Trump to Make Allies Pay More to Host US Bases

(edited)

Russia isn't a threat to Germany, Russia is more interested in doing business with the Germans, not invading. 

People need to stop playing the Russian scare card. 

Edited by Romka
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

Yeah underestimate Germany's ability to quickly rebuild its military... again.

Then it will be called the EU army. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, John Foote said:

Nixon extended the war to get elected.

JFK deepened our involvement in Vietnam so he could get re-elected. He admitted this. So if any one deserved to get shot...well not in that way.

LBJ doubled-down and upped our troops to over 500k. You think that was free and didn't have a political reason behind it? But it backfired and the coward didn't even try to get re-elected. He also hung his War on Poverty around the necks of Americans. So what if he balanced the budget one year in '68. The totality of his failed presidency is something we are still paying for.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

now other countries will pay 150% for your forces to be in their country?  LOL!  28% sure, maybe; 100% No; 150% is a joke of epic fence proportions.

That's what S. Korea probably thought then they ponied up the cash. In a year they'll pony up more.

 

10 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

"It’s true those bases are in our interests and so not entirely altruistic". Ya think!

I suppose it hit too close to home so you didn't read what followed that.

Every time you Euros see a ripple in the Baltic or North Sea you panic and scream "Russian sub". Then you beg us to rotate our military into your countries for training exercises as a show of force and commitment and store our equipment in your countries in case, you know, the Russians decide to invade .

No one is saying you have to pay of course but then you'll need to learn to fight or learn Russian.

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Yeah underestimate Germany's ability to quickly rebuild its military... again.

Other NATO nations particular the USA and UK have been critical of Germany for not rebuilding its military and simply relying on 'welfare' from the USA and UK.

 They have a commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defense spending. They barely exceed 1% and its been like this for decades. Even if they increased defence expenditure 5 fold it would take a decade or more to reach where they should have been had they maintained their NATO 2% commitment .

Its not like the old days where a well trained army, rifles with sharp bits on the end will suffice. The build out times for aircraft,ships, armoured vehicles etc can be decade long.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Romka said:

Russia isn't a threat to Germany, Russia is more interested in doing business with the Germans, not invading. 

People need to stop playing the Russian scare card. 

The people who are scared of Russia are those inbetween. Poland, Rumania and especially the Baltic States.

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, NickW said:

The people who are scared of Russia are those inbetween. Poland, Rumania and especially the Baltic States

I would throw in the Nordic states too. Nordic and Baltic are small states in close proximity to Russia. With no deterrent they would be easy to seize.

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shadowkin said:

That's what S. Korea probably thought then they ponied up the cash. In a year they'll pony up more.

 

I suppose it hit too close to home so you didn't read what followed that.

Every time you Euros see a ripple in the Baltic or North Sea you panic and scream "Russian sub". Then you beg us to rotate our military into your countries for training exercises as a show of force and commitment and store our equipment in your countries in case, you know, the Russians decide to invade .

No one is saying you have to pay of course but then you'll need to learn to fight or learn Russian.

S. Korea is a bit of an exception and you know it. 

I'm Canadian.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

I would throw in the Nordic states too. Nordic and Baltic are small states in close proximity to Russia. With no deterrent they would be easy to seize.

The key difference is Finland, Sweden and Norway have decent air forces. I suspect many Russians still remember 'Grandads' horror stories from fighting the Finns.

The Baltic states in contrast have no militatry airforce to speak of. I'm surprised they haven't club together and bought half a dozen 2nd hand F-16's to show some willing. Alternative some BAE Hawks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Leko said:

In my view The US military bases serve the U.S's political strategic interest. They should be charged rent for the property they use or they should go home, Nobody really needs or wants them any more. Trump has made feelings towards USA worse than they have ever been. The thought of charging the host nation "protection money" is wrong, but typical Trump.  

US bases in foreign countries do serve the US strategic interest, but they also make significant economic contributions to the local economies. In the Phillipines, before the US closed those facilities, they provided good paying jobs to 40,000 Filipinos and contributed $300 million annually to the local economy. 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Mexico will pay for the wall, now other countries will pay 150% for your forces to be in their country?  LOL!  28% sure, maybe; 100% No; 150% is a joke of epic fence proportions.

Level heads will prevail - not Trump lunacy.

"It’s true those bases are in our interests and so not entirely altruistic". Ya think! :)

Spend your own lives and treasure protecting your own families and economies. Bring the troops home.

N America is energy independent so no reason for a Cowboy military to deploy without at minimum breaking even on cost. 

Besides in this age of increasingly sophisticated missile capability much of any military is fodder against each other.

Trump is on the right track in theory but like most of his agenda there is little likelihood he will follow through.

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

S. Korea is a bit of an exception and you know it. 

In fact their circumstances are remarkably similar. Both are bordered by nuclear armed neighbors who regularly conduct provocative military exercises. Neither can defend against this adversary without a third power.

 

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

In fact their circumstances are remarkably similar. Both are bordered by nuclear armed neighbors who regularly conduct provocative military exercises. Neither can defend against this adversary without a third power.

 

I bet if we think just a minute there is another country that has enjoyed US military superiority for years, eh?  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TXPower said:

I bet if we think just a minute there is another country that has enjoyed US military superiority for years, eh?

Indeed Canada sits in the lap of luxury. Almost mentioned this but thought better of it.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

Indeed Canada sits in the lap of luxury. Almost mentioned this but thought better of it.

It's not much of a secret. Funny thing is Trump still called us a national security threat because of our steel and aluminum.  😂

Mexico will never pay for your wall, but you will continue to pay for our defense - it's an unavoidable byproduct of defending Alaska and having access to strategic resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, John Foote said:

Nixon extended the war to get elected. Easy to research and verify.

Nixon ended the war......

Kennedy and LBJ bankrupted the nation spending on the war.........

Nixon had to take us off the gold standard to recover from what they did.....

Yet you say the budget was balanced by LBJ.......

 

I disagree......

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

Funny thing is Trump still called us a national security threat because of our steel and aluminum

If you don't understand country X dumping into country Y's market represents a threat to Y's economy there's no hope for you.

 

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

but you will continue to pay for our defense - it's an unavoidable byproduct of defending Alaska and having access to strategic resources.

You mean you'll continue to be our b____h and the world will forever look at you as America-lite. It's why you have no clout in the word. Even if we didn't have Alaska we'd be spending more than any other country and you'd still be living under our protection. Permian oil is more strategically important nowadays than any resources in Alaska. It's location is more valuable than its resources.

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, shadowkin said:

If you don't understand country X dumping into country Y's market represents a threat to Y's economy there's no hope for you.

You mean you'll continue to be our b____h and the world will forever look at you as America-lite. It's why you have no clout in the word. Even if we didn't have Alaska we'd be spending more than any other country and you'd still be living under our protection. Permian oil is more strategically important nowadays than any resources in Alaska. It's location is more valuable than its resources.

Canada is an exporting nation with few people (consumers) and lots of resources - attempting a trade balance with us is foolish.  Just because we gain more from the deals doesn't mean you guys lose... a concept lost on a particular politician but not economists who are shaking their heads. It's making policy from emotion rather than logic and is a well known psychological phenomenon.  

Say Canada and the USA are given a pie to share.  Canada gets to split the pie and the USA can either accept the deal or throw the whole pie in the garbage and both sides get nothing.  Now Canada says "Hey let's take 2/3rds of the pie - they would be fools not to take 1/3 of a free pie."  Then Trump is a baby and can't understand that 1/3rd of a pie is better than nothing (and hates an "bad deal" more than he appreciates a win) so he tosses the thing in the garbage.  It's "leading" with feelings...

Better than being looked at like the world looks at the US right now.  Don't get me wrong, I like the states and know that in the past your people have done some great stuff; but right now you guys are a joke.  We are not your bitc* - not even close.  What are you going to do invade us?  Like you said it would make almost no difference to us other than beer and gas would get cheaper and healthcare would start to suck. 

I was referring to Canadian resources - and not all the oil.  We have huge amounts of potash and other stuff you need to feed an army.

Edited by Enthalpic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t worry about “our wall” my friend.  There isn’t one between the US and Canada either.  Humans, Mexicans, Central and South Americans et al., will always travel to find work and better circumstances for themselves.  Legally or otherwise.  The Mexican border creeps further north every year.  Canada will be embracing another Latin-root language sooner or later.  Sooner if we pass instant work ID legislation.  Plan accordingly.

In the meantime, we’ll continue to be a buffer and protector for our neighbors up north.  You’re welcome on both accounts.

p.s. Lecturing us on Trump, logic, foolishness and how the world views us.  One word, Trudeau.  giggle giggle........  

p.s.s. Send more crown royal, molasses and thick oil.  That is all.

  • Like 2
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

but right now you guys are a joke

Canada under its current prime minister is the joke.

Trump forced Trudeau to accept a new trade agreement in place of NAFTA. When Canada saw the US made a deal with Mexico without Canada, Trudeau quickly came to the table.

He invited a Sikh terrorist to a state dinner in India. Oh look here he is posing with Trudeau's wife.

1480587004_ScreenShot2019-03-13at5_28_14PM.png.f2f4bff12bc45e52c355a461dbda0b73.png

 

After pretending to stand up for human rights in Saudi and Trudeau claimed to want out of an arms deal. Instead Trudeau capitulated because of fear of Saudi's reaction and he is currently waiting for the controversy to die down so that Canada can go ahead with the deal. No clout.

Contrast this with Trump who told the Saudis their house wouldn’t last 2 weeks without the US.

He’s currently involved in a scandal where he is suspected of pressuring his former justice minister to go easy on a construction firm that was caught paying bribes in Libya. He may well not survive.

Let’s not even mention how his phony feminism has been exposed.

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

What are you going to do invade us?

 

It’s even better than that. We don’t need to invade you to achieve most of our goals. Canada has no independent foreign policy of note. Minor things here and there but basically US foreign is Canadian foreign policy. No clout.

 

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

I was referring to Canadian resources - and not all the oil.  We have huge amounts of potash and other stuff you need to feed an army.

You don’t understand. Canada is protected by the US because we could never allow another nation to conquer or even invade you since you are right next door, not because of…potash. This wouldn’t be the case if Canada was in S. America or some such place.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Canada is an exporting nation with few people

SNIP What are you going to do invade us? 

No: Alberta, Sask will leave forcing BC to leave as well.  At which time, they become their own nation

( A very THIN slice of cheese on the USA's hamburger)

or join the USA. 

There is literally nothing holding western Canada to Toronto/Ottawa/Montreal other than a VERY thin thread of history. 

Edited by Wastral
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

You don’t understand. Canada is protected by the US because we could never allow another nation to conquer or even invade you since you are right next door, not because of…potash. This wouldn’t be the case if Canada was in S. America or some such place.

Thankfully several other nations think the same - attacking us would be too much of a tipping point so we are immune.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

not because of…potash.

Never underestimate fertilizer...

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Thankfully several other nations think the same - attacking us would be too much of a tipping point so we are immune.

Yup it's interesting the influence geography has on security. Both Canada and US blessed with 2 big oceans separating us from most of the world's most volatile regions.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 oceans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites