I thought it was the NATO treaty that protected Norway and the other 27 member states?
US is the kingpin, but not alone. That is the purpose of the treaty.
So far Article 5 has only been invoked once, after the 9/11 attack on USA.
NATO members are still in Afghanistan in solidarity with USA, but I’m not sure for how much longer.
That looks like California before the Mexican invasion. Was that a very young Arnold Swartzenegger singing?
What would NATO do without the US providing and paying for almost everything?
Not much.
dude the soviets won a pyrrhic victory over Finland, alone, that cost thousands of Soviet lives when that was a country that had only been independent for like 20 years and was the economic and political equivalent of like, Nepal today. The idea that an irrationally aggressive but relatively poor Russia is going to roll over all the Nordics today without heroic America standing in the way is delusional. In fact it’s projection, given that the US has attacked and occupied many times more countries than every other country in the world by far since WWII.
Whatever the merits of NATO during the Cold War it was Western Europe, US, Canada, Greece and Turkey vs the entire Warsaw Pact. Now it’s those same countries plus most of Eastern Europe against… just Russia. And for all that the US hasn’t won a single war since 1945. Either the US has the most incompetent military leadership of all time or war is a racket and not to keep any country “safe”.
Payments by the individual member states are as agreed back in 1947.
The new agreement on defence spending of 2% of GDP by 2024 has nothing to do with direct monetary contribution to a common NATO budget.
Since Europeans don’t see Russia as a threat, there is no reason for the US to keep funding NATO and providing most of the troops and equipment.
NATO only provides a token handful of forces in Afghanistan. NATO, and especially the Germans, have never done much. Remember that the US had to straighten out the Balkan mess. Europe couldn’t do it.
It’s just a waste of US taxpayer money that could be better spent on Medicare for all, and tax cuts.
Not only Trump doesn’t understand how the funding of NATO works, it appears that a large proportion of the US population has the same problem.
I don’t know about the population of other NATO countries, since they don’t seams to care as much. (Or maybe they don’t scream their ignorance as loudly?)
In any case, here is Politico’s “Primer for President Trump”, which MAY be able to clear up some of the misperceptions:
https://www.politico.eu/article/primer-for-president-trump-how-nato-funding-really-works/
I’m sure it is quite complicated so let’s make it simple… It should go to zero. The EU is a big boy now unlike in the aftermath of WWII so it’s time for them to stand on their own militarily. We’ve got 20 trillion in debt and a completely fked up culture to address here and that money could be quite useful to that end.
Besides, according to our resident expert here, EU/China=good, US=bad so maybe we should give them what they want.
I totally agree that US is spending far too much on their military and too little on medicare and and other programs to improve the living condition for it’s citizens, incl. on improving infrastructure.
To build expensive Aircraft Carriers and other useless warships to project power around the world when infrastructure in the homeland rots away from lack of maintenance doesn’t make much sense to most people.
Spending more on education, health care (that actually work in stead of filling the pockets of private investors and CEOs) and other things to increase livability for ALL people in USA would make much more sense.
It is true that some of the US forces are supporting NATO is a fact, but most (if not all) are under US command at all times.
The military Commander of NATO is ALWAYS an American, while the civilian Secretary General are European.
Most US forces are occupied within non-NATO territory and with tasks that is mainly to ensure American supremacy in Asia and the Middle East.
Euphemism for “when hell freezes over”.
You forgot the part about; By 2024. We are far from that deadline yet.
Neither the total defence spending of the US or any of the other members of NATO goes into some common NATO account, or towards NATO related projects and expenses.
But Trump has made one thing crystal clear; US cannot be be trusted to honour Article 5, thus a separate European defence mechanism outside NATO is needed. But proportionate to the threat towards Europe, not to the whims of an unreliable partner.
Take it from a reptile.
Yes the European countries are mostly welfare states that look out for their people and spend their money on welfare for those who need it most.
Less paranoid about Russia perhaps, thus able to see reality differently and clearer than USA?
With Global warming Hell is not likely to freeze over anytime soon:
Yes I agree. See my reply in #168
How do you turn on post numbers?
Exactly… It’s time to let these elitist nose in the air mf’ers fend for themselves… We got plenty of problems here that need that finding
US did not invoke Article 5 for the Iraq war because they couldn’t come up with a plausible reason to do so. Had Iraq attacked USA, or even threatened to do so???
I think, with the benefit of hindsight, EVERYBODY would agree it was a dumb idea in the first place. They couldn’t even get the UN SC to agree that it was a genuine cause.
Besides, if you don’t ask, how do you know the answer??
Events since has made that undisputable.
You go to war on an ideological idea of forcing Democracy on people and believe they will just comply?? Most Europeans could see the futility of the venture and would have nothing to do with it
