• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Germany hikes defense spending over 2% of GDP after Russian aggression (1 Viewer)

Moon

Why so serious?
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
18,430
Reaction score
11,188
Location
Washington State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has scared German officials enough for the country, frugal on defense, to kickstart a surge in military power.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced to parliament on Sunday that the country would be raising its defense and military spending above 2% of its total GDP. Germany has, for decades, refused to adjust their spending on defense, instead focusing spending on social programs. With Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine underway, Scholz thinks it is time to flex the nation's muscles.

"We have to ask ourselves – what capacities does Putin’s Russia have and which capacities do we need to counter his threats?" Scholz said in front of parliament Sunday.

"It’s clear, we will need to invest a lot more in the security of our country to defend our freedom and our democracy."



It’s about time. NATO is a defensive alliance and it’s important that each member is able to pull its weight. Shame on Germany for letting their contribution drop as low as it has.
 
Western Europe has gotten complacent since the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and Putin is taking advantage.

Trump's team understood this and responded. Biden's team has been oblivious unless slapped in the face. It's one more example of Trump's administration being competent and professional while Biden's administration is ideological, impractical, and amateurish.
 
Western Europe has gotten complacent since the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and Putin is taking advantage.

Trump's team understood this and responded. Biden's team has been oblivious unless slapped in the face. It's one more example of Trump's administration being competent and professional while Biden's administration is ideological, impractical, and amateurish.
Trump was sucking up to Putin and Russia since before his inauguration.
None of this has anything to do with the President of the USA.
 
It's one more example of Trump's administration being competent and professional


LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
 
Trump was sucking up to Putin and Russia since before his inauguration.
That's the cult's story but it was never true and it has been thoroughly disproven.

Of course, Trump haters have to hate, so the story persists.

None of this has anything to do with the President of the USA.
It does. Foreign policy is always run through the White House. Trump's foreign policy team was unusually good, but Trump had the final say on every close decision.

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOLLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
You should get help with that. Inappropriate laughter is a symptom of several serious problems.
 
You should get help with that. Inappropriate laughter is a symptom of several serious problems.

Oh, it was very appropriate, EXTREMELY freaking appropriate laughter to this gem:

It's one more example of Trump's administration being competent and professional

:LOL::ROFLMAO:🤡🤡🤡🤡
 
That's the cult's story but it was never true and it has been thoroughly disproven.

Of course, Trump haters have to hate, so the story persists.
The day Obama put sanctions against Russia Trump had Flynn call the Russian ambassador.
It does. Foreign policy is always run through the White House. Trump's foreign policy team was unusually good, but Trump had the final say on every close decision.
I'm talking about Putin's foreign policy.
You should understand that what Putin is doing is out of fear, not boldness. That's why he didn't do it when Trump was President. He had nothing to fear.
 
Several of them need to meet the 2% threshold, still! Even within the 10 countries which contribute the most dollar wise, six still don't contribute their 2% - including Canada, France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands and Turkey. The U.S. contributes enormously, including overall dollars and a whopping 3.42% of GDP. The next highest % contributor is Greece at 2.24%.
Trump was so right to bring this NATO contribution problem to the forefront.
 
2% threshold is and always has be absolutely stupid. Let me out it this way. You set a goal of using 10% of your income on food. Your income doubles and suddenly you have to eat double as much?

The reason Greece uses so much of their GDP on military is because their economy crashed. Greece has in fact reduced military spending, but not as much as their GDP crashed.

Any country should spend money on what is needed and not set an arbitrary stupid goal.
 
Oh, it was very appropriate, EXTREMELY freaking appropriate laughter to this gem:
It's called denial. It means that you are not accepting reality as real.

Good look for you.

The day Obama put sanctions against Russia Trump had Flynn call the Russian ambassador.
Entirely appropriate given Flynn's position in the transition.

I'm talking about Putin's foreign policy.
OK. His ethic is to seize what he thinks he can keep.

You should understand that what Putin is doing is out of fear, not boldness.
Once maybe but Putin is now very secure.

If you recall a series called A Game of Thrones. Putin's approach is a matter of gamesmanship.

That's why he didn't do it when Trump was President. He had nothing to fear.
He was outplayed, particularly in Syria.
 
