world

EU council chief tells Trump: Respect the allies you have

95 Comments
By Robin Emmott

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2018.

©2018 GPlusMedia Inc.

95 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

European Council President Donald Tusk told U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday to stop berating NATO allies

Too late. Trump doesn't care about the countries formerly known as allies, nor about the American people other than the .01%ers who back him. He doesn't care about the Cult 45ists except as a force he can manipulate if things in the US get rougher.

Trump cares about further enriching the Trump brand and paying off his debts to 'financiers' abroad.

Trump's siding with Russia, thinking he'll be able to sell rights to his brand there and finally get a Moscow Trump Tower. He wants to see Ivanka's clothing line, made in China, sold throughout the Russian Federation as areas there get richer from Russia's control of oil and gas. Trump may not be a Putinpuppet, but he knows by siding with him he can get richer.

15 ( +16 / -1 )

The trade surplus was engineered by the US to make the US the economic engine of the world and is running on debt.

DT wants allies to invest more in their military but especially in US made weapons.

The US should then leave all bases in Europe and Asia and stop complaining.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Respect goes both ways.

-24 ( +2 / -26 )

NATO may be the US's ally, but Putin wants it broken up and Trump's only ally is Putin. Everyone else is just a pawn he uses to try and get more power. Everyone else is expendable to Trump.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Well, I mean, he's not wrong. Most NATO countries aren't paying their fair share, it says it right there in the article.

I just wish he could use a little more tact when he's telling them...

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Bass4funk nailed it. And the down votes are very telling.

-22 ( +0 / -22 )

Europe netted a $153 billion surplus against America last year, how's that for respect.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Googling "average house size, US vs Europe" will bring up telling statistics. The US has a trade deficit because many there tend to overconsume; that is, it is a choice, one which could be rectified immediately if Americans simply chose to consume less - but I don't see that happening.

And, considering the multitude of problems the world faces, I don't see how increased military spending would benefit anything except for the arms dealers.

16 ( +17 / -1 )

Well said, Donald.

Tusk, that is. Not the other fella.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Laguna: The US has a trade deficit because many there tend to overconsume

It’s a lot of complicated moving parts, like savings rates and consumption rates and things having to level out when you start to include foreign investment.

You also have a lot of the deficit being created by US companies manufacturing in China and exporting to the US. For example that deficit is partially funded by Trump’s ties and Ikanka’s dresses, which become imports when they enter the US. On the flip side of the product is American but made in China and sold in China, that’s not counted as an export for us.

And then you have oil, which we import. That’s a story in it’s own.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

The 2% GDP defense spending by NATO countries is a target not an obligation to be reached by 2024, six years from now. America spends 3.55% of GDP, the world's greatest amount and more than the national budget of many countries. Trump wants NATO countries to spend more, in other words, buy more American weapons.

Trump is even demanding the UK double its defense spending which is already making the 2% target but that would be more than America 3.75%.

Trump hates the EU and NATO because he does not have direct control over them. Putin also hates NATO just about more than anything.

Even if the NATO countries increase their defense spending it won't reduce American defense spending by a single cent. Only 20% of the American defensive budget of about $750 billion is spent outside of America. 80% is spent within the country.

America spends about $150 billion pa on maintaining their overseas bases. During the height of the Cold War America had more 400,000 troops stationed in Europe. Today there are about 51 bases in Europe with 65,000 troops. The average cost of those is about $10 billion but America also receives contributions from the countries hosting the bases. If America shut its bases and withdrew it troops back to stateside, their savings would be less than $5 billion pa.

Europe remains America's first line of defense against Russian and have agreed to increase spending by $4billion because of the Russian invasion of the Ukraine.

The direct NATO spending budget is about $2 billion and America pays 22% of it or about $550 million. Withdrawing from NATO would only save America that amount.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Let Europe take care of itself, let's see how long they last. Putin would have the biggest party of the century.

-17 ( +1 / -18 )

And then you have oil, which we import. That’s a story in it’s own.

Not for long.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/07/united-states-will-be-a-net-energy-exporter.html

-15 ( +1 / -16 )

Let Europe take care of itself, let's see how long they last. Putin would have the biggest party of the century.

Riiight, because "World Wars are good and easy win" right?

10 ( +10 / -0 )

@bas4 Putin would have the biggest party of the century.

And American Cult 45ists will join in celebration. They'll celebrate what they said they wanted Trump to do, and that was take down the American system, which Trump has been able to do with remarkable ease. 

If Putin gains more global power and Trump’s willing to cede even more to him by backing the US out of Europe and other places, what's going to happen to the US, especially if ties with 'allies' are weakened.

Now that Trump and the GOP hold control, and if they side with Russia, you have to assume Russia will have even more global control. Gas, oil and thug capitalism uber alles.

