point awarding" system, has been thoroughly explained for years towards the Chinese population before introduction - and therefore the majority accepts, that someone who does not adhere to general laws and does not respect nor contribute towards the general societies accepted values - does not deserve the same e.g. pension or social subsidies as one who acts in favor, contributes towards and respects a societies values.

The only problem Westerners have, they are simply unable and unwilling to define their own societies values and morals. But instead propagate and cling onto the ludicrous fantasy - "everybody is equal" and are "free" to vote for fake democracies.

Sure Trump and Biden are equal - right?, and a Negro with a University diploma is equal to a European Hillbilly who dropped out of Senior High - right? and a 67 year old American who worked all his live and is now jobbing at a 7/11 to make up for his measly pension is equal to a person who spend most of his live in a prison - right?

Okay, back to NATO
Which brings about the question, which citizen of a NATO member was ever asked to cast a vote for joining or not joining? Same goes for the NATO eastward expansion.

 

[Kruska]

When did you become a moderator? GFY.

Where does it state, that one has be a Mod in order to write what I wrote? - moron.

 

[Kruska]

There are several reasons why NATO still exists despite the end of the Cold War.

First, NATO provides a forum for member countries to discuss and coordinate on security issues, as well as to conduct joint military exercises and operations.

Second, NATO serves as a deterrent against potential aggression from non-member countries, as it demonstrates the collective military strength of its members.

Third, NATO also plays a role in promoting stability and security in regions outside of Europe, such as through its involvement in peacekeeping operations and counter-terrorism efforts.

Moreover, the alliance has also taken on new roles and missions in recent years, such as cybersecurity and countering hybrid warfare, which are relevant in today's security environment.

If America were to leave NATO, it would likely have significant implications for the future of the alliance. NATO was originally formed as a collective defense agreement among Western nations, and the United States has historically been a key player in the organization.

If America were to leave NATO, it could potentially weaken the alliance and diminish its ability to respond to security challenges in Europe and beyond. It could also lead to increased tensions and uncertainty among NATO member countries, as they may feel less secure without the backing of the United States.

However, NATO is not solely reliant on the United States, and other member countries could potentially work to strengthen and maintain the alliance in the absence of American participation.

Additionally, the United States leaving NATO does not necessarily mean the end of the alliance, as other member countries could potentially continue to work together on security issues.

NATO is obviously not a for-profit organization and the US president is not the CEO. Trump will probably fail if he keeps acting just like a Wolf of Wall Street! lol.

The immediate reaction upon Trumps statements and actions during his previous 4 year stint - was to emphasize onto a European Defense Policy and Alliance. Still very sleepy, but it has been activated.

 

[Lastamender]

Where does it state, that one has be a Mod in order to write what I wrote? - moron.

It doesn't as far as I know.

 

[Bleipriester]

Last I checked Trump got ejected out of the White House in 2020.

Does that mean he was not POTUS in the WH and not able to leave NATO? I don´t think you are seriously debating.

 

[Bleipriester]

View attachment 901384

Are you sure that this is not the Donbass Ave. and this is not Biden behind Putin?

 

[Kruska]

It doesn't as far as I know.

Great, so stop wasting my time via posting irrelevant statements.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

MSN

In English the level of spending by members.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

and they AGREED to spend 2 percent by this year.

 

[Kruska]

and they AGREED to spend 2 percent by this year.

Nope - they did NOT agree to spend 2% - but agreed to acknowledge the guideline - that "envisages" a defense budget of 2% minimum.

Defense Budget allocation is a national, sovereign decision, but NATO Allies have agreed that at least 20% of defense expenditures should be devoted to major equipment spending, including the associated research and development, perceived as a crucial indicator for the scale and pace of modernization.

Aka - the German government of 2006 agreed to acknowledge the guideline - and the German government of e.g. 2023 agreed to ignore the acknowledgement of the guideline of the e.g. 2006 government. Simply because they don't have the $$ aka Euros available.

 

[Mac1958]

Stop with those Cadillac health care systems and they can pay more. America isn't their security

Correct.

But you're choosing to ignore half of what he said. All of you are. It's dishonest.