A Deeply Fractured US

[Brad Sallows]

So if someone suggests that you do “whatever you want” to an organization who you’re against, you don’t think that maybe you would support that person?

When did the goalpost move from doing "whatever you want" to deadbeat countries to doing "whatever you want" to the organization?

And I'm still wondering what the "tell" is that allows people to distinguish Trump making policy commitments he will keep from Trump shooting off his mouth to gin up outrage and excitement among the easily gulled.

A sufficient reason for Putin to support Trump is that Biden will shovel aid into Ukraine, which is really up to Congress (authorize expenditures) and the courts (enforcement if the administration balks). Another sufficient reason is the political disarray I already mentioned.

And this all ignores a critical and obvious factor: most nations have an interest in which way US elections land. Putin probably had a favourite between Obama and Romney, and there are no records that Romney hinted he might do something to favour Russian interests "after the election".

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Did Putin back Obama and Biden?

Three people with the same socialist goal for the USA? Three people that support Iran. Three people that support Red China.

Hmmmmm.

 

[TacticalTea]

So if someone suggests that you do “whatever you want” to an organization who you’re against, you don’t think that maybe you would support that person?

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/10/politics/trump-russia-nato/index.html

You can't be real.

Don't we have 15 or so different threads on here about failing procurement, the military falling apart, the world getting more dangerous? If NATO free-riders (Canada included) need a kick in the rear then whoever performs it is entirely justified.

Trump Is Right on NATO Spending

The former president’s inflammatory comments could have the positive effect of forcing European leaders to contribute more to their continent’s defense.

foreignpolicy.com

https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/exp@FPP/USA/FRA/CAN

Trudeau increased govt spending by 3% of GDP. A quarter of that could've gone to DND and we would've met the target.

https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2018/18/shsconf_infoglob2018_01032.pdf

All NATO countries (Except Iceland, Luxembourg) maintained 2%+ spending from '49 til the 80s. Canada, naturally, was the first to fall below that threshold. The NAT made sense when every country did its part. DC had not predicted that every other country would become a freerider and assume the US would do everything.

When they ceased to do their part, they became effectively delinquent in their obligations (Article 3) and the US is under no obligation to defend those who would not be able to defend the US.

 

[dimsum]

It’s one thing if Trump said “get spending up or leave NATO”, but totally another thing if he said “get spending up or I’ll let Russia do whatever they want”.

Besides the whole pesky “attack on one is an attack on all” part of the alliance.

 

[mariomike]

Besides the whole pesky “attack on one is an attack on all” part of the alliance.

From what I have read, Article 5 has been invoked only once in NATO history. After the 9/11 attacks on the United States in 2001.

 

[QV]

Brad's and TacticalTea's arguments dance circles around the emotional responses from the folks upset at the mean orange man.

Very fun to follow this thread.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Instead of complaining about his comments to NATO, I'd rather concentrate on the effect it had, of countries finally increasing their budgets. Sometimes, you just gotta call out the participants to get them to pay their bills.

And guess what? It worked. The end justified the means.

 

[FJAG]

Instead of complaining about his comments to NATO, I'd rather concentrate on the effect it had, of countries finally increasing their budgets. Sometimes, you just gotta call out the participants to get them to pay their bills.

And guess what? It worked. The end justified the means.

I think that you are conflating the cause of the general increase in NATO funding as between the effect Trump had (generally minimal) with that of Russia's attack on Ukraine (generally maximal).

His comments re NATO were counterproductive and generally on a par with the degree to which Mexico is paying for the wall.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Instead of complaining about his comments to NATO, I'd rather concentrate on the effect it had, of countries finally increasing their budgets. Sometimes, you just gotta call out the participants to get them to pay their bills.

And guess what? It worked. The end justified the means.

Really the effect is the allies don't see the US as the one who will come to their rescue anymore and I think that's a good thing. Countries need to be willing to carry their own weight before expecting others to do the fighting and dying for them. Canada I'm looking squarely at us.

Perhaps they/we view it as instability, or perhaps we have had our feet pulled to the fire, or perhaps its combination of both.

You cant deny that DJT has had an impact on internal and international politics. We can argue what that impact is, but there most definitely is an impact crater.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I think that you are conflating the cause of the general increase in NATO funding as between the effect Trump had (generally minimal) with that of Russia's attack on Ukraine (generally maximal).

His comments re NATO were counterproductive and generally on a par with the degree to which Mexico is paying for the wall.

Opinions.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Opinions.

Of course. There are too many moving parts in economic and world affairs to make useful qualitative assertions about causes and effects. People are going to find reasons to attribute good things to their team and bad things to all other teams.

 

[TacticalTea]

I think that you are conflating the cause of the general increase in NATO funding as between the effect Trump had (generally minimal) with that of Russia's attack on Ukraine (generally maximal).

His comments re NATO were counterproductive and generally on a par with the degree to which Mexico is paying for the wall.

Anachronistic, I'm afraid.

NATO expenditure went steadily up during the Trump presidency, then slightly down/stagnating during the Biden presidency until the invasion of Ukraine.

That the latter occurred on Biden's watch is not exactly an indictment of Trump.

 

[KevinB]

Anachronistic, I'm afraid.

NATO expenditure went steadily up during the Trump presidency, then slightly down/stagnating during the Biden presidency until the invasion of Ukraine.

That the latter occurred on Biden's watch is not exactly an indictment of Trump.

You also need to look at what was going on during both terms.

Honestly neither is a good choice.

 

[FJAG]

Anachronistic, I'm afraid.

NATO expenditure went steadily up during the Trump presidency, then slightly down/stagnating during the Biden presidency until the invasion of Ukraine.

That the latter occurred on Biden's watch is not exactly an indictment of Trump.

No one was indicting Trump. Just pointing out that a war within your backyard where hundreds of thousands are dying and arms have to be poured in might be a teeny bit more influential when it comes to ramping up defence spending than some an aberration in transient American politics.

@Fishbone Jones is absolutely right - "opinions": You've got yours, I've got mine, life goes on.

Just so that folks can have a look, here are the NATO's defence expenditures for the period 2014-2024.

 

[dimsum]

Brad's and TacticalTea's arguments dance circles around the emotional responses from the folks upset at the mean orange man.

Very fun to follow this thread.

I’m guessing that I’m one of those folks being “emotional”.

I’m literally using his quotes to prove a point - please elaborate how I’m being emotional.

 

[TacticalTea]

Yeah so

This is not financial advice but

It's probably a good time to invest in gold and crypto

 

[QV]

I’m guessing that I’m one of those folks being “emotional”.

I’m literally using his quotes to prove a point - please elaborate how I’m being emotional.

You fail to recognize context.

 

[PuckChaser]

Folks, friendly reminder that if you're going to post a link or news article, it needs a comment to further debate. This stops driveby grenades from getting thrown into threads.

- Milnet.ca Staff

 

[dapaterson]

Cause and effect?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1804353684815405187

 

[GK .Dundas]

Cause and effect?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1804353684815405187

The Oilers now HAVE to win the Stanley Cup.
The very fate of Western Civilization now rests on them !!!