GoTrumpers who railed against 'globalists': will you cheer on this shift in power?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@PTownsend

GoTrumpers who railed against 'globalists': will you cheer on this shift in power?

I think we all know they will...

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Let Europe take care of itself, let's see how long they last. Putin would have the biggest party of the century.

You seem to forget that Britain and France are nuclear armed so there won't be any Russian invasions. There might be more border violations and hostile attacks in countries like Ukraine.

America will also suffer. Its not some kind of isolated world. America can't exist just on its own. American companies were the first to move their bases oversea for better dollar returns. It was America who started trading with China and if its out of control then the fault lies with America. America has been the biggest of the globalist and maintains an empire of 800 military bases oversea. Currently building one of the world's largest airstrips in North Africa Niger, in the Sahara Desert.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Riiight, because "World Wars are good and easy win" right?

Not at all, but if there were a hypothetical attack on the Baltic's, there is no way NATO could successfully defend them without the US, they would be overrun and crushed faster than you can crush a soda can.

And American Cult 45ists will join in celebration. They'll celebrate what they said they wanted Trump to do, and that was take down the American system, which Trump has been able to do with remarkable ease. 

Actually, the last admin. took it down, the President is trying to restore it, but the socialists leftists in the US are trying their best to thwart that.

If Putin gains more global power and Trump’s willing to cede even more to him by backing the US out of Europe and other places, what's going to happen to the US, especially if ties with 'allies' are weakened.

Now that Trump and the GOP hold control, and if they side with Russia, you have to assume Russia will have even more global control. Gas, oil and thug capitalism uber alles.

Yeah, leave the Tom Clancy Novels alone.

GoTrumpers who railed against 'globalists': will you cheer on this shift in power?

Yup, but not the way the left think

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Let Europe take care of itself, let's see how long they last. Putin would have the biggest party of the century.

Why would Trump want to give Putin such a victory? Its almost as if Trump owes uncle Vlad a favor. ;)

10 ( +12 / -2 )

You seem to forget that Britain and France are nuclear armed so there won't be any Russian invasions. There might be more border violations and hostile attacks in countries like Ukraine.

They didn't even try to stop the invasion of Crimea! I don't believe that for a second as dovish as Europe is and as incompetent as Obama was, there is no way Trump or even Bush....heck, even Bill Clinton wouldn't have allowed that to happen.

America will also suffer. Its not some kind of isolated world. America can't exist just on its own. American companies were the first to move their bases oversea for better dollar returns.

No one is saying that, but when it comes to the security and the safety of Europe, ever leader knows the only country that has the power to save the the dovish Europe is the US doesn't matter what the little people think, but every leader knows it and if we can export natural gas, it won't be long before they all bail on Russia to come to the US.

It was America who started trading with China and if its out of control then the fault lies with America.

We are not talking about China. Do you want to talk about Afghanistan as well?

America has been the biggest of the globalist and maintains an empire of 800 military bases oversea.

Guess what, if we decided to pull them out, European leaders would have a meltdown of biblical proportions.

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

Why would Trump want to give Putin such a victory? Its almost as if Trump owes uncle Vlad a favor. ;)

takeda.shingen.1991@gmail.com

By george, I think you're on to something. ;-)

4 ( +4 / -0 )

bass4funk

They didn't even try to stop the invasion of Crimea! 

Nor did America. It would have been a direct war between the west and Russia.

Do you want to talk about Afghanistan as well?

Have you already forgotten the major role NATO countries played in Afghanistan and Iraq? Short term memory.

Guess what, if we decided to pull them out, European leaders would have a meltdown of biblical proportions.

Why there are only 51 American bases and 65,000 troops in Europe. There are more American troops is this region.

When Trump meets with Putin will he demand the immediate release of Ukrainian political prisoners. Will Trump continue to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by Russia?

Whether you like it or not Europe is America's strongest ally. Trump should end his bully boy tactics and treats he has no intention of carrying out. I think an American withdraw from NATO would need some kind of agreement from congress as would shutting the 51 European bases.

America will be unable to provide cheaper gas to Europe than Russia because of the need to transport it across oceans.

"dovish Europe" what does that mean? I have the impression for sometime you have been edging for some kind of war probably against a country like Iran? Russia, China, the EU, all intend to maintain the nuclear agreement. Trump will be pressurizing Putin to get Assad to withdraw the Iranian troops from Syria, who are there at the request of Syria because that's what Israel wants from Trump.

Your threats are as just as empty as those made by your president. The trade in the EU is almost equal to that of America at about $19 trillion and within the next five years will go above it. Trump can't ignore that.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

@bass4funk

If you honestly believe that Russia can invade the Baltics and not be beaten back by NATO, you're delusional. Russia is not some steamroller. It has nukes. That is the ONLY thing it has that can stand up to modern European military forces, and like a comment above stated, England and France have more nukes combined than even China.

Go look up Russian military spending figures...

nevermind, I'll do it for you. it was USD 69 BN in 2016 vs. USD 97 BN for just France and Germany.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/04/24/the-top-15-countries-for-military-expenditure-in-2016-infographic/#54a76fdf43f3

NATO without US support CAN beat Russia in conventional warfare if they were to attack the EU but the point of NATO is to insure that war DOESN'T happen. Trump is trying to fleece our allies by harping on 1) trade deficiets and 2) military spending so that they buy more US made weapons. it's not "fairness" he wants...it's "begger they neighbor"

11 ( +11 / -0 )

bass4funk

-How many American bases in NATO countries.

-Number of American troops in NATO countries.

-Cost of the American bases in NATO countries.

-Amount paid by America for the NATO spending budget.

-The amount saved if Trump closed all the American bases in NATO countries and withdrew the troops and equipment back to stateside.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Even after Brexit Britain will remain a major player in NATO. The EU have agreed to open it borders to the military so that troops and equipment like tanks can be moved quickly should Russia attack Europe.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

-The amount saved if Trump closed all the American bases in NATO countries and withdrew the troops and equipment back to stateside.

As I have said, they wouldn't stand a chance, they can save a lot of money and the Russians can save even more money.

If you honestly believe that Russia can invade the Baltics and not be beaten back by NATO, you're delusional.

Actually, I'm not, the US has been basically been in constant military combat readiness mode and conflicts for 100 years, how about Sweden? The rest of Europe? Sorry, don't kid yourself. Again, every European leader knows keeping the US in NATO is vital to its overall survival.

Russia is not some steamroller. It has nukes.

Which is more than enough, not to mention some of the brutalist military tactics.

NATO without US support CAN beat Russia

ROFLMBO!

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

Nor did America. It would have been a direct war between the west and Russia.

No, Obama the appeaser as with everything that involved military conflict decided not to do anything, giving Russia the green light and emboldening it.

Have you already forgotten the major role NATO countries played in Afghanistan and Iraq? Short term memory.

Yes and what a big help and difference they made......not.

Why there are only 51 American bases and 65,000 troops in Europe. There are more American troops is this region.

The bigger question is, the European leaders don't want them to leave indirectly because they know the consequences if that were to happen.

When Trump meets with Putin will he demand the immediate release of Ukrainian political prisoners. Will Trump continue to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by Russia?

I don't know, ask the previous President why he didn't do that, he had time since 2014 to address the issue.

Whether you like it or not Europe is America's strongest ally. Trump should end his bully boy tactics and treats he has no intention of carrying out. I think an American withdraw from NATO would need some kind of agreement from congress as would shutting the 51 European bases.

Exactly, Europe is America's strongest ally, so because Russia poses a bigger threat to them and its on their doorstep, they need to pay more and do more, they lead, we back them up. That way they can't come back and complain we always stick our nose into other peoples conflicts, so to avoid the criticism, Europe pays more and they will lead. Problem solved and its fair.

America will be unable to provide cheaper gas to Europe than Russia because of the need to transport it across oceans.

You don't know that, there is no way you can know that. Why is the left always have to spin. weening themselves of Russian gas is the greatest thing that the European leaders dream of.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/08/could-a-trade-deal-lift-the-u-s-longstanding-ban-on-crude-oil-exports-europe-thinks-so/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dbb9899f925b

Your threats are as just as empty as those made by your president.

Threats? I'm not a politician, but Europe will pay more because they can't afford to lose the US, that's not a threat, that's a promise.

The trade in the EU is almost equal to that of America at about $19 trillion and within the next five years will go above it. Trump can't ignore that.

Trade has nothing to do with military defense.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

The America defense budget is set by the president and congress and has nothing to do with NATO. The current defense budget is about $800 billion or about 3.75% of its GDP. America is free to reduce that defense spending to 2% if it likes but since its spends 80% of its budget within America that reduction would lead to American job losses because 2% of the workforce are employed by the military.

America could set all the overseas bases and withdraw stateside and save less than $100 billion, because it would still have those troops and equipment.

An attack on Europe by Russia would be the start of WW3 and even Putin isn't that stupid or ambitious. Russia is developing a range of weapons which will be a direct treat to America. An undersea atomic bomb which would be undetectable and able to travel at high speed from Russia to America. Ultrasonic missiles atomic armed traveling at speeds unable to be stopped.

Actually, I'm not, the US has been basically been in constant military combat readiness mode and conflicts for 100 years, how about Sweden?