Several of them need to meet the 2% threshold, still! Even within the 10 countries which contribute the most dollar wise, six still don't contribute their 2% - including Canada, France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands and Turkey. The U.S. contributes enormously, including overall dollars and a whopping 3.42% of GDP. The next highest % contributor is Greece at 2.24%.
Trump was so right to bring this NATO contribution
Not sure why you use the word "contribute". It's not a matter of contributing . It is the percent any country spends on their own military/defense out of their own internal budget. There is no "conributing," going on. Domestic policy and priorities drive internal budgets.
 
Not sure why you use the word "contribute". It's not a matter of contributing . It is the percent any country spends on their own military/defense out of their own internal budget. There is no "conributing," going on. Domestic policy and priorities drive internal budgets.
Use whatever word you like.
When will Canada live up to their obligation? Do you think any country who independently elects not to meet their obligation should be able to count on/rely on NATO support? If so, please explain why or how you consider that fair or ethical. Do you think being a part of a "group" without living up to the obligations of "membership" is fair? Is this kind of like an individual who chooses not to work but expects to be supported by someone who works hard?
I think it stinks that numerous countries don't meet their obligation. Shame on Canada!!!!!
 
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has scared German officials enough for the country, frugal on defense, to kickstart a surge in military power.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced to parliament on Sunday that the country would be raising its defense and military spending above 2% of its total GDP. Germany has, for decades, refused to adjust their spending on defense, instead focusing spending on social programs. With Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine underway, Scholz thinks it is time to flex the nation's muscles.

"We have to ask ourselves – what capacities does Putin’s Russia have and which capacities do we need to counter his threats?" Scholz said in front of parliament Sunday.

"It’s clear, we will need to invest a lot more in the security of our country to defend our freedom and our democracy."



It’s about time. NATO is a defensive alliance and it’s important that each member is able to pull its weight. Shame on Germany for letting their contribution drop as low as it has.
Remember when Trump told NATO to pay their fair share? They didn't like it but most upped what they were paying to the proper amount or at least closer. Aren't we glad he did that.
 
It’s about time. NATO is a defensive alliance and it’s important that each member is able to pull its weight. Shame on Germany for letting their contribution drop as low as it has.

I thought NATO was obsolete. What happened? We should have listened to Trump and just disbanded the whole thing, right?
 
Remember when Trump told NATO to pay their fair share? They didn't like it but most upped what they were paying to the proper amount or at least closer. Aren't we glad he did that.

Trump said he said NATO was obsolete and it was time to disband the whole thing. Aren't we glad he DIDN"T do that?
 
2% threshold is and always has be absolutely stupid. Let me out it this way. You set a goal of using 10% of your income on food. Your income doubles and suddenly you have to eat double as much?
The food comparison is absolutely silly. 2% is a minimum. But some countries, like the US (by a lot), Greece, and the UK (by a bit) do more than their fair share - and in this case, "extra" is a huge and useful benefit to NATO.
 
I thought NATO was obsolete. What happened? We should have listened to Trump and just disbanded the whole thing, right?
I’ve never said it was obsolete. I think it’s still a valuable alliance, but a lot of the members haven’t been willing to maintain their militaries adequately.
 
I thought NATO was obsolete. What happened? We should have listened to Trump and just disbanded the whole thing, right?
I'd have to go back and review his reasoning - but I believe the very fact that many countries simply didn't and wouldn't take their obligation seriously, was exactly why he had issues with a group which wasn't functioning fairly and properly. It's hugely unfair that so many countries expect the VERY important protections NATO provides (just think of how much Ukraine would appreciate that protection right now) yet blow off their personal obligation.
 
Remember when Trump told NATO to pay their fair share? They didn't like it but most upped what they were paying to the proper amount or at least closer. Aren't we glad he did that.
Very glad! Sadly, many still aren't at even the minimum of their fair share. If Trump takes office in 2025, I hope he continues on that worthwhile path and gets all the way there.
If the unwillingness continues, I can certainly understand there would be a logical case to be made for disbanding NATO. It will be unfortunate if it comes to that.
 
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has scared German officials enough for the country, frugal on defense, to kickstart a surge in military power.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced to parliament on Sunday that the country would be raising its defense and military spending above 2% of its total GDP. Germany has, for decades, refused to adjust their spending on defense, instead focusing spending on social programs. With Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine underway, Scholz thinks it is time to flex the nation's muscles.

"We have to ask ourselves – what capacities does Putin’s Russia have and which capacities do we need to counter his threats?" Scholz said in front of parliament Sunday.

"It’s clear, we will need to invest a lot more in the security of our country to defend our freedom and our democracy."



It’s about time. NATO is a defensive alliance and it’s important that each member is able to pull its weight. Shame on Germany for letting their contribution drop as low as it has.
That Scholz wants to upgrade his country’s defensive capabilities makes sense.
 
I’ve never said it was obsolete. I think it’s still a valuable alliance, but a lot of the members haven’t been willing to maintain their militaries adequately.

Well then surely you were outraged when Trump said it was obsolete, because he said he knew nothing about it when he was runnng for president:

“ Trump recalled in an interview with the Associated Press on Friday that when he was first asked about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization by CNN's Wolf Blitzer, he was caught off guard because he "wasn't in government" so never had to learn about the US-led defense alliance.


"People don't go around asking about NATO if I'm building a building in Manhattan, right?" Trump said, according to the AP's transcript.

"So they asked me, Wolf ... asked me about NATO, and I said two things. NATO's obsolete — not knowing much about NATO, now I know a lot about NATO — NATO is obsolete, and I said, 'And the reason it's obsolete is because of the fact they don't focus on terrorism.' You know, back when they did NATO there was no such thing as terrorism."

This is who you wanted runnng the country. And then you wonder why people were just a little upset.
 
I'd have to go back and review his reasoning

“Review his reasoning”? What, you think he actually has reasoning? LMAO. He has no clue about about anything. He just says stuff to piss people off, and that’s why his deplorable base likes him. It’s that simple.

“Reasoning”. What a joke.

“ Trump recalled in an interview with the Associated Press on Friday that when he was first asked about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization by CNN's Wolf Blitzer, he was caught off guard because he "wasn't in government" so never had to learn about the US-led defense alliance.

"People don't go around asking about NATO if I'm building a building in Manhattan, right?" Trump said, according to the AP's transcript.

"So they asked me, Wolf ... asked me about NATO, and I said two things. NATO's obsolete — not knowing much about NATO, now I know a lot about NATO — NATO is obsolete, and I said, 'And the reason it's obsolete is because of the fact they don't focus on terrorism.' You know, back when they did NATO there was no such thing as terrorism."

This is the guy you think knows more than all the generals, scientists, and doctors on everything. I suppose next you’re gonna want to review his “reasoning” for why he was undermining mask and vaccine recommendations from the CDC and was pushing horse dewormer, UV light, and bleach up everyone’s behind during a deadly global pandemic.

But hey, he can cuss good and owns the libs- so it’s all good, right?

“Reasoning”. Hilarious.
 
The food comparison is absolutely silly. 2% is a minimum. But some countries, like the US (by a lot), Greece, and the UK (by a bit) do more than their fair share - and in this case, "extra" is a huge and useful benefit to NATO.
You do understand that Greece has lowered it's military budget right? Despite this their % of GDP has gone up....it is math..

And the comparison is not silly. Does not have to be food... Electricity, water, gas... and many other things fit.

Point is with an increase in income aka GDP, you are forced to buy more to keep the 2% goal and that is silly.
 
Well then surely you were outraged when Trump said it was obsolete, because he said he knew nothing about it when he was runnng for president:

“ Trump recalled in an interview with the Associated Press on Friday that when he was first asked about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization by CNN's Wolf Blitzer, he was caught off guard because he "wasn't in government" so never had to learn about the US-led defense alliance.


"People don't go around asking about NATO if I'm building a building in Manhattan, right?" Trump said, according to the AP's transcript.

"So they asked me, Wolf ... asked me about NATO, and I said two things. NATO's obsolete — not knowing much about NATO, now I know a lot about NATO — NATO is obsolete, and I said, 'And the reason it's obsolete is because of the fact they don't focus on terrorism.' You know, back when they did NATO there was no such thing as terrorism."

This is who you wanted runnng the country. And then you wonder why people were just a little upset.
What are you talking about? I didn’t vote for Trump nor would I think he was correct when he said NATO was obsolete. I think you’ve become a slave to your stereotypes.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom