Donald Trump says he would encourage Russia to attack Nato allies who pay too little

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
Decades of close alliance and support mean nothing.

It's pretty simple ... Pay the bills ... get a protective agreement.
Don't pay the bills ... go it on your own.
Why should Americans foot the bill for the defense of other countries when those should pay for themselves?

America=pay to play....
America=little to absolute zero moral value

a reply to: BedevereTheWise

Exactly. Putins aggression is taking wealth and resources away from people's standard of living and be 'wasted' on military spending.

It will be, and is, like you suggest.

But we can't capitulate, acquiesce, or bend the knee, to dictator scum like Putin.

As it seldom works out well down to the fact that if you give their sort an inch, they are apt to take a mile.

Just might have been nice not to live once again with the threat of nuclear war being wielded above our heads.

You would think we would know better by now.

But the fact is humanity refuses to learn from history and seems doomed to repeat the past transgressions of generations gone by.

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" Albert Einstein.

a reply to: Threadbarer
Trump is the best !!! Why would USA go to war for a country that isn’t in NATO or pays its fair share .. America 1st thats what he’s saying .. fck NATO it is a scam anyway .

But this is ATS and this is Trump, so I'm sure someone will be along shortly to defend these comments and tell us how lucky we are to have Trump and Putin.

Quoted for accuracy.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

NATO should have been disbanded when the Soviet Union collapsed.

The American people receive no benefit from being a part of it.

Recent Russian actions show NATO to be as relevant as ever.

The American people receive no benefit from being a part of it.

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

NATO should have been disbanded when the Soviet Union collapsed.

The American people receive no benefit from being a part of it.

Recent Russian actions show NATO to be as relevant as ever.

The American people receive no benefit from being a part of it.

That is is your opinion. I believe it to be wrong but I doubt I will convince you otherwise.

Still doesn't make saying he would encourage Russia in invading allies any less abhorrent.

a reply to: BedevereTheWise

What have these "allies" done for us that we should send our people to die in a war on the other side of the planet?

a reply to: watchitburn

The American people don't benefit from a lack of WWIII?

a reply to: watchitburn

The only time Article 5 has ever been invoked was in the wake of 9/11. Our NATO allies honored their obligations even though they had nothing to gain by sending their sons to die in the desert.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

What have these "allies" done for us that we should send our people to die in a war on the other side of the planet?

Fellow democracies that the US trades with and that work together to provide collective security?

You don't see any benefit l?

a reply to: Threadbarer

Oh?

You mean illegal wars based on lies that cost thousands of lives?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: watchitburn

The American people don't benefit from a lack of WWIII?

NATO is more likely to be the direct cause of WWIII.

NATO = WWIII

No NATO = No WWIII

a reply to: BedevereTheWise

The US is not a democracy.

The word does not appear in the Constitution even once.

And calling most of the NATO countries democracies is laughable at best.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

The US is not a democracy.

The word does not appear in the Constitution even once.

And calling most of the NATO countries democracies is laughable at best.

There are lots of words that don't appear in the constitution.

Doesn't mean the US isn't a democracy.

Some NATO countries could be better democracies , but they are all better than the alternative

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Threadbarer

What was actually said compared to the commie's unhinged OP.

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, adding “I said, ‘You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent?’

No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.”

So why would we be expected to get into a war for some other country over a treaty they weren't meeting their obligation to?

that sounds a lot like how he spoke before about NATO and making sure everyone "paid their fair share" to borrow a line from Joetatoe. He was able to get countries who hadn't been paying, to pay, so the US didn't have to shoulder the entire amount.

NATO is an organization, and it requires a financial obligation of all it's members. If someone doesn't pay, someone else has to, as the bills are still the bills. It's a business thing. Was it right to say it like that? Probably not. Is this an impeachable offence? (I have to ask this now, as we are nearing impeachment season)

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Threadbarer

What was actually said compared to the commie's unhinged OP.

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, adding “I said, ‘You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent?’

No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.”

So why would we be expected to get into a war for some other country over a treaty they weren't meeting their obligation to?

that sounds a lot like how he spoke before about NATO and making sure everyone "paid their fair share" to borrow a line from Joetatoe. He was able to get countries who hadn't been paying, to pay, so the US didn't have to shoulder the entire amount.

NATO is an organization, and it requires a financial obligation of all it's members. If someone doesn't pay, someone else has to, as the bills are still the bills. It's a business thing. Was it right to say it like that? Probably not. Is this an impeachable offence? (I have to ask this now, as we are nearing impeachment season)

NATO countries all have independent defence budgets. No one is paying anyone else's bills.

Some countries should increase their defence budgets, however doesnt remotely excuse what he said.

a reply to: watchitburn

The American people receive no benefit from being a part of it.

They do actually, in the form of jobs.

A United States divorced from NATO would also suffer direct economic consequences.
Trade losses from a hypothetical 50-percent retrenchment in global US overseas commitments are estimated to reduce US GDP by $490 billion per year. While this reduced presence would also create substantial savings, the net impact of this retrenchment is still estimated to reduce US GDP by $350 billion per annum.
RAND analysis indicates the hypothetical retrenchment in Europe (again, 50 percent of all security-treaty relationships and personnel commitments in Western and Eastern Europe) accounts for approximately $170 billion of the losses in GDP associated with reduced trade (this is 35 percent of the $490 billion total).

www.atlanticcouncil.org...

Here come the anti-Trumper crowd from overseas who don’t want Mr Meanie Mean tweets getting elected again.

Because apparently they’re worried about getting invaded by an army of “shovels” from prehistoric times, whose economy is the size of Panama and always drunk on vodka.

It’s so bad that apparently even Poland can take it directly head on, blindfolded in a game of counter strike. Against a country who ran out of missiles 10 years ago etc.

With added TDS symptoms tossed in there, such as seeing Mr Mean Tweets tell their NATO countries to start paying up their share.

All while wanting U.S. to drop its own border/national security funding and send moar monies to zee Ukraine!

originally posted by: Nofear51
a reply to: Threadbarer
Trump is the best !!! Why would USA go to war for a country that isn’t in NATO or pays its fair share .. America 1st thats what he’s saying .. fck NATO it is a scam anyway .

You just described the country of Ukraine, so why would the USA send massive amounts of military aid if America comes first? It has nothing to do with NATO, it has to do with pushing back on Russian aggression.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Threadbarer

What was actually said compared to the commie's unhinged OP.

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, adding “I said, ‘You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent?’

No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.”

So why would we be expected to get into a war for some other country over a treaty they weren't meeting their obligation to?

that sounds a lot like how he spoke before about NATO and making sure everyone "paid their fair share" to borrow a line from Joetatoe. He was able to get countries who hadn't been paying, to pay, so the US didn't have to shoulder the entire amount.

NATO is an organization, and it requires a financial obligation of all it's members. If someone doesn't pay, someone else has to, as the bills are still the bills. It's a business thing. Was it right to say it like that? Probably not. Is this an impeachable offence? (I have to ask this now, as we are nearing impeachment season)

NATO countries all have independent defence budgets. No one is paying anyone else's bills.

Some countries should increase their defence budgets, however doesnt remotely excuse what he said.

NATO COUNTRIES all have their own defense, but NATO itself has a budget also. They have people, equipment, weapons, all needed money to continue it's operation. And I don't think Trump was looking for an excuse in saying it. It's part of the unfiltered part of Trump. He says was he's thinking. Some call it a flaw, some like it. I cringe.