Probably you don't know but Sweden is a neutral country and not a member country of NATO. America wasn't combat ready at the beginning of WW1. Even WW2 was late in joining. The combined troops numbers of the NATO countries is much greater than the total number of troops in America. NATO countries have more than 5 million troops and reserves compared with a total 2.5 million Americans.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

An attack on Europe by Russia 

Why do you keep peddling this propaganda? Russia makes their money by selling oil and gas to Europe. Why would they shoot their customers?

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Trade has nothing to do with military defense.

What? Read up on why the US Marines sing '...to the shores of Tripoli', and while you're doing that read up on what 'manifest destiny' entails and then why China's expanding its navies.

Among thousands of other examples.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@fizzb Russia makes their money by selling oil and gas to Europe. Why would they shoot their customers?

Why would they shoot them when they can 'findland-ize' them? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlandization

0 ( +2 / -2 )

bass4funk

Yes and what a big help and difference they made......not.

shame on you for dismissing the thousands of NATO troops killed in Afghanistan and helping America with its terrorist war. More than 1,000 families lost loved ones. Hundreds more in Iraq. Please, show a little respect.

they need to pay more and do more, they lead, we back them up. 

What do you actually mean about pay more. I've asked you several times about NATO finances but you refuse to answer those. There are only 65,000 American troops in Europe compared with 6 million European troops and reserves?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO

Trade has nothing to do with military defense.

Your president disagrees with you because for him there's a link with trade and defense.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Even though Trump is making a UK visit he refuses to recognize PM May as the leader of the country. He states the UK is in turmoil and is interfering in the internal politics of another country.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Probably you don't know but Sweden is a neutral country and not a member country of NATO.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/09/21/as-russia-threatens-sweden-ponders-joining-nato

What are you talking about. I guess you don't know Sweden and although not an active member, but contributing member, they are building up their forces and contemplating joining

SWEDEN’S Aurora-17 drill, which continues until the end of September, is the biggest war game that the supposedly neutral country has carried out for 23 years. Not only does it involve 19,000 of Sweden’s armed forces (about half of them), including its Home Guard, but also more than 1,500 troops from Finland, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, France, Norway and America. All except Finland are members of NATO, the big western alliance.

The size of the exercise and its main focus, the defence of Gotland, an island in the Baltic Sea some 350km (220 miles) from the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, is a reflection of how insecure Sweden feels. Vladimir Putin, having gobbled up Crimea and attacked Ukraine, is flexing his muscles near the Baltics and Scandinavia. Russia’s massive Zapad-17 military exercise, which finished this week, involved sending 100,000 troops to Belarus and the Baltic to practise repelling the “Western Coalition”. Foreign observers were banned, as they never are from NATO exercises. (Perhaps luckily: a Russian helicopter reportedly fired missiles at spectators by mistake, though the government denies this.)

America wasn't combat ready at the beginning of WW1. Even WW2 was late in joining. The combined troops numbers of the NATO countries is much greater than the total number of troops in America. NATO countries have more than 5 million troops and reserves compared with a total 2.5 million Americans.

And yet, it was the US that saved WWII Europe.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Respect and retard both begin “r”.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

shame on you for dismissing the thousands of NATO troops killed in Afghanistan and helping America with its terrorist war. More than 1,000 families lost loved ones. Hundreds more in Iraq. Please, show a little respect.

Don't give me that. NATO is not the strongest military to enforce anything, they are good at peace keeping, but that's just about it. Shame on the Europeans that think it's ok for Americans to do the heavy fighting while they sit back and wait until all the smoke clears. You think that's right? I sure as heck don't!

What do you actually mean about pay more.

It means this...

https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-donald-trump-defense-spending-give-due-europe-must-spend-more/

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

And yet, it was the US that saved WWII Europe.

The US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand among others played huge roles, but Russia probably a bigger one.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

bass4funk

And yet, it was the US that saved WWII Europe.

But it did not achieve it alone and certainly would not achieved it without the help and sacrifice of the Soviets who also defeated the Nazi along with the British. The glory is not just an America one. 20 million Soviets died.

In one comment you stated Sweden was not ready to defend itself and even a neutral country has that right just as Japan too has the right of defense.

Now in another comment, you are saying Sweden is upping its defense training and thinking of applying to join NATO. It's not actually like joining a social club. But yes it would be good if both Sweden and Finland joined NATO. Then if Sweden is attacked by Russia, NATO including America would be committed to coming to its defense.

If Russia continues with its threats NATO should continue to expand to all the countries on Russia's borders.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

The US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand among others played huge roles, but Russia probably a bigger one.

Yes, the smaller nations with less firepower less man power and military might did help to an extent, dully noted.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

it was the US that saved WWII Europe

Is that what they teach you in school?

The US didn't even join in until it was all over bar the shouting. The Soviet Union was in it from the start (albeit on the wrong side initially) and it was the sacrifice of millions of Soviet troops on the Eastern Front that kept Germany contained there.

The US certainly made a valuable contribution during the latter part of the war and in its aftermath, but you didn't win the war single-handedly and you certainly did not 'save' Europe.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

But it did not achieve it alone and certainly would not achieved it without the help and sacrifice of the Soviets who also defeated the Nazi along with the British. The glory is not just an America one. 20 million Soviets died.

Sorry, we fought two wars, the Atlantic and the Pacific, every little help counts, but OVERWHELMINGLY it was the US that sacrificed the most, not to mention we spent billions on nation building and helped rebuild Germany as well.

In one comment you stated Sweden was not ready to defend itself and even a neutral country has that right just as Japan too has the right of defense.

It does and it will from the looks of its growing military.

Then if Sweden is attacked by Russia, NATO including America would be committed to coming to its defense. 

Yes, provided they pay their fair share.

If Russia continues with its threats NATO should continue to expand to all the countries on Russia's borders.

Yeah, I would like to see that happen.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Is that what they teach you in school?

What do they teach you, Europe defeated the Nazis by themselves?

The US didn't even join in until it was all over bar the shouting.

That is correct and thank God we did, otherwise das Viertes Reich would have won.

The US certainly made a valuable contribution during the latter part of the war and in its aftermath, but you didn't win the war single-handedly and you certainly did not 'save' Europe.

I said, overwhelmingly. You are welcome.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

bass4funk

Don't give me that. NATO is not the strongest military to enforce anything, they are good at peace keeping, but that's just about it. Shame on the Europeans that think it's ok for Americans to do the heavy fighting while they sit back and wait until all the smoke clears. You think that's right? I sure as heck don't!

Your President Bush asked for help from the British forces for his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those forces are just as capable in combat as the Americans. The British Special Forces like the SAS are highly respected by their American counterparts. The French forces too are highly capable in combat and again respected by the American forces. I guess you only read the book sections that concern America. Shame on you for asking for help and then dismissing their efforts and sacrifices.

The British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan were never just peace keepers. Unlike in America, every dead British trooper killed was given an honors parade through the streets of his barracks and the people lined the streets. In America they preferred not to think about their fallen hero's, like a rerun of the Vietnam VETS.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

zichiToday  12:11 pm JST

(The America defense budget is set by the president and congress and has nothing to do with NATO. The current defense budget is about $800 billion)

Interesting, equal to America's $800 billion trade deficit.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

it was the US that saved WWII Europe.

I said, overwhelmingly

Mmm, no you didn't. Not till later when you were in CYA mode.

OVERWHELMINGLY it was the US that sacrificed the most

Again, no.

Total civilian and military deaths:

France 567,600

United States 418,500

United Kingdom 450,700

Poland 5,600,000

Soviet Union 24,000,000

And that's not counting millions of others in other theatres of the war, or the civilian casualties of bombing.

What do they teach you, Europe defeated the Nazis by themselves?

No, of course not. They teach the truth. Or at least a much less nationalistically biased truth than is apparently taught in the US.

Do you learn that you overwhelmingly won the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the Battle of Mogadishu, too?

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Back on topic please.

Your President Bush asked for help from the British forces for his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I'm not talking about Bush or Afghanistan, I am talking about NATO and the fact that we have to float most of the costs, doesn't seem fair to me.

Unlike in America, every dead British trooper killed was given an honors parade through the streets of his barracks and the people lined the streets. In America they preferred not to think about their fallen hero's, like a rerun of the Vietnam VETS.

Vietnam?? What? 

It was the Brits who discovered radar. It was the Brits who broke the Nazi secret codes.

It was the US that gave the Brits our F-35 again, you are welcome, stealth is a wonderful tool.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

He states the UK is in turmoil and is interfering in the internal politics of another country.

Aye. And he's bigging up Johnson as well, hoping to meet him. He's undermining May in full view of everyone.

Not that I'd be defending any tory leader, ever, but it's interesting to see how the pieces are falling into place, in order for Johnson's slimy bid for leadership to become official. Having Trump's blessing may feed his ego but his deeds have not been forgotten by the public.

Causing Brexit, along with the other wreckers, and then bailing out when the going gets tough.

Let's hope the UK doesn't become as isolated from the EU as much as the US is becoming isolated from the rest of the world. And in Trump's case - isolated from reality.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

bass4funk

I'm not talking about Bush or Afghanistan, I am talking about NATO and the fact that we have to float most of the costs, doesn't seem fair to me.

Wrong as I keep pointing out to you but just like your president you refuse to look at the real figures. America spends about $10 billion per year to maintain its 51 bases and 65,000 troops in Europe. The fact that it spends 3.75% of its GDP on defense has nothing to do with how much it actually spends in Europe. In addition America pays 22% of the real NATO spending budget of about $2 billion and the American contribution is $550 million.

