Kushner's "deal of the century" falls flat on it's face

Every country, including the USA, should continue to protect our EU allies against the efforts of Russia to globally dominate. Putin’s hybrid war in the Ukraine is a good example of that. In 2017 in the Ukraine, where Russia tests its new cyber weapons and tactics, one of the most devastating examples of the type of harm was Russia’s “NotPetya” virus cyber attack. It originated in Ukraine, spread across sixty-four countries. It caused more than $10 billion worth of damage to U.S. government agencies and companies like Maersk, and it also fully shut down the Port of Los Angeles.

From his actions in Ukraine and across Europe and the world, it is clear that Vladimir Putin wants to reclaim the super power status of the crumbled Soviet Union. The United States still maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad, from giant “Little Americas” to small radar facilities. Britain, France and Russia, by contrast, have about 30 foreign bases combined.

 

Indeed they should. Except to protect these countries which do not want to pay for their own defense.

Right? Of course right!

 

FACT CHECK: Trump's Claims On NATO Spending
https://n.pr/2L8gZww
The Claim
Sitting down to breakfast in Brussels just before the NATO plenary session Wednesday, Trump accused NATO allies of being freeloaders:

"Many countries owe us a tremendous amount of money from many years back, where they're delinquent as far as I'm concerned, because the United States has had to pay for them. So if you go back 10 or 20 years, you'll just add it all up, it's massive amounts of money is owed."

False
The U.S. has not been stiffed for unpaid bills by NATO allies.

"There is no ledger that maintains accounts of what countries pay and owe," says former Obama administration National Security Council staffer Aaron O'Connell. "NATO is not like a club with annual membership fees."

NATO members did make a commitment four years ago to spend at least 2 percent of their GDP on defense by 2024. Just nine of the military alliance's 29 members are expected to reach or surpass that target this year.

The Claim
At the same pre-plenary breakfast, Trump excoriated Germany, the biggest economic power in NATO after the U.S.:

"Germany is just paying a little bit over 1 percent, whereas the United States in actual numbers is paying 4.2 percent."

True And False
Germany indeed devotes only about 1.25 percent of its GDP to defense. While it has boosted defense spending the past two years, Germany, like about half the other NATO members, does not plan to reach 2 percent by 2024.

But Trump's claim that the U.S. is spending 4.2 percent of GDP is at odds with the Pentagon, which puts it at 3.3 percent.

NATO scholar Garret Martin says in any case, U.S. defense needs vastly surpass those of its European allies.

"We're not comparing apples to apples," notes Martin, a lecturer at American University's School of International Service. "The United States is a global military power with global military commitments.

"NATO and the trans-Atlantic geographical area is only a part of what the United States military does. That's not necessarily true for most of the European members of the alliance."

The Claim
At a July 5 rally in Montana, Trump said this about NATO funding:

"We're paying for anywhere from 70 to 90 percent to protect Europe, and that's fine."

Confusing
Trump did not say 70 to 90 percent of what. It's true that if the overall defense budgets of all 29 NATO allies are tallied, the U.S. defense budget accounts for about two-thirds of that total. But as noted above, American defense expenditures are for much more than just protecting Europe.

"There is a common budget that all NATO allies pay into," says O'Connell of NATO's direct expenses for shared headquarters and exercises. "It's about $2.8 billion and the U.S. pays 22 percent of that, not 90 percent."

The Claim
Trump sought to take credit in Brussels for NATO allies spending more:

"This year, since our last meeting, commitments have been made for over $40 billion more money spent by other countries."

Exaggeration
NATO reported on July 10 that spending by European members increased from last fiscal year to the current fiscal year by about $35 billion.

The increased spending predates Trump.

"I think once the trend started changing in 2014, that created momentum even before he became president," says Martin. "Now maybe there's a bit more urgency now because he's blunter than his predecessors in criticizing his European partners."

Despite Trump's complaints about American outlays for NATO, the U.S. is actually spending more in Europe than when he took office.

"Actions speak louder than words," NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters as the NATO summit got underway. "Since Trump became president, U.S. funding for military presence in Europe — the European Deterrence Initiative — has been increased by 40 percent."

That spending was approved by Congress, where both the House and the Senate overwhelmingly approved resolutions this week backing NATO.

 

You’ll have to waterboard me before I open the link which looks like https://n.pr/2L8gZww

 

You don't have any need to open the link, I've copied the entire article.

 

You can criticize this plan as much as you want. But the only alternative for it is for Palestinians to continue to live as they do right now. In poverty and corruption. Or they can try and develop economically while America is helping them to do so.

 

Indeed. Post something from reliable source I’ve heard of before, and I’ll read it.

 

Yes, historians, DNA, archaeology and the bible put the Jews squarely in the land of
Israel 2,000 years ago. It was under Roman control and was later to be the scene of
three terrible Roman-Jewish wars.

I watched this yesterday

 

The last good deal for the Palestinians was the original partition. They might have been able to get the entire West Bank before 1973, but not after the Yom Kippur War.

 

There were Arab families who had been living in the same communities for centuries. It's unreasonable to dismiss them as "not Palestinian" as though they weren't legitimately resident in the area.

A miracle? No, of course not. Study the history of the region. After WW2, there were large populations of Muslims and Jews who weren't likely to get along. The UN decided to partition Palestine.

Okay.

Absurd. Israel annexed Jerusalem.

 

Israel is coming to an inflection point in relations with the Palestinians. They can create protectorates in the West Bank and Gaza, or the can continue to whittle away at the West Bank with new settlements until a Palestinian state in no longer a possibility.

 

Indeed.

 

No, they don't. Nearly everyone, across the political spectrum, recognize that Israel and to a lesser extent Hamas and Fatah, control the situation.

 

Arabs in countries surrounding Israel lost wars. The Palestinians (IOW, Arabs living in Palestine) were not calling the shots in the three major wars.

Factually incorrect. Before WW1, there were very few Jews in Israel.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-and-non-jewish-population-of-israel-palestine-1517-present​

Most of the Palestinians in 1948 (IOW, Arabs living in Palestine) were residents or their descendants of residents. Much of the Jewish population were immigrants.

Huh? Palestinians have never agreed to live in peace with Israel. See below.

See above.

The Palestinians have been unwilling to accept any arrangement Israel has been prepared to offer.

 

You must be one of a handful here that has never heard of NPR

 

Kushner barely understands real estate and has not been overly successful in business....why would ANYONE think he would understand or succeed at something far more complex and non responsive to bullying and bribery?

 

I think it was a good faith effort to show them how they can dramatically better themselves with real investors and blueprints standing at the ready, rather than the hazy vagueries of "then what" negotiations which always propel them to a warlike all or nothing position. The proposal should be disseminated among the Palestinian people themselves, to encourage their leaders during negotiations. Surely there are those who prefer peace and prosperity over perpetual conflict.

 

Way too simple. There was never any thought of ceding Palestine west of the Jordan River to Israel.

What happens to the millions of Arabs living inside Israel today?

 

You're spreading misinformation.

 

They will continue to drive BMW and Mercedes Benz luxury cars .. eat Baklawa and enjoy life in the land of milk and honey.

 

Is there some point to your propaganda?

 

Oh, is that what your link is? You're right, I should have known that n.pr is the same as npr. In any case, there are no flat denials of Trump's claims, just nuances and splitting hairs. But thank you anyway.

 

What a croc! Read up on Zionism. Jews have not been waiting 2000 years to regain a Middle East homeland.

 

Let's begin with reality. Israel has today millions of both Arabs and Israeli Jews who know no other home and who have nowhere else to go.

There's no evidence Israel would attack foreign cities with nuclear weapons in this scenario.

 

Israel would not need to.