nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Quin_Dub

This thread is for the continuing discussion of Donald Trumps's presidency in the US and any related matters.

Please ensure that you are familiar with the charter before posting.

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

robinph

Danzy wrote: »

The Germans .8% of GDP behind where they should be, that is a lot of money.

No it isn't. Germanys spend is about a weeks worth of the USA annual spend, for Germany to be spending the 2% of GDP would be about the equivalent of an extra couple of hours worth of the USA total spend.

The USA is spending massively on defence, and way above the NATO ideal of 2% of GDP each. What the USA decides to waste it's money on though is of no concern of Germany, and what Germany spends it's money on will not be of benefit to the USA in the slightest. There is zero "burden" to the USA from Germany underspending the target by a couple of million when the USA is spending hundreds of millions more than all other nations combined. It makes zero impact on what the USA is doing or would continue to do.

Danzy

1) Do you think Russia interfered in the US Election

To a degree yes, but in a Micky Mouse fashion, it certainly did Putin no problems that certain sections of the Media try to make it look like he is deciding elections, see point 3. Mueller reckons they were spending 1.25 million a month on ads. Both Presidential candidates spent 80 million in total, on face book ads alone. Up to Mid October, both sides had spent about 3/4s of a billion. It would not be an internationally significant or business contribution. It doesn't rank.

2) Do you think Trump aided them
No

3) Do you think Trump is compromised by Russia
No, this sort of conspiracy nonsense has been in the public conscious for years, probably always been, Manchurian candidates, a puppet of world Jewry etc etc etc.

It is easier to blame Russia than to look closer to home for the Democrats.

Danzy

robinph wrote: »

No it isn't. Germanys spend is about a weeks worth of the USA annual spend, for Germany to be spending the 2% of GDP would be about the equivalent of an extra couple of hours worth of the USA total spend.

The USA is spending massively on defence, and way above the NATO ideal of 2% of GDP each. What the USA decides to waste it's money on though is of no concern of Germany, and what Germany spends it's money on will not be of benefit to the USA in the slightest. There is zero "burden" to the USA from Germany underspending the target by a couple of million when the USA is spending hundreds of millions more than all other nations combined. It makes zero impact on what the USA is doing or would continue to do.

It doesn't matter if it is a week or a minutes worth of spending, it is a valid point to say that Germany is not lifting the load in line with its ability or obligation.

The rest of the post is why they feel they do not have to meet that target, they feel others are already doing it for them. That leads to where we currently are.

20Cent

Danzy wrote: »

2) Do you think Trump aided them

3) Do you think Trump is compromised by Russia.
No, this sort of conspiracy nonsense has been in the public conscious for years, probably always been, Manchurian candidates, a puppet of world Jewry etc etc etc. [/COLOR

It is easier to blame Russia than to look closer to home for the Democrats.

Trumps campaign manager is currently in jail and five members of his campaign have pled guilty in the Muller probe.

RIGOLO

robinph wrote: »

Danzy wrote: »

The Germans .8% of GDP behind where they should be, that is a lot of money.

No it isn't. Germanys spend is about a weeks worth of the USA annual spend, for Germany to be spending the 2% of GDP would be about the equivalent of an extra couple of hours worth of the USA total spend.

The USA is spending massively on defence, and way above the NATO ideal of 2% of GDP each. What the USA decides to waste it's money on though is of no concern of Germany, and what Germany spends it's money on will not be of benefit to the USA in the slightest. There is zero "burden" to the USA from Germany underspending the target by a couple of million when the USA is spending hundreds of millions more than all other nations combined. It makes zero impact on what the USA is doing or would continue to do.

Your maths is all over the shop... there isnt millions at stake , its billions

German GDP is about 3.5 Trillion,
Current German Defence spend is 37 Billion ..a fraction over 1%
NATO target spend is 2%
GERMANY should be spending about 70 billion ... thats an increase of 43 billion on current spending ....
Since when has 43 billion being zero impact ...
Instead of the US picking up 43 billion in the cost of NATO operations, Germany should be picking up that expense.

Leroy42

But what is the ultimate aim of all of this. As pointed out it is a fraction of what the US spends so likely to make little real difference. What areas does Trump feel that NATO is not performing because of this lack of funds from Germany and others?

This attack is not likely to go down well in Germany. So Trump is putting a strong historis relationship at risk over a relatively minor point and one that the Germans have already agreed to deal with, just over a number of years.

Trump seems adamant that NATO (which he said was obsolete and has said that the US will not come to the aid of fellow members) is facing a significant threat from Russia, whilst at the same time telling everyone at home that Russia is great and no need for any sanctions.

So it is clear that it isn't Russia he is worried about. My guess if that it is part of his dislike of Merkel. This goes along with his treatment of her at the G7.

Manic Moran

Harika wrote: »

OFC the military personal wants more money, like everyone wants for himself. The leaders are aware of the threats and prepare properly. US invests so much and with all the NATO power in their back are continuously punched in the face in Afghanistan, got a bloody nose in Iraq and barely made progress in Syria before Russia turned the tide. The lesson out of that is that the solution is not more guns, planes and tanks.

Mm... Given the threat that NATO is most worried about right now seems to be Russia (Note which way the defenses of Poland or the Baltic States are facing), more guns, planes and tanks is precisely what is happening.

The Dutch used to have a massive tank fleet of over 400 tanks. They got rid of every last one of them, the fired their last shots in 2011, selling their last 100 to Finland, a country which has a bit of a history with Russia in 2014. 2016, they announced they are buying enough tanks back to make a battalion.

Plans for the Germans to cut back their tank forces have been reversed, with the Panzerschool at Munster cancelling its reduction and expanding again. They are currently adding about 50% to their tank fleet, but there is some concern as to whether they have the money to actually keep them running.

The US withdrew its last tanks from Germany amidst much fanfare in 2013. 9 months later, they were back.

Poland has been working on its tank and aviation fleet considerably, buying a lot of the ex German vehicles.

The Baltic States are, with Poland, proving well motivated to hit their 2% mark, and they are definitely buying hardware, lots of it in the last two years. Estonia never ended conscription, and Lithuania brought it back. Latvia is talking about it, but has instead decided to increase its arms purchases by an astonishing 46% this year over 2017. (It doesn’t have the money to both rearm and conscript).

So insofar as the folks charged with defense are concerned, with what meager funds they are getting, they are very much of the opinion that new hardware is needed.

Christy42

As pixel mentioned this is nothing more than Trump wanting Germany to buy more US bombs and increase the US arms industry.

Leroy42

Danzy wrote: »

It is easier to blame Russia than to look closer to home for the Democrats.

It is easier to blame the Russians because all the evidence points to them. The CIA/FBI and and house Committee all agree that Russia interfered in the election. Mueller has indicted 13 people over it.

It is easier for Trump to blame the Democrats as it avoids him having to answer questions. Like why his son met with Russians to obtain illegally gained information about an opponent and why Trump lied about it.

About why he has such massive business relationship with Russia yet claims that Germany having business dealings means they are controlled.

It sure is easy to blame Russia, but it seems far harder for any of Trumps supporters to admit that it happened and their man is potentially on the hook to them.

What other explanation is there for Trumps continued attacks on almost every country except Russia?

everlast75

Danzy wrote: »

1) Do you think Russia interfered in the US Election

To a degree yes, but in a Micky Mouse fashion, it certainly did Putin no problems that certain sections of the Media try to make it look like he is deciding elections, see point 3. Mueller reckons they were spending 1.25 million a month on ads. Both Presidential candidates spent 80 million in total, on face book ads alone. Up to Mid October, both sides had spent about 3/4s of a billion. It would not be an internationally significant or business contribution. It doesn't rank.