In Europe and NATO Britain spends about $50 billion or five times at of America. The total contribution of the European NATO countries far exceeds that of America in terms of spending and troop numbers.

It does not seem fair to me, that Europe is the first line of American defense against Russia but pays so little of the costs. Even the $10 billion is on the high side because host countries are also paying for the bases.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

This is Trump's week. Sees the Queen, sees Putin, sees the NATO leaders (whatever the schedule is). After this week there will be no doubt that the USA is past its prime and everyone will be better off without them while they go isolationist fascist hermit mode

6 ( +6 / -0 )

It's time Trump and America should be paying their fair share of the military costs in defending Europe. There are thousands of American companies in Europe. There are many tens of thousands of American living and working in Europe but it does not pay a fair share for the military coats.

The 28 member states of the EU spend about $250 billion on European defense compared with America which spends less than $10 billion.

Most the EU have agreed to form an EU mega military, one military for the entire EU area. It will become the world's largest single military. More than three million troops and then also reserves.

What America spends on it annual defense budget, is not the money it spends in Europe for its bases.

Obama agreed to increase military spending in Feb 2016 but was that cut back by Trump?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

bass4funk

we didn't ask you to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. You asked us to help America, which we did and wrongly too I believe since it was based only on false American intelligence.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

It's time Trump and America should be paying their fair share of the military costs in defending Europe.

Then Europe should protect itself and leave us alone, but I don't think it'll ever come to that and every European leader knows that. Membership has its privileges.

There are thousands of American companies in Europe. There are many tens of thousands of American living and working in Europe but it does not pay a fair share for the military coats.

Those people are working, can't defeat the Russians with a paint brush.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

"Dear America, appreciate your allies, after all you don't have that many,"

Sounds like an elitist to me.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

bass4funk

Then Europe should protect itself and leave us alone, but I don't think it'll ever come to that and every European leader knows that. Membership has its privileges.

So you not only expect the EU/European NATO countries to pay the lion's share of military defense and provide the lion's share of troops and equipment you now also expect us to protect all your European American business interests too.

Don't think it's time America paid its fair share and not even 1/25th of the total spent by the rest of us?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

You asked us to help America, which we did and wrongly too I believe since it was based only on false American intelligence.

Which was shared by 4 other European countries, so you need to blame those countries as well since we all share the same intelligence, let' s address the elephant in the room, this whole notion that the US got the intelligent alone is preposterous! But when the chips fall, they don't want to take any grief at all.

As the old saying goes, when America sneezes, everyone else catches a cold. NATO is going to pay their fair share and their are signs it's going to happen.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

Europe should protect itself and leave us alone

You mean no more European military bases on US soil, paid for by the US? I could go with that.

Oh hang on...

It's the US coming across the Atlantic to use Europe as a staging post for its (fake intelligence-based) attacks on the Middle East, not the other way around.

What do you mean, 'leave you alone'?

Those people are working

And need protecting?

can't defeat the Russians with a paint brush.

The brush is mightier than the sword?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

bass4funk

I'll ask a very simple question which should not be too difficult to answer. How much does it actually cost America to maintain it's 51 European bases and 65,000 troops given that Germany with the largest number of bases and 35,000 American troops pays American $1 billion pa.

Can you give me a ballpark figure on that?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

You mean no more European military bases on US soil, paid for by the US? I could go with that.

Oh hang on...

It's the US coming across the Atlantic to use Europe as a staging post for its (fake intelligence-based) attacks on the Middle East, not the other way around.

Yes, that's right, Someone has to lead.

What do you mean, 'leave you alone'?

Rhetorical question??

And need protecting?

Contingency extraction plans.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

@Bass

Have you already forgotten the major role NATO countries played in Afghanistan and Iraq? Short term memory.

Yes and what a big help and difference they made......not.

Well done... you've just dismissed the sacrifice that other countries' forces have made to support America in its wars... you disgust me.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

NATO is going to pay their fair share and their are signs it's going to happen.

I think it's more likely the US will just pull out of NATO altogether. Can't be pissing off big daddy Putin by being part of an organization that is against him.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Rhetorical question??

No, a simple request for clarification. It's the US coming over to Europe, not the other way around. So what exactly do you mean when you say you want Europe to leave the US alone?

Contingency extraction plans.

You really have no idea, do you?

Or are you admitting that the US is in Europe to protect its own interests? If so, what's wrong with the US paying for that?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

NATO is the US's ally.  It is an alliance of which the US is a part - in fact the hugely major part.  Without the US it would be a pretty weak organization.

