Germany rejects Trump's claim it owes NATO and U.S. 'vast sums' for defense

[Pitt Gorilla]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...ource=facebook

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen on Sunday rejected U.S. President Donald Trump's claim that Germany owes NATO and the United States "vast sums" of money for defense.

"There is no debt account at NATO," von der Leyen said in a statement, adding that it was wrong to link the alliance's target for members to spend 2 percent of their economic output on defense by 2024 solely to NATO.

"Defense spending also goes into UN peacekeeping missions, into our European missions and into our contribution to the fight against IS terrorism," von der Leyen said.

She said everyone wanted the burden to be shared fairly and for that to happen it was necessary to have a "modern security concept" that included a modern NATO but also a European defense union and investment in the United Nations.

Trump said on Twitter on Saturday - a day after meeting German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Washington - that Germany "owes vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany!"

Trump has urged Germany and other NATO members to accelerate efforts to meet NATO's defense spending target.

German defense spending is set to rise by 1.4 billion euros to 38.5 billion euros in 2018 - a figure that is projected to represent 1.26 percent of economic output, Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble has said.

In 2016, Germany's defense spending ratio stood at 1.18 percent.

During her trip to Washington, Merkel reiterated Germany's commitment to the 2 percent military spending goal.

(Reporting by Andreas Rinke; writing by Michelle Martin; editing by Jason Neely)

[BucEyedPea]

Switzerland is armed to the teeth is a fact. It was discussed at length previously many years back.

Neutral but armed to the teeth:

Swiss have 150,000 troops - a massive amount for a country of about eight million.They also support military conscription. But they have a citizen militia. Just because it's a citizen militia doesn't mean they're not very armed. It makes everyone a soldier. Even women practice at gun ranges.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2013-09-...y-conscription

"In the event of any attack on Switzerland, the whole Swiss population becomes the army. "

It's no wonder they armed to the teeth since ALL of Switzerland’s other neighbors have spent their entire histories invading other countries.

The Swiss started a nation-wide shelter building program in 1960 to protect it's citizens from nuclear terrorism. This provides enough shelters for everyone and are only minutes away from a fall out shelter. This is part of their defense.

Swiss have rigged the tunnel vaults of their banks for demolition.

Nobody attacks the Swiss. Not even the Swiss attack the Swiss; their crime rate is minuscule. They don't have a president with the power to declare war as we do, but it not followed.

We have no civil defenses for our children, no shelters, no thought-out plan for recovery from attack. In fact, when we suffered a few thousand dead on 9-11, we panicked and did ten times more economic damage to ourselves than the terrorists had. We also let ourselves be suckered into joining a Middle Eastern tribal war without end, on transparently fraudulent grounds.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2008/07/...k-switzerland/

I have to go, but their mountains have tons of munitions in them and many have been hollowed out as airplane hangers. These are on gigantic booby-trap. They are in fact, armed to the teeth. It's just a small country.

[theelusiveeightrop]

The best way to handle this is to Tell Germany to get ****ed. Regardless of the fallout. Let them pay for their own defense. Trump should personally tell the worthless Merkel this. World police time is over.

[BucEyedPea]

Switzerland is one gigantic booby-trap

Documented in La Place de la Concorde Suisse, John McPhee's "rich, journalistic study of the Swiss Army's role in Swiss society."

Near the German border of Switzerland, every railroad and highway tunnel has been prepared to pinch shut explosively. Nearby mountains have been made so porous that whole divisions can fit inside them. There are weapons and soldiers under barns. There are cannons inside pretty houses. Where Swiss highways happen to run on narrow ground between the edges of lakes and to the bottoms of cliffs, man-made rockslides are ready to slide...

The impending self-demolition of the country is "routinely practiced," McPhee writes. "Often, in such assignments, the civilian engineer who created the bridge will, in his capacity as a military officer, be given the task of planning its destruction."
...


To interrupt the utility of bridges, tunnels, highways, railroads, Switzerland has established three thousand points of demolition. That is the number officially printed. It has been suggested to me that to approximate a true figure a reader ought to multiply by two. Where a highway bridge crosses a railroad, a segment of the bridge is programmed to drop on the railroad. Primacord fuses are built into the bridge. Hidden artillery is in place on either side, set to prevent the enemy from clearing or repairing the damage...

To interrupt the utility of bridges, tunnels, highways, railroads, Switzerland has established three thousand points of demolition. That is the number officially printed. It has been suggested to me that to approximate a true figure a reader ought to multiply by two. Where a highway bridge crosses a railroad, a segment of the bridge is programmed to drop on the railroad. Primacord fuses are built into the bridge. Hidden artillery is in place on either side, set to prevent the enemy from clearing or repairing the damage.

http://boingboing.net/2012/06/19/swi...gantic-bo.html

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

You understand that we already pay FAR more on defense than the next top 7 countries COMBINED, and you want to triple it?



What is the actual goal for you here, because this makes zero sense. Zero.

And why pay more for our troops than we have to in order to recruit and maintain an excellent military?

I don't care how much others spend, I'm sorry if that bothers you. That being said, I think we should recoup some from some others.

What's my goal? If you have to ask that, if it's really a question, how can you say it makes zero sense? You're an idiot, that's clear, and there's zero debate about that.

As for your last part, well let me refer to the part where I called you an idiot, and double down on it.

[Cochise]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

I don't care how much others spend, I'm sorry if that bothers you. That being said, I think we should recoup some from some others.

I'm also not moved by comparison to how much others spend. The United States occupies a unique place of leadership in the world and through our prosperity, we have been able to provide a presence that brings security and safety to the world that would not be there if the United States weren't around to help maintain order. We haven't always gotten everything right, but the world needs a benevolent nation with a big stick to wield more than ever.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by notorious

http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the...re-that-works/

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

I don't care how much others spend, I'm sorry if that bothers you. That being said, I think we should recoup some from some others.

So if the rest of the world was using bows and arrows, you'd still advocate for a military budget that is more than the entire federal budget? Because that seems to be your argument right now.

What's my goal? If you have to ask that, if it's really a question, how can you say it makes zero sense? You're an idiot, that's clear, and there's zero debate about that.

I'm asking because you either don't have one, or don't understand that your goal and your statements regarding military spending are misaligned.

As for your last part, well let me refer to the part where I called you an idiot, and double down on it.

I really like how you dodge the question by insulting me. Very effective. I mean, I barely noticed at all.

Your post makes no sense. TRIPLING the military budget from it's current $600 BILLION to $1.8 trillion is probably the stupidest ****ing thing anybody on here has posted in 2017, and that is saying quite alot.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Cochise

I'm also not moved by comparison to how much others spend. The United States occupies a unique place of leadership in the world and through our prosperity, we have been able to provide a presence that brings security and safety to the world that would not be there if the United States weren't around to help maintain order. We haven't always gotten everything right, but the world needs a benevolent nation with a big stick to wield more than ever.

Yes. Agreed. And we should continue to do that. But, like school systems, throwing more money at a thing doesn't necessarily improve that thing.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

So if the rest of the world was using bows and arrows, you'd still advocate for a military budget that is more than the entire federal budget? Because that seems to be your argument right now.



I'm asking because you either don't have one, or don't understand that your goal and your statements regarding military spending are misaligned.




I really like how you dodge the question by insulting me. Very effective. I mean, I barely noticed at all.

Your post makes no sense. TRIPLING the military budget from it's current $600 BILLION to $1.8 trillion is probably the stupidest ****ing thing anybody on here has posted in 2017, and that is saying quite alot.

"Yes we can"! But this time for something good.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

"Yes we can"! But this time for something good.

I'm still trying to understand why our military needs its budget tripled, when tripling it would mean that we outspend the entire rest of the world COMBINED.

The whole notion is ridiculous. The US is already by far the world's foremost military power, and you want to increase the budget to a level only seen when the US is in a major war. Why? No clue. Because you want to, I guess, without any logic or rationale at all.

[Cave Johnson]

Damn.

We pay a metric ****ton to play Team America World Police.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

I'm still trying to understand why our military needs its budget tripled, when tripling it would mean that we outspend the entire rest of the world COMBINED.

The whole notion is ridiculous. The US is already by far the world's foremost military power, and you want to increase the budget to a level only seen when the US is in a major war. Why? No clue. Because you want to, I guess, without any logic or rationale at all.

You do understand that China's actual DoD spend is much higher than the reported figures?

[patteeu]

The silver lining of being involved in wars for the past decade and a half is that we have developed a lot of warfighting experience. The downside, aside from the obvious human toll, is that we've worn down our equipment and that we've focused our spending on immediate needs instead of developing for the future.

Meanwhile, our most capable adversaries have been studying our warfighting weaknesses, closing the technology gap and investing in emerging capabilities like cyber and space warfare.

Now is not the time to continue shaving the defense budget for deficit reduction bailout money. The President's stake in the sand seems reasonable as a top level number. My understanding is that it's not that much more than what Obama was requesting. This needs to be a multi-year rebuild program though.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

I'm still trying to understand why our military needs its budget tripled, when tripling it would mean that we outspend the entire rest of the world COMBINED.

The whole notion is ridiculous. The US is already by far the world's foremost military power, and you want to increase the budget to a level only seen when the US is in a major war. Why? No clue. Because you want to, I guess, without any logic or rationale at all.

That's your opinion. My opinion is that Barry gutted the military, and ****ed them over, to the best of his ability.

And I'm going to stick with triple until "whatever it takes to right-size the military and get all the wonderful people serving in the military compensated to the level they've always deserved" is put into place.

I guess you can call me a MJW (Military Justice Warrior). I want all the sins of the past (paying most of the military like shit) fixed for those serving today.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

That's your opinion. My opinion is that Barry gutted the military, and ****ed them over, to the best of his ability.

And I'm going to stick with triple until "whatever it takes to right-size the military and get all the wonderful people serving in the military compensated to the level they've always deserved" is put into place.

I guess you can call me a MJW (Military Justice Warrior). I want all the sins of the past (paying most of the military like shit) fixed for those serving today.

When you signed up, did you understand how much they were going to pay you or do you feel like you were misled?