2) Do you think Trump aided them
No

3) Do you think Trump is compromised by Russia
No, this sort of conspiracy nonsense has been in the public conscious for years, probably always been, Manchurian candidates, a puppet of world Jewry etc etc etc.

It is easier to blame Russia than to look closer to home for the Democrats.

Firstly, fair play to you for answering the questions. I note Rigolo thanked you for doing so, despite refusing to do it him/herself.

I have only read your reply, and before I got a chance to post a substantive reply, others have pretty much made most points.

I might come back with others later, I just wanted in the interim to acknowledge the fact that you replied.

robinph

RIGOLO wrote: »

Your maths is all over the shop... there isnt millions at stake , its billions

German GDP is about 3.5 Trillion,
Current German Defence spend is 37 Billion ..a fraction over 1%
NATO target spend is 2%
GERMANY should be spending about 70 billion ... thats an increase of 43 billion on current spending ....
Since when has 43 billion being zero impact ...
Instead of the US picking up 43 billion in the cost of NATO operations, Germany should be picking up that expense.

The US is not picking up any costs related to any other country not spending their 2% target. None of the 2% target spend is for NATO, it is purely to do with how much money each country spends on their own military for themselves.

The USA gets nothing of that spend (will except they probably sell the planes) and NATO gets nothing of that spend (except that completely unrelatedly those forces from each country will occasionally be called on to participate in NATO missions). The amount that Germany spends on their forces has absolutely nothing to do with the money that the USA spends on their military or what their military puts towards NATO missions.

RIGOLO

Whilst the Trump Administration is powering thru Europe like somethign we havent seen since Pattons 3rd, the Trump Adminstration continues to have other wins domestically .
Another of Trumps Twitter barrage has delivered the goods...
Pfizer have held back on further drug price increases and also promised to roll back recent price hikes.
Pfizer says it will postpone price increases after discussions with Trump
With one of the drugs mentioned being Viagra, so it represents a personal win also.
This adminstration is kicking ass .

Harika

RIGOLO wrote: »

Whilst the Trump Administration is powering thru Europe like somethign we havent seen since Pattons 3rd, the Trump Adminstration continues to have other wins domestically .
Another of Trumps Twitter barrage has delivered the goods...
Pfizer have held back on further drug price increases and also promised to roll back recent price hikes.
Pfizer says it will postpone price increases after discussions with Trump
With one of the drugs mentioned being Viagra, so it represents a personal win also.
This adminstration is kicking ass .

Might end like the stopped layoffs at Carrier, who then got fired anyway. Fox for balance
So expect Pfizer to put in price increases sneakingly later in the year.

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

Whilst the Trump Administration is powering thru Europe like somethign we havent seen since Pattons 3rd, the Trump Adminstration continues to have other wins domestically .
Another of Trumps Twitter barrage has delivered the goods...
Pfizer have held back on further drug price increases and also promised to roll back recent price hikes.
Pfizer says it will postpone price increases after discussions with Trump
With one of the drugs mentioned being Viagra, so it represents a personal win also.
This adminstration is kicking ass .

With your refusal to answer those 3 simple questions, hiding behind Danzy who did reply, and then the above post which is complete nonsense and hyperbole, I cannot take you seriously.

weisses

everlast75 wrote: »

With your refusal to answer those 3 simple questions, hiding behind Danzy who did reply, and then the above post which is complete nonsense and hyperbole, I cannot take you seriously.

Who can at this point ?

relax carry on

RIGOLO wrote: »

Whilst the Trump Administration is powering thru Europe like somethign we havent seen since Pattons 3rd, the Trump Adminstration continues to have other wins domestically .
Another of Trumps Twitter barrage has delivered the goods...
Pfizer have held back on further drug price increases and also promised to roll back recent price hikes.
Pfizer says it will postpone price increases after discussions with Trump
With one of the drugs mentioned being Viagra, so it represents a personal win also.
This adminstration is kicking ass .

Seriously you must be working for the Trump/Putin administration at this point? Your posts are coming across as unabashed propaganda at this stage. Any chance you can take a coffee break and answer the questions put to you repeatedly on the thread?

listermint

relax carry on wrote: »

Seriously you must be working for the Trump/Putin administration at this point? Your posts are coming across as unabashed propaganda at this stage. Any chance you can take a coffee break and answer the questions put to you repeatedly on the thread?

Automation doesnt work that way, It analysis key phrases and responds accordingly. When there is no key phrases or the phrases cannot be referenced no response is the decision.

Hurrache

Christy42 wrote: »

As pixel mentioned this is nothing more than Trump wanting Germany to buy more US bombs and increase the US arms industry.

Don't think so, probably a lot to do with Americas surplus of gas and the low prices because of it. Try get Europe to buy it instead of from Russia, increase in demand, therefore increase in prices and reduction in surplus for themselves.

Christy42

Is buying US gas and transporting it that far realistic?

Hurrache

Christy42 wrote: »

Is buying US gas and transporting it that far realistic?

Don't know, probably extremely expensive and not worthwhile either by sea or building a pipeline, but there's no logic really in what happened today anyway.

Harika

Christy42 wrote: »

Is buying US gas and transporting it that far realistic?

As realistic as filling it in Saudi Arabia, Oman, Venezuela and shipping it from there.

everlast75

The Press thinks Trump is acting unreasonably towards NATO
Trump supporters - Trump knows what he is doing

The News thinks Trump is acting unreasonably towards NATO
Trump supporters - Trump knows what he is doing

Fellow NATO members thinks Trump is acting unreasonably towards NATO
Trump supporters - Trump knows what he is doing

The Senate, by a vote of 97-2 send a message to stand by NATO allies
Trump supporters - Trump knows what he is doing

Everyone is wrong - Trump is smarter than all of them apparently

Daxve

So it looks like Trump got the 60%- 70% figure correct but it's not of energy from Russia it's Gas and Gas makes up less than 20% of German energy requirements so 12% from Russia that's not exactly reliant on Russia for their energy needs.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44794688

"The commodities brokerage Marex Spectron told Reality Check that about 60% of Germany's gas was imported from Russia, with most of the rest coming from Norway.

But that does not mean that 60% of Germany's energy comes from Russia - Germany's energy mix for power production is about 40% coal, more than 30% renewables, less than 20% gas and 10% nuclear, according to Marex Spectron."

RIGOLO

So the NATO communique has just come out.
Some of the elements will have been agreed in the weeks or days before hand and they just get a final sign off at the summit.
It would appear Trump has made some huge inroads on NATO changes and achieved alot of what he had brought attention too in recent months.
Another success for Trump Administration, this message will be carried into the November mid-terms .
The full draft is here, its not very long, among the key statements
And share the burden of our security more fairly.
We all agree that we do not have fair burden-sharing in our Alliance today.
We all agree that we need more cash in national defence budgets;
More modern capabilities;
And more contributions to missions and operations.
We are also stepping up contributions to NATO deployments.
So we have turned the tide. But we need to do more.
This is about fairness. This is about credibility. And above all, this is about our security in a more unpredictable world.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg following the meeting of the North Atlantic Council at the level of Heads of State and Government (NATO Summit Brussels)

Leroy42

Jebus Rigolo, did you learn nothing from the NK debacle.

Hold on until the actual details emerge. What you posted could literally mean anything. Diplomats are trained to use language that both says everything and nothing at the same time.

dr.fuzzenstein

Leroy42 wrote: »

Jebus Rigolo, did you learn nothing from the NK debacle.

Hold on until the actual details emerge. What you posted could literally mean anything. Diplomats are trained to use language that both says everything and nothing at the same time.

There is no point. Trump fans are mindless automatons that simply trumpet the latest bullsh*t and lies from the Trump administration.
It's basically the same as North Korean propaganda announcements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il-22Q8mECc

To be a Trump supporter switch off brain, plug ears and shout propaganda. Especially the evil slime at Fox news. Someone should pull the flush on that toilet that calls itself "news".

