Author Topic: US versus NATO  (Read 60087 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 219,842
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,502
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #100 on: July 06, 2018, 16:13:49 »
And there are better, more diplomatic ways to do so.

Which have worked so well and achieved so much over so many decades, nein? But I'm sure that they will in another decade or two if we just continue with the same methods long enough.

The kids have great, well-paying jobs but still just hang around the house, enjoying the "free" wi-fi, eating all of the food in the fridge, sneaking Dad's booze, and pay not a cent of rent and refuse to contribute to the operating costs for the house.

Dad's been asking them nicely and diplomatically to help out a bit for the last couple of years, but they just brush him off and merrily keep eating, drinking, and surfing.

Until he slips an eviction notice under their bedroom doors.

Sometimes, "diplomacy" is saying "nice doggy" while looking for a big stick.

The big stick was elected last November.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #101 on: July 06, 2018, 16:30:47 »
And there are better, more diplomatic ways to do so.Trump, I believe, started this off perfectly, raising just enough doubt to kick European nations and Canada into gear and defense spending was rising accordingly.
Which have worked so well and achieved so much over so many decades, nein? But I'm sure that they will in another decade or two if we just continue with the same methods long enough.

The kids have great, well-paying jobs but still just hang around the house, enjoying the "free" wi-fi, eating all of the food in the fridge, sneaking Dad's booze, and pay not a cent of rent and refuse to contribute to the operating costs for the house.

Dad's been asking them nicely and diplomatically to help out a bit for the last couple of years, but they just brush him off and merrily keep eating, drinking, and surfing.

Until he slips an eviction notice under their bedroom doors.

Sometimes, "diplomacy" is saying "nice doggy" while looking for a big stick.

The big stick was elected last November.

Heh.

Also,  what election did I miss in November 2017?
« Last Edit: July 06, 2018, 16:38:21 by Altair »
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 244,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,403
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #102 on: July 06, 2018, 16:48:19 »
NATO spending has been rising across the board, even in Canada. So there have been improvements. To hear the US president rant and rave though, you wouldn't know it. When he was elected, 3 NATO* countries met the 2 percent of GDP threshold, it's looking like 8 will shortly.  Yet instead of being pleased about the improvements being made, what we get are accusations of countries being free loaders and how they all owe America.

Using that mentality, if I only paid half my rent this month, but next month I paid half + $50, my landlord shouldn't be mad at all, because "there was an improvement".  I wonder if I can try this with my mortgage, insurance or car payments.  I mean, it is summer after all and I'd like to have more money for 'other stuff'. 

Although, I am pretty sure if I tried to pull a stunt like that with a landlord, he or she would probably contact the Residential Tenancy Board the second month to start the process of evicting me...
« Last Edit: July 06, 2018, 16:57:45 by Eye In The Sky »

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #103 on: July 06, 2018, 17:17:37 »
Using that mentality, if I only paid half my rent this month, but next month I paid half + $50, my landlord shouldn't be mad at all, because "there was an improvement".  I wonder if I can try this with my mortgage, insurance or car payments.  I mean, it is summer after all and I'd like to have more money for 'other stuff'. 

Although, I am pretty sure if I tried to pull a stunt like that with a landlord, he or she would probably contact the Residential Tenancy Board the second month to start the process of evicting me...
So my question again,  do our expect canada to suddenly spend 20 billion more on defense overnight?
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 374,746
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,573
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #104 on: July 06, 2018, 17:18:54 »
Quote from: Altair
That's quite the spin. If Canada did likewise I don't think you would be saying the same. There are very few ways to sugar coat what has happened, that is a massive cut, and it's going to cut into effectiveness and readiness. Not exactly something that puts the fear of god into people

Quote from: Altair
NATO spending has been rising across the board, even in Canada. So there have been improvements.
Yup. Better health care and education is bound to not only affect 3.5 million Russian service members in a positive way but the whole country.  Would I feel the same way if it was Canada? No, you're right I wouldn't. But there is a hell of a difference between where their military is at and ours is at.

Spending that increase from 1.0% to 1.2% (or 1% to 1.02% depending where you look) wisely seems like an implied intent to me.  We have the second highest paid military in NATO (maybe the world?) and yet look at the state of our weapons, vehicles and equipment.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/659988/German-army-pulls-out-NATO-training-exercise-exceeding-overtime-limits
Quote
German army quits NATO training exercise after exceeding Merkel's bizarre overtime limits
GERMAN authorities were left red-faced when troops were forced to pull out of a recent Nato training exercise after they exceeded new overtime limits set by Angela Merkel's government.
Tell me that's not retarded from a major NATO country.


Like Loachman said, the big stick was just elected.






There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #105 on: July 06, 2018, 17:24:43 »
Yup. Better health care and education is bound to not only affect 3.5 million Russian service members in a positive way but the whole country.  Would I feel the same way if it was Canada? No, you're right I wouldn't. But there is a hell of a difference between where their military is at and ours is at.

Spending that increase from 1.0% to 1.2% (or 1% to 1.02% depending where you look) wisely seems like an implied intent to me.  We have the second highest paid military in NATO (maybe the world?) and yet look at the state of our weapons, vehicles and equipment.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/659988/German-army-pulls-out-NATO-training-exercise-exceeding-overtime-limitsTell me that's not retarded from a major NATO country.


Like Loachman said, the big stick was just elected.
it naturally is,  but again,  countries are putting more money into defense spending now.

Do you expect 2 percent of GDP and countries to have worked out all kinks from chronic underspending overnight?
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 209,245
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,752
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #106 on: July 06, 2018, 17:44:29 »
Increasing the GST by 2% back to its original 7% and allocating the expected $14B or so would do it. 
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #107 on: July 06, 2018, 17:46:38 »
Increasing the GST by 2% back to its original 7% and allocating the expected $14B or so would do it.
I thought we were overtaxed as it was?
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 244,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,403
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #108 on: July 06, 2018, 17:58:40 »
So my question again,  do our expect canada to suddenly spend 20 billion more on defense overnight?

If you were a landlord, and a tenant only paid half his rent one month, does that mean he is only responsible for half plus 0.02% more the next month?   I didn't think it worked that way...I guess your tenant couldn't expect the benefits of having a roof over his head, and a warm place to sleep, etc if he wasn't willing to fulfill his end of the bargain.  As a landlord, wouldn't you be risking the stability of your building and all tenants if you didn't make sure everyone was paying their rent.

NATO has been a lousy landlord and Canada, among other nations, have been lousy tenants. 

What do I say as a taxpayer to any government?  The same thing I said to my step-daughter - "adult choices come with adult consequences". 

To answer your question directly, yes I'd rather see the $ go into the NATO commitment than watch where some of our tax dollars are going now under the current government.  We can use some minor and major purchases.  Flying suits, boots...hell one of my guys couldn't even get a replacement for his flying knife because there are none [IAW a few flying orders, "aircrew members shall carry the issued flying knife during flying operations".  How is it we can't get them then?]  $20 billion...I'd take it...the problem isn't the CAF can't spend money, the problem is the CAF can't spend money where it needs it, timely, and efficiently, because our procurement system, PWGSC, etc is inefficient and not designed to actually get kit to operators as its priority.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2018, 18:02:20 by Eye In The Sky »

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 209,245
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,752
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #109 on: July 06, 2018, 18:02:00 »
You gotta pay to play.  And a consumption tax that the economy did just fine with is the simplest way of making a pronouncement and finding money to fund defence to the desired level.  I'm only floating ideas here.

Reallocation is another possibility.  Equalization program at $17.1B, Crown Corp expenses at $2.7B (after subtracting the income they produce), "Other Transfer Payments" $41.6B, and All Government Agencies/Departments aside from Defence at $52B.  These are all prime targets for cuts.

Also keep in mind the almost $18B in deficit spending that needs to be addressed, and you're looking at $35B that needs to be found to have a government in the black with what many would consider a properly funded defence program.  Getting their without a tax increase is probably pretty hard - PM Harper was not wise to hack the GST.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2018, 18:25:14 by Infanteer »
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 209,245
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,752
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #110 on: July 06, 2018, 18:03:57 »
The landlord analogy sucks.  Go back to the link I provided earlier.  2% is a non-binding agreement amongst NATO countries.  We aren't defaulting on any obligation, just doing a poor job of meeting an aspirational number agreed to long ago by a different government.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 244,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,403
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #111 on: July 06, 2018, 18:10:38 »
The landlord analogy sucks.  Go back to the link I provided earlier.  2% is a non-binding agreement amongst NATO countries.  We aren't defaulting on any obligation, just doing a poor job of meeting an aspirational number agreed to long ago by a different government.

It isn't perfect, but it makes the point.  You can't expect a free ride or to not meet your obligations and still reap the benefits.  I don't think anyone would argue we are actually pulling our weight?

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 552,615
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,629
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #112 on: July 06, 2018, 18:16:25 »
We need to understand what is in the definition of "defence spending".  For example, my understanding is that the US includes the coast guard, Veterans programs including healthcare for retired members and families, and healthcare for serving military members' families.   (We won't go into R&D spending through the military, otherwise lots of money to Bombardier could be added on as well - Boeing makes big bucks that way).

In Canada (round numbers): VAC is $4.5B per year and the coast guard is about $700M.  Family and retired member medical care are trickier to calculate, so I'll do some big hand, small map estimates.

Average provincial healthcare expenditures: $6600 per person.  With about 70K full-time military members, each with 1.5 dependants, that's 105K dependents receiving $693M in healthcare.  Assume another 200K retired members, each with 1 dependant makes 400K people, receiving $2.6B in healthcare.


So: Canada is spending $20B (DND); $4.5B (VAC); $700M (CCG); and $3.3B (healthcare for members, families, and retired members and families) under the US definition of military expenditures.  That's $28.5B, or about 1.4% of GDP.

You need to speak the same language and include the same items in the basket.  Right now, we're understating what we spend because of different accounting & organizational decisions.
Putting the *** in acerbic.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 209,245
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,752
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #113 on: July 06, 2018, 18:20:28 »
It isn't perfect, but it makes the point.  You can't expect a free ride or to not meet your obligations and still reap the benefits.  I don't think anyone would argue we are actually pulling our weight?

Pulling our weight at doing what?  Defending North America?  Meeting some arbitrary number from Belgium?  Supporting U.S. operations in Asia and Africa?

I'm all for improving our military's capability and capacity, but only if its based on some real calculation of requirement, and only if we clean up our own DND house first (are we getting the most out of the money the government already gives us?).  The 2% cudgel gets a bit tiresome, as it seems to indicate if we just spend that much, everything will be solved.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #114 on: July 06, 2018, 18:56:27 »
Pulling our weight at doing what?  Defending North America?  Meeting some arbitrary number from Belgium?  Supporting U.S. operations in Asia and Africa?

I'm all for improving our military's capability and capacity, but only if its based on some real calculation of requirement, and only if we clean up our own DND house first (are we getting the most out of the money the government already gives us?).  The 2% cudgel gets a bit tiresome, as it seems to indicate if we just spend that much, everything will be solved.
Like Greece somehow being useful by spending 2.4 percent of GDP on defense.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 219,842
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,502
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #115 on: July 06, 2018, 19:02:07 »
Also,  what election did I miss in November 2017?

Yes, it's been over a year.

How time flies when one is enjoying a presidency.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 219,842
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,502
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #116 on: July 06, 2018, 19:07:52 »
You need to speak the same language and include the same items in the basket.  Right now, we're understating what we spend because of different accounting & organizational decisions.

Agreed.

We most definitely should define our expenditure the same way that the US does.

But still spend whatever it costs to buy enough boots, operational clothing, rucksacks, sleeping bags, and trucks etcetera.

We have approximately one-tenth of the population of the US, but way, way less than one-tenth of the military personnel and kit.

I would not advocate for proportional parity, but we do have some pretty big gaps.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 952,995
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,792
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #117 on: July 06, 2018, 19:27:11 »
Like Greece somehow being useful by spending 2.4 percent of GDP on defense.

How useful are we with 1% but barely able to force project a Battalion quickly across the Atlantic to help NATO out? Yes, we have one prestaged, but up until recently there was no way we were going to get anyone into Eastern Europe quickly without pulling support from all other active operations.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #118 on: July 06, 2018, 19:38:49 »
Agreed.

We most definitely should define our expenditure the same way that the US does.

But still spend whatever it costs to buy enough boots, operational clothing, rucksacks, sleeping bags, and trucks etcetera.

We have approximately one-tenth of the population of the US, but way, way less than one-tenth of the military personnel and kit.

I would not advocate for proportional parity, but we do have some pretty big gaps.
we should count it the French way.

The  germanderie is part of the armed forces,  so anything spent on what amounts to the national police force counts as defense spending.

We should just count the RCMP. That's what,  an extra 3.5 billion or so?
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #119 on: July 06, 2018, 19:39:42 »
How useful are we with 1% but barely able to force project a Battalion quickly across the Atlantic to help NATO out? Yes, we have one prestaged, but up until recently there was no way we were going to get anyone into Eastern Europe quickly without pulling support from all other active operations.
So you are saying Greece is useful spending 2.4 percent of GDP on defense?
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 374,746
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,573
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #120 on: July 06, 2018, 19:40:00 »
Quote from: Altair

Do you expect 2 percent of GDP and countries to have worked out all kinks from chronic underspending overnight?

Strawman argument.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 952,995
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,792
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #121 on: July 06, 2018, 19:46:27 »
So you are saying Greece is useful spending 2.4 percent of GDP on defense?

No, I'm saying we're equally useless with less than half the expenditure. 2% of GDP is just an easy button figure, the politicians that came up with it because they have no idea about what it would actually take to defend Europe/North Atlantic.

Greece's 2.4% of GDP is because their economy is in the tank.

Also since you trotted out that our spending as a percentage of GDP is set to grow, https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/defence-parliamentary-budget-office-1.4411356 (article is 5 months after Strong, Secure, Engaged was released) says that our current defense plan is funded to set us up as 0.69% of GDP by 2035. There's those glass houses and peace dividends again.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #122 on: July 06, 2018, 19:56:49 »
No, I'm saying we're equally useless with less than half the expenditure. 2% of GDP is just an easy button figure, the politicians that came up with it because they have no idea about what it would actually take to defend Europe/North Atlantic.

Greece's 2.4% of GDP is because their economy is in the tank.

Also since you trotted out that our spending as a percentage of GDP is set to grow, https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/defence-parliamentary-budget-office-1.4411356 (article is 5 months after Strong, Secure, Engaged was released) says that our current defense plan is funded to set us up as 0.69% of GDP by 2035. There's those glass houses and peace dividends again.
bingo.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 313,645
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,791
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #123 on: July 06, 2018, 20:02:09 »
we should count it the French way.

The  germanderie is part of the armed forces,  so anything spent on what amounts to the national police force counts as defense spending.

We should just count the RCMP. That's what,  an extra 3.5 billion or so?

And the Coast Guard. Bolt some 20mms to their decks and then you can add another 4,500 people and $286 million.

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 53,564
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US versus NATO
« Reply #124 on: July 06, 2018, 20:26:02 »
And the Coast Guard. Bolt some 20mms to their decks and then you can add another 4,500 people and $286 million.

 :cheers:
CBSA?

1.8 billion?
Someday I'll care about milpoints.