As for the EU, I saw a bit of Tusk's speech and thought it pretty weak.  Like what has the EU done for the US lately?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I meant is NOT

0 ( +0 / -0 )

NATO doesn't have a good record of being impartial. They are the new tool of the European elitists and must be ripped apart. How many times have they lied in their wars? It's kind of funny, Europeans want peace but have no problems with NATO. Well I guess as long as you have free everything and don't have to think about consequences, then everything is peaches and cream.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

No, a simple request for clarification. It's the US coming over to Europe, not the other way around. So what exactly do you mean when you say you want Europe to leave the US alone?

I want the leaders to stop asking us for help whenever there is a conflict or when they need anything from military advice to weapons technology or in conflicts when they have to go into but want us to lead. Now if there is anything on the previous President that I liked, at least he pushed Europe to take a more leadership role and we lead from behind in that sense, I agreed.

You really have no idea, do you?

That's what I want to say to these leaders.

Or are you admitting that the US is in Europe to protect its own interests? If so, what's wrong with the US paying for that?

For the simple fact, we give you guys protection.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

I want the leaders to stop asking us for help whenever there is a conflict or when they need anything from military advice to weapons technology or in conflicts when they have to go into but want us to lead.

You mean like the US does when they go to war with other countries? How exactly are you not choking on your hypocrisy?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Now you know how we feel when we talk to liberals. ROFL

Why would you feel that way?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@fizzb new tool of the European elitists and must be ripped apart. 

To be ripped apart and replaced by whom? Inevitably another faction of the wealthiest and most powerful, most likely those controlling oil and gas and their financial backers will take over, as has been the case pretty much throughout history. Should the 'European elites' be ripped apart the most likely 'elite' replacements would include Putin and his oligarchs. How would that be different.

Well I guess as long as you have free everything and don't have to think about consequences

Do you have an example of anyone ever having 'free everything' and 'not having to think about consequences'.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

To be ripped apart and replaced by whom? 

Maybe a king or queen, it would be fitting of the EU.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The EU is run by a bunch of eurocrats who run the place a bunch of kings and queens. Why wouldn't Trump attack them?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Bass, Fizz, Right on!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@fizzb Maybe a king or queen, it would be fitting of the EU.

In other words you haven't a clue. Some GoTrumpers have claimed to oppose the neo-cons responsible for invading Iraq and creating the messes seen there - and other places. The neo-cons wanted to destroy, but didn't have a plan for what to do after the destruction. Those GoTrumpers also wanted Trump to bring down the US, and also didn't have a plan for what to do after that. Reminds me of some lines from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbmWs6Jf5dc

2 ( +2 / -0 )

After screwup G7, uncle Trump is going to wreck US influences in NATO! Good job!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

NATO was an important military component in Cold War. Now, it's better to belong to UN to perform PKO services, or NATO should be dissolved where EU countries find it wasted of money.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

NATO and EU have maintained peace with those European countries and for 70 years there have been no further wars.

The making of a single European military could replace NATO. We don't need America if it no longer wants to spent so little to be part of NATO. $10 billion per year compared with many tens of billions spent by the other NATO countries. America hides behind a cloak and speaks with a forked tongue.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

It was the US that gave the Brits our F-35 again, you are welcome, stealth is a wonderful tool.

The F35 that uses VTOL tech invented by British engineers for the Harrier!

7 ( +7 / -0 )

The EU already has Queen Merkel.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The EU is run by a bunch of eurocrats who run the place a bunch of kings and queens. Why wouldn't Trump attack them?

I don’t get the logic. Why should Trump attack them?

Trump is more open than most in his embrace of far worse than the people you mentioned. Why wouldn’t he attack them?

Anyway, I thought the banksters controlled everything.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The countries at the front edge of NATO unsurprisingly are ones spending money for the defense

2/3 of the EU NATO though are on-course to meet the spending target by 2024, and those countries don't appreciate Trump's belligerent manner they're being treated

2 ( +2 / -0 )

America gives military aid to both Israel and Egypt but no complaints from Trump on that one. Israel receives $3 billion per year and Egypt $2 billion.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Let Europe take care of itself, let's see how long they last. Putin would have the biggest party of the century.

Actually they should and there's enough expertise to make it a leading superpower.

It's only that the majority of the European public, like the Japanese, thinks differently about further militarisation and the budgets needed. But under certain circumstances that attitude may chance.

I'm the last one to deny the efforts of the US during WW 2 with thousands of Americans buried in my home country's soil but the credits which come with that can't last till eternity.

Don't forget that the expertise of born Europeans gave you the status of superpower, enabled you to send a human to the moon and the lead in the entertainment industry. The European [ later Asian] brain drain gave you a lead in many field and strengthened the Ivy league universities.

Like with trade war, let it come !

3 ( +3 / -0 )

You mean like the US does when they go to war with other countries?

Sometimes you need a war to keep the peace.

How exactly are you not choking on your hypocrisy?

Choking? Maybe on a Cuban and drinking a fine Columbian.

NATO and EU have maintained peace with those European countries and for 70 years there have been no further wars.

We made sure of that. You are welcome.

The making of a single European military could replace NATO.

So why won’t the European leaders do it? They can do it, they have the power and......maybe the technology.

We don't need America

But as long as it doesn’t happen, you do.

America hides behind a cloak and speaks with a forked tongue.

Then that means Europe is a hydra.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

bass4funk

most of the EU countries signed an agreement end of last year to make a EU mega military. Britain didn't sign. America will lost its influence. 23 of the EU countries.

http://www.businessinsider.com/eu-countries-agree-mega-army-2017-11

You can close the American bases and remove your troops back to stateside and save somewhere between $5-$10 billion a year.

But in fact America has been stock piling tanks in the Baltic countries in ready to deal with Russia so looks like you are not leaving Europe just yet. The cost of transporting those tanks was paid by Germany.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

most of the EU countries signed an agreement end of last year to make a EU mega military. Britain didn't sign. America will lost its influence. 23 of the EU countries.

Yippee!!!

You can close the American bases and remove your troops back to stateside and save somewhere between $5-$10 billion a year.

Great news!!!

But in fact America has been stock piling tanks in the Baltic countries in ready to deal with Russia so looks like you are not leaving Europe just yet. The cost of transporting those tanks was paid by Germany.

Zahle euren gerechten Anteil

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

EU council chief tells Trump: Respect the allies you have. zichi you are correct, America didn't fight the Pacific War alone. There were also British troops and other Commonwealth troops. I was in the occupation of Japan and know this for a fact. I met some of them a number of times. Those Australian and New Zealand soldiers were tough combat troops to be proud of.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Respect goes both ways. your confusing respect with subservient. No sane US allie will kowtow to the US just because they want it, respect needs to be earned and maintained, insulting berating friends wont do that actually the opposite.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

"Yes and what a big help and difference they made......not."

I agree with Zichi.

What a rotten, disrespectful thing to say to allies who have lost many soldiers to the war on terror. Please say that to the faces of their families...Ahhh didn't think so. Pathetic.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

What a rotten, disrespectful thing to say to allies who have lost many soldiers to the war on terror.

No one is disparaging them or undermining their service, but failure to recognize we lost more people protecting Europe and Asia is in my view very disrespectful, even if you don’t agree with America’s geopolitical policies, but we have sacrificed a lot so that Europe can enjoy its freedoms. We played the biggest role in securing that.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

No sane US allie will kowtow to the US just because they want it,

They don’t have to, Germany needs to just pay their fair share, we shouldn’t have to pay more to protect Europe, doesn’t make any sense.

respect needs to be earned and maintained, insulting berating friends wont do that actually the opposite.

I agree! And I hope our allies realize just that.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

we lost more people protecting Europe and Asia

You've been given the figures before. The US made a significant contribution to the war effort, but you did not lose more people.

Nor were you protecting Europe and Asia: you only joined in because Japan attacked Pearl Harbor - which is not in Europe, nor in Asia.

Germany needs to just pay their fair share

Germany will pay what Germany considers fair, not some arbitrary figure Trump pulls out from under his dead hamster.

respect needs to be earned and maintained, insulting berating friends wont do that actually the opposite.

I agree! And I hope our allies realize just that.

It would be useful if the mighty US were to set an example...?

Speaking of setting an example, and as a total aside, if Trump wants to Make America Great Again and boost American enterprise, why is his missus wearing a Burberry trench coat and Louboutin heels? Are American brands not good enough?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

LagunaJuly 11  08:29 am JST

Googling "average house size, US vs Europe" will bring up telling statistics. The US has a trade deficit because many there tend to overconsume; that is, it is a choice, one which could be rectified immediately if Americans simply chose to consume less - but I don't see that happening

That's not entirely true.

Norway is the size of Japan with 1/20th of its population, yet an astonishing amount here live in either apartment or one bedroom homes. Usually farmers are the only ones who've got huge properties.

Europe is thousands of years older than the U.S and obviously way more urbanized.

Small cars (us cars look like tanks), might be why the sale of huge American pickup trucks just don't catch on in Europe, same with Japan.

Not everyone has the primitive mindset that bigger is better and small is feminine. European men are also more feminine than Americans and generally more lucky with women.

Not having a Napoleon complex and adapting with time is just something the developed world does, but I'm sure USA will develop at some point as well.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Cowboys want guns. Europe wants balance. Which became unsettled after RU collapsed and CN got rich. Now there is maverick US. History is exiting and will never end.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Exciting

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@ Jandworld.. correct! Europe wants ballance! We must life there together with Russia on one continent. And stories about the WWII glory of some god owns countries are really bothering! Too much victims! Life is changing! Future wars are the trade-wars. You know a trade-war is an easy won game! Welcome to Trump-world!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites