Support NeoGAF

[LegendofJoe]

Trump is the biggest threat to national security in America.

He's the biggest threat to security in the world, not just the US.

 

[chillybright]

I mean during the campaign he literally said US allies should pay for protection, so this is him keeping his words by doubling down on the stance I guess?

 

[Ragnar Blackmane]

"Trump said there aren't any safety control checks formpeople ckming to the US. This is however factually false"

Like seriously, can't he help lying through his teeth aboit things that are so factually and obviously false?

The funny thing is that the reporters doing the interview will have had those non existing safety control checks happen to them before the interview when they entered the country through the NY/DC airport.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Can someone play devil's advocate with me and explain how encouraging disunity and nationalism in Europe is good for the US in the long term?

 

[Ac30]

Can someone play devil's advocate with me and explain how encouraging disunity and nationalism in Europe is good for the US in the long term?

Then we won't be a trading bloc and we'd be less competitive with the US, I suppose, even though that would hurt American exports as well. There's no scenario where we all win (only ones where Russia does)

 

[Thetinman]

Trump is going to do his best to burn it all down then him and his friends will collect the insurance money that is when the real fun will begin. He has already planted the seed that the CIA, FBI, NSA, the Blacks, the Mexican, the Chinese, the Arbis, and the Whites who love them all are out to get him. So none of it will be his fault he'll just say they started the fire no not me not my boss Putin it was them they let it happen, they did it, and they wanted it I saw them partying in the street after it happen. It worked for Bush. See you all in 8 yes 8 years his going all the way let's just make it 10 to be on the safe side.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Looking at the article in the OP, Trump about Syrian refugees to Germany: "I think she made one very catastrophic mistake and that was taking all of these illegals, you know taking all of the people from wherever they come from."

Uh, they're not illegal if they're supposed to be there. That's just the way he treats immigrants, isn't it?

It's how he frames issues. When he calls them illegals, he says their presence in Germany is not legitimate and he dogwhistles to people who think that immigrants shouldn't be there.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

 

[FantasticMrFoxdie]

1st step to WW3 here we go

 

[radios shipping overview]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

So you work with them to increase their financial commitment over time. You don't throw the baby out with the bath water and disband NATO.

 

[JP_]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

You really think that's what he's concerned about?

 

[Nafai1123]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

Does it not matter that those countries are letting us setup strategically located bases within their country, thus allowing us to maintan our watchguard presence throughout the world?

NATO is an essential component in keeping peace within Europe, which is beneficial to the US.

 

[sangreal]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

It's a long-term goal, not a requirement

Also, Estonia and Poland are on the list of 2+%, 2 of the countries begging for more NATO support

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Does it not matter that those countries are letting us setup strategically located bases within their country, thus allowing us to maintan our watchguard presence throughout the world?

NATO is an essential component in keeping peace within Europe, which is beneficial to the US.

not enuf! no free rides!

 

[A Serious Man]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

Those countries also allow us to have a military presence within their borders, which is worth quite a bit to us. NATO is not charity on our part, keeping Russia contained and Europe stable benefits us in so many ways. The economic returns from healthy European trading partners alone outweigh whatever costs we might dump into NATO, it's extremely shortsighted to pull out over spending "fairness". People seem to think the post-WWII world order is the Earth's default state and little we could do could ever upset it. That is dangerously naive.

 

[Lime]

Can someone play devil's advocate with me and explain how encouraging disunity and nationalism in Europe is good for the US in the long term?

It'll be good for fascists and neo-nazis like Stephen Bannon who wants to destroy the whole state apparatus and have complete White straight male rich power over all others without any institutional or systemic hurdles stopping them.

 

[faisal233]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

When was the only time Article 5 of NATO invoked? Oh, after the US was attacked on 9/11. You want to bitch about spending when the only time the binding agreement to defend NATO countries was invoked after the US was attacked and NATO countries sent their troops to support the US?

America's disproportionate spending on NATO is a small price for the 50 years of peace it bought NATO countries. Compare that to what isolationist America had to spend for WWII.

 

[chadskin]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

It's not about 'paying their fair share', it's about the commitment of each country to spend 2% of its GDP per year on the military.

The US has commitments beyond NATO (e.g. South Korea, South China Sea) that help explain its higher military expenditures. Same for France that's militarily active in its former African colonies outside of the NATO framework.

If we're talking about contributions to the actual NATO budget ...

 

[Kthulhu]

Congress won't let him back out of NATO. It's too popular, and pretty much everyone likes NATO.

 

[Bear Force One]

If the Repubs don't remove him I could see him restructuring into a dictatorship for life.

 

[sangreal]

When was the only time Article 5 of NATO invoked? Oh, after the US was attacked on 9/11. You want to bitch about spending when the only time the binding agreement to defend NATO countries was invoked after the US was attacked and NATO countries sent their troops to support the US?

America's disproportionate spending on NATO is a small price for the 50 years of peace it bought NATO countries. Compare that to what isolationist America had to spend for WWII.

I would love for someone to ask Trump which countries have invoked article 5

 

[Earthstrike]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

Nato is already sufficiently strong. You know how the U.S. army is too big and there's a lot of wasted money? If everyone in NATO upped to the 2%share of gdp, thats just more waste. The U.S.A. alone is way more powerful than every other nation, USA plus all nato nations? Come on.

 

[samoscratch]

NO PUPPET! NO PUPPET!

Doesn't matter how many times I see it, this always gets me..

 

[Ragnar Blackmane]

Um, there going to be elections in France and Germany in 2017. We just saw how Russia alone has been able to influence US elections. Together with US they could a whole lot more to get scum like AfD and Front National elected or near power (in Germany).
A EU without either of those countries is hard to imagine.

You have no idea about the German electorate, the current political situation, the political demographics or the the political system in Germany if you think that the AfD has any chance of taking over in the country or even get close to it.

Now France on the other hand...

 

[Gnome Scat]

Trump trying to redirect attention from the intelligence reports.

 

[ISOM]

1st step to WW3 here we go

And the US won't be the good guys this time.

 

[Slaythe]

There would be a civil war long before Trump gets to start WW3.

 

[A Serious Man]

Trump trying to redirect attention from the intelligence reports.

By saying something extremely pleasing to Russia.

4D Chessmaster.

 

[Usobuko]

Can someone play devil's advocate with me and explain how encouraging disunity and nationalism in Europe is good for the US in the long term?

Maybe, or just maybe, Trump is looking out for himself.

As it is now, the EU governments aren't that friendly towards him so it is in his interest to prop up their opponents, the alt-right, so that both seek win-win relationships. The alt-right in EU wants to use UK and USA momentum to come into power and Trump wants allies instead of enemies.

I don't know, that's what I think. With Trump, it's never about America but his family and himself.

 

[OG Shaka Zulu]

This is seriously messed up.

 

[neorej]

“It’s obsolete, first because it was designed many, many years ago,”

So... What exactly does that make the US?

 

[thehypocrite]

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

Maybe you should educate yourself about the reasons why instead of acting like a mob boss running a protection racket.

 

[B-Dubs]

Can someone play devil's advocate with me and explain how encouraging disunity and nationalism in Europe is good for the US in the long term?

It's not. It's not even good for us in the short-term. Economically we'd have to negotiate a trade deal with every single country instead of just the EU, then there'd be the currency discrepancy. I mean, maybe a European vacation gets super cheap but that's about it.

Hell, if we want to get really dark, those two things (disunity and nationalism) are part of what led to the last two world wars. Outside of the post-WWII age Europe has been at almost constant war with itself and while encouraging them to be at odds with each other wouldn't lead to an immediate return of that sort of thing, who the hell knows what the world will look like in 50-60 years without NATO or the EU.

I'm sorry but I do agree with him about other countries not paying their fair share (i.e. 2% of their GDP). Only 5 countries are paying what they are supposed to. That's BS to me.

NATO isn't some protection racket that needs to be run by a better class of gangster.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Trump trying to redirect attention from the intelligence reports.

So he talks up his foreign policy, which only benefits Putin and far-right groups. I don't think he's doing too well at distracting this time.

It's probably important to distinguish what benefits Putin from what benefits Russia or the Russian people at this point.

 

[DJKhaled]

Stealing from Matt Hardy. Sad!

 

[Nokterian]

Fucking fascist piece of shit.

Can't believe people voted for the worst of the worst. The US must be a sick society to allow this to happen

I am baffled how it all goes and nothing has happend to prevent this before he puts his hand on the bible and laying a oath against democracy and the constitution. We are all fucked because of this orange cunt.

Even europe is holding his breath even me and my parents are thinking the worst is yet to come.

 

[99Luffy]

It's not about 'paying their fair share', it's about the commitment of each country to spend 2% of its GDP per year on the military.

The US has commitments beyond NATO (e.g. South Korea, South China Sea) that help explain its higher military expenditures. Same for France that's militarily active in its former African colonies outside of the NATO framework.

If we're talking about contributions to the actual NATO budget ...

According to the source this is just a $3.4B budget. Doesnt really move the needle all that much.

 

[Kabouter]

Can someone play devil's advocate with me and explain how encouraging disunity and nationalism in Europe is good for the US in the long term?

Less likely to get involved in European conflicts if you pull out of the theatre, no strong European competitor in terms of global influence in a divided Europe (since Russia's economy is too weak to make it such, and a divided Europe has only small nations without significant global pull in the long run), easier to force imbalanced trade agreements on nations if their negotiating position with you is much weaker.

It'd be pretty odd to see Trump take a sledgehammer to US arms exports though by ending NATO. Plus, if the EU does end, it's not entirely unlikely you'll see a smaller, much more closely knit, union emerging in the north. Such a union might in the long run actually be a more significant global player than the current loose EU.

So he talks up his foreign policy, which only benefits Putin and far-right groups. I don't think he's doing too well at distracting this time.

It's probably important to distinguish what benefits Putin from what benefits Russia or the Russian people at this point.

I think many Russians will agree with Putin that weakening Europe benefits them. Pretty hard to enact sanctions when you're divided, not to mention military intervention is extremely unlikely without NATO or the EU, meaning Russia can do what it wants in Eastern Europe and close friend Serbia could go back into Kosovo (they've already been upping the war rhetoric, they must really be eager to go).

 

[mid83]

This kind of crap is why I was so disappointed when even hawks like Rubio backed Trump. There's a reason why so many national security/foreign policy people, many of which are Republicans, were overwhelmingly in favor of Clinton.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Not occupying. Ukraine and South Ossetia have large ethnic Russian populations who are and were supportive of Russia. So it is a little more complicated. Other countries along the border have smaller populations and are far more hostile to Russian intervention.

Now, does Putin want more influence over Eastern Europe? The answer is of course he does. But he's not going to go invading them, at least we don't have any indication of such an escalation. Indeed, if that were to happen then it would be disastrous for everyone.

Regarding your concerns about Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders, there's little doubt he is using and exploiting the rise of right of the right as a way to further Russian influence over the region and weaken the Union. It serves their interests to have countries have closer relations and trade deals with them as opposed to the union itself. It's to their benefit that fragments.

Le Pen in particular has had a couple of deals, one of which was a Russian bank loan that allegedly has ties to the Kremlin. The rationale she gives for such deals is that French banks won't loan the money. The last loan I believe she attempted to negotiate was also with a Russian bank, but it failed to materialise. Wilders doesn't say much in regards to Russia. He's mostly running off the platform of Islamophobia. Farage, nah. Most of these have varying reasons for their position but share the common 'fear' of immigration and 'open borders'. It's not all connected.

This is basically the explanation of the rationale behind Russian policy. They're not going to zerg rush Ukraine and Poland because it serves no purpose. Soft power is where it at.

 

[chadskin]

According to the source this is just a $3.4B budget. Doesnt really move the needle all that much.

The point was that contributions to the NATO budget are the only payments made to NATO and all member states do indeed pay their fair share based on their GDP here.

 

[99Luffy]

The point was that contributions to the NATO budget are the only payments made to NATO and all member states do indeed pay their fair share based on their GDP here.

Thats a completely different thing though. The European Reassurance Initiative was proposed by Obama just a few years ago. Its $3.4B.

This is the 2% requirement(or I guess, suggestion) that trump is talking about.
http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2016_07/20160704_160704-pr2016-116.pdf

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

I kind of want NATO to be obsolete, if it means the EU can stand on its own.

 

[chadskin]

Thats a completely different thing though. The European Reassurance Initiative was proposed by Obama just a few years ago. Its $3.4B.

This is 2% requirement(or I guess, suggestion) that trump is talking about.
http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2016_07/20160704_160704-pr2016-116.pdf

I think you need to go back and check the post I responded to.

The pie chart I posted shows NATO's budget that pays for, you know, administrative costs (HQ, staff), exercises and trainings, AWACS missions and so on and so forth. I don't actually know the current hard numbers but the budget is in a similar range.

 

[99Luffy]

I think you need to go back and check the post I responded to.

The pie chart I posted shows NATO's budget that pays for, you know, administrative costs (HQ, staff), exercises and trainings, AWACS missions and so on and so forth. I don't actually know the hard numbers but the budget is in a similar range.

I just told you what it is. Its the budget for the ERI proposed by Obama. Maybe dont just look at the google images search page when looking for info.

 

[SirRattleBalls]

I haven't seen the full interview linked so here it is. Its quite a piece, the only thing I hated was that Michael Gove AKA Backstabbing Rat was conducting the interview.

Some Keypoints from The Spectator

1. Trump congratulates Britain for Brexit.. He says: ”People don't want to have other people coming in and destroying their country. I thought the UK was so smart in getting out [of the EU]... Obama said: they'll go to the back of the line [queue]... that was a bad statement."
   
2. And is keen on a quick trade deal with the UK When asked about a trade deal, he replied: ”Absolutely, very quickly. I'm a big fan of the UK, we're gonna work very hard to get it done quickly and done properly. Good for both sides. I will be meeting [Theresa May] — in fact if you want you can see the letter – wherever the letter is – she just sent it. She's requesting a meeting and we'll have a meeting right after I get into the White House and... we're gonna get something done very quickly."
   
3. Trump thinks Angela Merkel made a ”catastrophic mistake" in tearing up EU immigration laws to welcome Syrian refugees. ”I think she made one very catastrophic mistake and that was taking all of these illegals, you know taking all of the people from wherever they come from. And nobody even knows where they come from."
4. And he places Merkel in the same bracket of mistrust as Vladimir Putin: ”Well, I start off trusting both — but let's see how long that lasts. It may not last long at all." He said he likes her, ”but people make mistakes".
   
5. And partly as a result, he thinks the UK won't be the last country to leave the EU. ”People, countries, want their own identity and the UK wanted its own identity. But, I do believe this, if they hadn't been forced to take in all of the refugees, so many, with all the problems that it... entails, I think that you wouldn't have a Brexit. This was the final straw that broke the camel's back... I believe others will leave... I think it's gonna be very hard to keep it together because people are angry about it."
   
6. He says Nato is ”very important to me" but wants its members to cough up. ”I took such heat when I said Nato was obsolete. It's obsolete because it wasn't taking care of terror. I took a lot of heat, for two days. And then they started saying: Trump is right And the other thing is the countries aren't paying their fair share so we're supposed to protect countries. But a lot of these countries aren't paying what they're supposed to be paying, which I think is very unfair to the United States. With that being said, Nato is very important to me. There's five countries that are paying what they're supposed to. Five. It's not much."
   
7. And about the ex-MI6 spy who compiled the Moscow dossier: ”That guy is somebody that you should look at, because whatever he made up about me it was false.... If I did that in a hotel it'd be the biggest thing. They'd have me on the front page of the New York Post, right? And the other thing, I can't even, I don't even want to shake hands with people now I hear about this stuff."

 

[Baron Doggystyle von Woof]

The EU really needs to take steps for a European army. The USA is a falling empire which can't be trusted anymore.

 

[chadskin]

I just told you what it is. Its the ERI proposed by Obama. Maybe dont just look at the google images search page when looking for info.

The European Reassurance Initiative is a White House program, funded by the DoD and no other country. And I mean, the image says NATO BUDGET right there.

But why not, here's the official NATO budget, which - surprise - coincides with the pie chart I posted:

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_67655.htm?

 

[Hermii]

Stop it now. Article 5 should be invoked. USA has been invaded by Russia.

I'm fucking serious, this needs to happen.

Um. You want Nato to go to war against Trump? You want Trump and Nato to go to war against Russia because they helped getting Trump elected? Who should invoke article 5 on who?

 

[RulkezX]

I'm surprised you're all focusing on his NATO comments and not him saying he wants to drop the sanctions on Russia and forge closer ties.