NobleSavage
Veteran Member
Convince me that we should stay in NATO. I say, let Europe defend its self while we mind our own borders.
-
Features
Should the US pull out of NATO?
- Thread starter NobleSavage
- Start date
Heh.
US mind it's own borders.
Funny.
US mind it's own borders.
Funny.
tupac chopra
Veteran Member
It's coming, maybe sooner that later. America can't even pay for the last two misguided wars. Will the world keep loaning them money to have another one?
Before long we will see a US president say..."god has given us the task of taking democracy to the world....but the world doesn't seem to want it...so we will focus at home."
Bacillus anthracis
Member
It depends. Europe can handle its own problems if it comes to military confrontation. The U.S. has been there long enough.
Of course we'd have to have the resolve to not go back in once they started killing each other on a grand scale again. Only under the hand of U.S. military might has Europe managed to behave itself for the first time in 15 centuries or so.
And the U.S. could recoup some of its losses by bringing its navy home. The entire world benefits from it so maybe they can begin to police their own waters. It would be fun to sit back and watch as Europe and Asia began to crumble under the weight of having to handle their own defense and trade protection, and all the conflicts that would break out from that. But like a huge pile of dogshit flung from the world's largest catapult, it would definitely land in North America and splatter all over us.
With all the wars that would break out, the U.S. could make ten times the amount it already makes in arms sales. Fuckin' A. Bring our military home.
Like the much admired (for who the fuck knows why) Swiss, the U.S. has the Atlantic on one side, the Pacific on the other. We'll just become the world's next gigantic Switzerland and claim total neutrality.
It won't happen but damn it would be nice.
Of course we'd have to have the resolve to not go back in once they started killing each other on a grand scale again. Only under the hand of U.S. military might has Europe managed to behave itself for the first time in 15 centuries or so.
And the U.S. could recoup some of its losses by bringing its navy home. The entire world benefits from it so maybe they can begin to police their own waters. It would be fun to sit back and watch as Europe and Asia began to crumble under the weight of having to handle their own defense and trade protection, and all the conflicts that would break out from that. But like a huge pile of dogshit flung from the world's largest catapult, it would definitely land in North America and splatter all over us.
With all the wars that would break out, the U.S. could make ten times the amount it already makes in arms sales. Fuckin' A. Bring our military home.
Like the much admired (for who the fuck knows why) Swiss, the U.S. has the Atlantic on one side, the Pacific on the other. We'll just become the world's next gigantic Switzerland and claim total neutrality.
It won't happen but damn it would be nice.
Petrel
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2013
- Messages
- 213
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
- Basic Beliefs
- less passion; more compassion
Whose idea was NATO in the first place?
What is its purpose?
Whom does it serve?
What would happen if it were allowed to lapse?
What is its purpose?
Whom does it serve?
What would happen if it were allowed to lapse?
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
NATO was founded as a mutual defense treaty against a country that doesn't exist anymore.
tupac chopra
Veteran Member
delete
dystopian
Veteran Member
Why is it that Americans always talk a big talk about international order and their commitment to it when things are easy for them, but the moment it seems like that talk could lead them to having to fight a strong enemy they start getting isolationist again? I seriously doubt this would even be a question for anyone other than the lunatic fringe if it wasn't for the current geopolitical situation. If America wants to pull out of NATO it should have done so in the 90's, not now that there's a madman in the kremlin. If a real war broke out in the world today, it'd be the world wars all over again; the US sitting back to let Europe do all the groundwork, then swoop in at the last moment to try and take credit when they realize that 'oh, actually it could be real bad for us depending on who wins'. No, fuck that. You guys committed to NATO, that means you have obligations; expectations to meet. Reneg on that in the middle of a geopolitical crisis, and the US would be utterly alone in the world; with dire long-term consequences for its prosperity. But hey, who am I to stand in the way of Americans wanting to slowly self-destruct without realizing it?
The US pulling out of NATO now would be the equivalent of having 'friend' who goes up to the outlaw biker dude at the bar to tell him you said he's an asshole, then going back over to you and goading you into committing to the fight while promising you that he has your back only to then disappear when glasses start flying: cowardly and dishonorable behavior. Oh, and then afterwards you find out that he hacked your cellphone and is sharing your girlfriend's naked pictures with his brothers.
The US pulling out of NATO now would be the equivalent of having 'friend' who goes up to the outlaw biker dude at the bar to tell him you said he's an asshole, then going back over to you and goading you into committing to the fight while promising you that he has your back only to then disappear when glasses start flying: cowardly and dishonorable behavior. Oh, and then afterwards you find out that he hacked your cellphone and is sharing your girlfriend's naked pictures with his brothers.
barbos
Contributor
NATO?
US can't seem to pull out of Ukraine.
This is unfortunate but US only pulls IN, never out.
US can't seem to pull out of Ukraine.
This is unfortunate but US only pulls IN, never out.
NobleSavage
Veteran Member
Maybe if Europe paid it's fair share we could afford a cushy welfare state like Europe has.
http://www.thestate.com/2014/07/08/3552102/nato-head-europeans-must-pay-more.html
http://www.thestate.com/2014/07/08/3552102/nato-head-europeans-must-pay-more.html
How do you figure? Do you think less need for the US military would somehow translate into less US military spending? You have eleven aircraft carrier groups. You're mothballing thousands of tanks because there's no need for them and yet still building more tanks no matter how loudly the Pentagon insists they don't want or need them in order to keep cushy government jobs. You're deploying anti-missile systems despite those systems not even passing the beginning beta tests. The list goes on and on. It's not like your country employs some kind of sane metric which matches military spending to what you're going to be doing with the military.
NobleSavage
Veteran Member
Wishful thinking.
Bacillus anthracis
Member
Awww. Europe can't take care of itself? The U.S. has policed the world long enough--and I might add, doing so to loudly voiced complaints from the people of Europe about being the world's policeman.
So how about we stop? How about we let each nation in the world defend itself. As an American citizen, I don't fear being invaded and I don't care if we're #1 at Whatever in the world. And as an American citizen, I am fucking war weary, as is most of the country, and risking another war in Europe just doesn't sound like a good time.
The U.S. is supposed to take the lead and risk itself over something that is purely a European affair? One that can only be bad for the U.S.? And at the risk of nuclear conflagration? As far as any commitments honored, the U.S. has honored it since the end of WW2. That's going on 60 years. It's enough.
Bacillus anthracis
Member
Well, if we pulled out of Europe, Japan, Korea, etc. We wouldn't have to worry about that now, would we? We could take the same posture as China: a decent sized army and the guarantee that if you try to nuke us, we can do the same.
Don't worry Canada, we share a common border. We'll totally back you if Greenland tries to take Baffin Island (or Newfoundland--my geographical knowledge of Canada is a little rusty).
At any rate, what it all adds up to is that if Europe is going start yet another conflagration resulting in tens to hundreds of millions of deaths, we don't want any part of it. At least I don't.
barbos
Contributor
Merkel says Germany will start spying on GB and US
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ca-for-the-first-time-since-1945-9627178.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ca-for-the-first-time-since-1945-9627178.html
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,057
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
Maybe you are just getting rolled by your suppliers.
According to the NATO report that appears to be the source for the figures in your graph, the USA spends roughly the same proportion of its defense budget on each major category - personnel, equipment, infrastructure and 'other' as the United Kingdom; and according to table 6 in that report, the US gets 1,440,000 active duty personnel for their money; the Europeans plus Canada get 2,000,000 active duty personnel for their dough - so while the USA may spend 70% of the total cost of NATO, that expenditure only provides 41% of the forces.
To put it another way, to get the same total of 3,440,000 men under arms, at the prices paid by the non-US members of the alliance, would cost only 55% of the current NATO budget.
The US pays more, not because it contributes more troops, but because it pays vastly more money for each troop it contributes than the other members of the alliance. I suspect that the take-home pay for soldiers doesn't vary by anything like enough to make all of the difference; but it wouldn't shock me to discover that corporations who supply the armed forces with everything from vehicles to uniforms, and from weapons to rations, make a shitload more profit per unit sold to the US than they do in sales to other NATO member states.
If the USA took its 72% of the money and went home, the rest of NATO would need to find only twice what they currently spend, in order to keep a similar number of similarly equipped troops ready to fight.
You guys did not complain when NATO supported you in Afghanistan. Ingrates.
arkirk
Veteran Member
All the funding disparity shows is that NATO is merely a fictional organization and is actually a subsidiary of the U.S. government. Governments contribute to these alliances in proportion to how important they are to them. Extremely low European contributions indicate that NATO is in the interest mainly of the U.S. Yes, the U.S. should dismantle this worthless and inefficient organization that periodically attacks 3rd world countries, but really isn't that like asking if the royalty in England should abandon their meal tickets. In other words, how can the U.S. leave itself?
dystopian
Veteran Member
Bullshit. What the people have complained about is your foreign policy; not your commitment to NATO; a treaty you are bound to by law. Not only can you not just arbitrarily pull out of it without violating treaty law; but to do so NOW is blatantly dishonorable and cowardly. Which incidentally, is exactly the sort of thing we've been complaining about in regards to your foreign policy all these years.
As an American, you don't actually know what war is. Playing soldier in the desert and losing a few thousand soldiers is a skirmish in the grand scheme of things, not a war. NATO was founded after a *real* war, after the devastation of entire continents; and it was to prevent a repeat. And know that if there IS a repeat, the US can't sit it out because if it tries to then the war WILL eventually reach its shores. The US tried to stay out of the previous world wars for as long as it possible could on the same sort of arguments as yours, only to finally realize it can't without fucking up its own shit. Fortunately for you, there's leaders in your country who understand that leaving NATO would be shooting yourselves in the foot.
The US has asked us to do the same thing; and we've done it. You DO realize the US is the only one to have ever invoked NATO's article 5 in regards to self-defense, right? What the fuck did Europe have to gain by going into afghanistan? But we were right there with you. Now that it's looking like a European country might in the near future find itself forced to call on article 5 against a country with something approaching a respectable military, suddenly Americans want to pull out of NATO? Cowards and oathbreakers, is what that makes you. But I suppose you guys have a history of breaking your word.
barbos
Contributor
Per soldier contribution does not have to be equal.
I mean look at american "soldier" on B2 bomber and soldier from Netherlands who probably ride bicycles.
But yeah, NATO should have at the very least reformatted itself after SU collapse.
I mean look at american "soldier" on B2 bomber and soldier from Netherlands who probably ride bicycles.
But yeah, NATO should have at the very least reformatted itself after SU collapse.