What's new

Trump warning to Germany/Nato

.
This will push Germany and the EU to create an army and in the long term, it is the US that will lose.
 
.
This will push Germany and the EU to create an army and in the long term, it is the US that will lose.

USA already destroyed European mobile market, Nokia etc. Now with Tesla they will destroy European car market, BMW, Mercedez. USA already control most important software companies on planet. Bad times ahead for europeans.
 
. . . .
Mr. Trump is truly a blessing for Europe.

Finally, we can take charge of our own destiny...

Europe combined has a bigger GDP and better quality of life than Mr. Trump's America.

Time for European solutions to European problems... we have paid enough protection fee through our vassalage...

Time to become equals with America and jointly act where necessary. And act alone where required.

Our problems are many and growing... senseless, goal-less terrorism that we have never seen is becoming common.. Time for shaping our policies which are in our own best interests...

Germany, France, Italy and UK combined political, economic, cultural and industrial power is equal to any super power. Paris still is the intellectual capital of the world.

And lest anyone forget the flatest country in our galaxy, my Netherlands...

So, thank you Mr. Trump for making Europe Great Again.

Europe was, is and shall remain Heart and Soul of Western civilisation...

No, other civilisation has advanced the Human Condition more than the European Civilisation.
 
.
Trump is simply continuing what Obama has started. Even Obama was critical about Europeans not spending enough in his last term. The problem with the US is that it is now overstretched and the regions that are not vital to their interests and countries that are perfectly able to spend for their own defense (Germany and Japan) will lose support in the long term. We will see a less significant US in the future but I certainly don't see such a future as favourable to us as we share a lot of American values and US has been central to creating a rule-based global framework instead of anarchy. We will probably see these systems being eroded sadly.
 
.
Trump is simply continuing what Obama has started. Even Obama was critical about Europeans not spending enough in his last term. The problem with the US is that it is now overstretched and the regions that are not vital to their interests and countries that are perfectly able to spend for their own defense (Germany and Japan) will lose support in the long term. We will see a less significant US in the future but I certainly don't see such a future as favourable to us as we share a lot of American values and US has been central to creating a rule-based global framework instead of anarchy. We will probably see these systems being eroded sadly.

And as a result, there was an agreement to increase spending to 2% of GDP on defense by 2024.
Has Trump made anyone agree to increase to more than 2% - No...
Has Trump made anyone agree to meet that earlier than 2024 - No...
All he has done is to produce hot air, to please his voter base.

All the important decisions were made under Obama.
 
. .
And as a result, there was an agreement to increase spending to 2% of GDP on defense by 2024.
Has Trump made anyone agree to increase to more than 2% - No...
Has Trump made anyone agree to meet that earlier than 2024 - No...
All he has done is to produce hot air, to please his voter base.

All the important decisions were made under Obama.
Obviously the Twitter in Chief is all about the talk. That's what his supporters value anyway. He hasn't achieved any major legislative victory in this first 6 months and this is the easiest time for a president. He is beyond doubt going to be the biggest clown the free world has ever seen.
 
.
Hey yo get the hel out of my way :laugh:
Trump is making fun with Europeans
 
.
America is going to use Germany as their boogeyman in the next few years. :lol:
 
.
Impeccable "logic": only the USA should have trade surplusses.

LET'S NOT FORGET: TRADE DEFICITS WORK BOTH WAYS!

Trump wouldn't be whining if the situation were the reverse, would he now? So, would not the only 'fair' solution be to all seek parity in our trade balances, being good partners and all? But that's quite a challenge if you have many trading partners!

See Who is Bringing Offshore Money into the U.S
The United States is the most popular country in the world for foreign investment according to the Organization for International Investment. It is easy to forget how foreign investment in the U.S. substantially benefits the economy. The map below illustrates the top ten countries which have contributed to foreign direct investment in the United States (FDIUS) on a cumulative basis as of 2014.

fdi-usa-9e5c.jpg


Cumulative foreing direct investment in the United States (FDIUS) over the past few years has reached $2.9 trillion on a historical cost basis.

The top ten contributors are:
  • United Kingdom with $449 billion
  • Japan with $373 billion.
  • The Netherlands with $305 billion.
  • Canada with $261 billion.
  • Surprisingly, the tiny country of Luxembourg with $243 billion.
  • Germany with $224 billion.
  • Switzerland also at $224 billion.
  • France at $223 billion.
  • The British Virgin Islands at $100 billion.
  • Belgium with $89 billion.
Although many decry the loss of American jobs to other countries, especially manufacturing jobs, foreign investments are creating many well-paying positions for American citizens. This, in turn, supports the overall economy.

https://howmuch.net/articles/foreign-investment-usa

I think that should count for something too.

As for defence spending:

Reality is that NON-US NATO spending has increased steadily mostly 1950-2011. Whereas US NATO spending has been more eratic. As a result, we see below for TOTAL NATO spending a peak for Korean war (early 1950s), Vietnam war (late 1960s), the Reagan years (1980-1989) and post-911 increase (GW Bush). Dips 1970s (end of Vietnam), post 1992 (end of Soviet Union, Clinton years > defence draw down). Those are US (defence) policy related, not European (defence) policy. [edit: granted, the European (defence) policy also reflects the end of the Soviet Union, immediately post 1992]

6e96c0d2-42ae-457b-90fb-c5c54489ff3f


  • The NON-US line is slightly flatter compared to that of the NATO TOTAL, but not much.
  • Non-US spending is way more stable though than NATO TOTAL.
  • Fluctuations in NATO total coincide with Korean War, Vietnam war build up an draw down, the Reagan years buildup and the post CCCP-collapse drawdown, and the aftermath of 9/11.
  • Fluctuation in NON-US spending is a small break in the trendline following the CCCP-collapse.

Which shows it is US spending that jumps and drops eratically, typically when it is in the US interest.

csbachartmon.png


soltas_military.jpg


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/08/28/defense-spending-in-the-u-s-in-four-charts/

Thank you, Washington post.

While I do think Europeans should spend more on defence (in view of instability and potential threats in various parts of the world), but I don't think Europeans are there to finance US foreign adventures (and of late the US hasn't been too trustworthy in the area of motivating its foreign excursions).
 
Last edited:
. .
Back
Top Bottom