Angela Merkel says Germany can no longer rely on Donald Trump's America: 'We Europeans must take our

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by MrTLegal, May 28, 2017.

  1. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, they are not.
     
  2. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I fully support the US leaving NATO and the UN, at the request of Germany and the rest of Europe.
    The next time war rages all across Europe, please do not call us.
     
  3. hawgsalot

    hawgsalot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2017
    Messages:
    10,339
    Likes Received:
    9,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Are you really unable to comprehend how little Germany is really paying on a per capita basis. It's beyond ridiculous no matter how bad you and German boy want to spin it. Bottom line Merkel and that Rich Germany as the OP proclaimed should pay more than $586 per citizen.
    [​IMG]
     
  4. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    32,222
    Likes Received:
    12,253
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Best news I've heard all day. @MrTLegal finally created a thread I can get on board with.

    Peace out, Germany. You won't be missed
     
    navigator2 likes this.
  5. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    46,673
    Likes Received:
    26,230
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So, the article is a lie and the journalists completely fabricated what the NATO officials said in the report? By all means, let's see a substantive rebuttal with quotes and links. If the reporters made all that **** up I'm man enough to admit I was misled.

    Some of you were with us in Iraq and Afghanistan and I appreciate the service and sacrifice of those who fought alongside us, but the fact remains you were with us.

    No help?

    Obituary: Caspar Weinberger
    Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher later said that without the Sidewinder "supplied to us by US Defence Minister Caspar Weinberger, we could never have got back the Falklands."
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4854962.stm

    Reagan, Thatcher, and the ‘Tilt’
    https://automaticballpoint.com/2010/05/07/reagan-thatcher-and-the-tilt/

    What help did you provide us in Panama and Granada?

    FYI, I'm very realistic about our importance and limitations. As I mentioned earlier, your countries have emerged from the rubble of World War II and the Soviet Union is dead - there is no reason for my country to maintain the posture we assumed during the post-WWII Cold War era. The world has changed and our commitments and alliances should reflect that. The less we're involved in each other's affairs the better.

    Aside from manning the bases that are useful to us, wasting taxpayer money.
     
    guavaball likes this.
  6. BestViewedWithCable

    BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    48,288
    Likes Received:
    6,966
    Trophy Points:
    113

    NATO documents show that a majority of NATO members fail to meet NATO’s guideline, established in 2006, that defense expenditures should amount to 2 percent of each country’s gross domestic product. The median spending in 2015 is just 1.18 percent of GDP, compared to 3.7 percent for the United States, NATO says. Just four other countries currently exceed the 2 percent guideline.

    “The volume of the US defense expenditure effectively represents 73 per cent of the defense spending of the Alliance as a whole,” NATO says in a discussion of indirect funding. “This does not mean that the United States covers 73 per cent of the costs involved in the operational running of NATO as an organization, including its headquarters in Brussels and its subordinate military commands, but it does mean that there is an over-reliance by the Alliance as a whole on the United States for the provision of essential capabilities, including for instance, in regard to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; air-to-air refueling; ballistic missile defense; and airborne electronic warfare.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-lions-share-for-nato/?utm_term=.087f693da57b
     
  7. MrTLegal

    MrTLegal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2017
    Messages:
    41,095
    Likes Received:
    26,663
    Trophy Points:
    113
    2024 is the original goal by which time the pledge was to have been completed. Accept that fact first, and then we can have a debate about whether certain member countries should be criticized for not meeting that 7 years ahead of schedule.
     
  8. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I know. Thanks for the comments.
     
  9. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,177
    Likes Received:
    12,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the taliban was not removed from afghanistan, they were pushed into the mountains and remote regions. bush dropped the ball with afghanistan, most especially with karzai. if you attribute that with nation building, fine.

    with libya i understand your issue, but libya was already breaking into civil war while kaddafi was in power.
     
    perotista likes this.
  10. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The way I see this is that they must not see danger. So let's also quit seeing danger and get out of there with our money.

    When they pay up, it means they see danger.
     
  11. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They got pushed where they went by the Afghan forces coupled with bombs from our bombers. The Afghanis are to blame if they let back in the Taliban, not Bush.
     
  12. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And NATO should never have been used that way. I agree with you.
     
    perotista likes this.
  13. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,177
    Likes Received:
    12,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    he was in tora bora. we allowed the war lords to finish, but they let him slip by
     
  14. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,177
    Likes Received:
    12,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no he turned his attention to iraq when we should have finished in afghanistan
     
    Sadanie likes this.
  15. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Again, the actual fighters remained behind in Afghanistan. Bush used warlords. Our few troops were there to ensure the bombs were correctly aimed. Besides, that was over a year past Bush defeating the Taliban.
     
  16. HB Surfer

    HB Surfer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    34,707
    Likes Received:
    21,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Until Germany does their "fair share" to pay for NATO and Defense, the can **** about relying on others.
     
    guavaball likes this.
  17. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    General Franks says that is a myth. There was no evidence Bin Laden was in Tora Bora. But on the chance he was there, Franks unleashed MOABS on his suspected sites. A search party could have checked had the Afghani warriors not wanted to get back to eat dinner.

    [​IMG]
     
    guavaball likes this.
  18. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Eye Witnesses claim General Franks did kill Bin Laden in 2001.

     
  19. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Pakistan does not believe Obama killed Bin Laden. I always wondered why our men had no photos to show the world. It seemed to me as if Obama so revered Muslims he could not bear to show Bin Laden's face or body as proof.

    But many Muslims do not believe it was Obama that killed Bin Laden, but General TommyFranks with monster bombs.

     
  20. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,177
    Likes Received:
    12,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the taliban was not defeated
     
  21. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,177
    Likes Received:
    12,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    keep believing that bs :)
     
  22. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You first. These are the kinds of lessons, so brutal, you yourself cannot learn from them, but others can. You are just so hell-bent on pretending the "real" threat to our country is "The Ruskies" while always claiming that Jihadists are little to no threat, and certainly nothing that can be guarded against.
     
  23. Sadanie

    Sadanie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Messages:
    14,427
    Likes Received:
    639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well. . .that wouldn't be new!
    After all, the US was NOT exactly anxious to come and help Europeans during WWII. . .until THE US GOT attacked directly in Pearl Harbor!

    If Pearl Harbor had not happened, the US would have been perfectly happy to sit back and watch Europe tear itself apart. The US even refused to take Jewish refugees. . .sending them back to a certain death in the concentration camp!

    Why did the US get involved in WW2? - Quora
    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-US-get-involved-in-WW2
     
    snakestretcher likes this.
  24. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Give me a reason to believe you over General Franks. I shall consider your comments.
     
  25. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The natives of Hawaii are still upset that the USA took them over. In 1941. Hawaii was not so much as a state. FDR, i believe wanted to have that attack take place there.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page