Manic Moran

Christy42 wrote: »

As pixel mentioned this is nothing more than Trump wanting Germany to buy more US bombs and increase the US arms industry.

Germany has an extremely healthy arms industry and is one of the largest exporters of weapons in the world, before the UK. Its tanks, planes, rifles, ships, trucks are not American. Plus given the current environment, Merkel would prefer to have less reliance on American equipment.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21679/the-german-air-force-wants-to-know-if-its-eurofighters-can-carry-u-s-nuclear-bombs
“It’s no longer the case that the United States will simply just protect us,” Merkel said in the 2018 speech, which also lauded French President Emmanuel Macron who was on hand to receive an award. “Rather, Europe needs to take its fate into its own hands. That’s the task for the future.”

This could make the idea of buying any type of American aircraft increasingly politically untenable.

In any case, any increase in the German defense budget is inherently going to go on German (or French) parts for all the equipment it has that doesn't work.
Here's an example as to how bad it has gotten:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/05/germanys-typhoon-problem-only-four-fighters-can-be-made-combat-ready/

As of two months ago:
4 out of 138 Eurofighters are combat ready.
9 out of 244 Leopard Tanks. (Hopefully the 110 or so new ones under purchase will actually work when delivered)
5 of 13 major warships can sail.
0 out of 6 submarines.
16 of 62 Eurocopter Tigers worked.
3 of 19 A400M transport aircraft are flying.

And as Der Spiegel's Matthias Gebauer was told by a Bundeswehr source, "We can say with a good conscience that large parts of the [German armed forces] are mission ready, because there is currently no mission."

The German military quite simply is non-functional due to lack of funds. Trump is correct on two points: 1) Germany (and others) is not living up to its commitment, and is relying on the efforts of other nations to defend it militarily. He is not the first US president to say so, but he is certainly the most direct/least polite about it. 2) Germany in particular needs to up its defense budget just to make its own military work, and Germany is not doing it. The German minister of defense has said as much.

BoJack Horseman

Leaders summit statement.

79 points long.

The Mattis '30-30-30' plan seems to be the only new development I can see, which is good.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_156624.htm

MadYaker

Trump didn’t make any friends there anyway!

But to be honest I think he sort of has a point even if he’s really bad at articulating it.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

As pixel mentioned this is nothing more than Trump wanting Germany to buy more US bombs and increase the US arms industry.

Germany has an extremely healthy arms industry and is one of the largest exporters of weapons in the world, before the UK. Its tanks, planes, rifles, ships, trucks are not American. Plus given the current environment, Merkel would prefer to have less reliance on American equipment.
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21679/the-german-air-force-wants-to-know-if-its-eurofighters-can-carry-u-s-nuclear-bombs
“It’s no longer the case that the United States will simply just protect us,” Merkel said in the 2018 speech, which also lauded French President Emmanuel Macron who was on hand to receive an award. “Rather, Europe needs to take its fate into its own hands. That’s the task for the future.”

This could make the idea of buying any type of American aircraft increasingly politically untenable.

In any case, any increase in the German defense budget is inherently going to go on German parts for all the equipment it has that doesn't work.
Here's an example as to how bad it has gotten:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/05/germanys-typhoon-problem-only-four-fighters-can-be-made-combat-ready/

As of two months ago:
4 out of 138 Eurofighters are combat ready.
9 out of 244 Leopard Tanks. (Hopefully the 110 or so new ones under purchase will actually work when delivered)
5 of 13 major warships can sail.
0 out of 6 submarines.
16 of 62 Eurocopter Tigers worked.
3 of 19 A400M transport aircraft are flying.

And as Der Spiegel's Matthias Gebauer was told by a Bundeswehr source, "We can say with a good conscience that large parts of the [German armed forces] are mission ready, because there is currently no mission."

The German military quite simply is non-functional due to lack of funds. Trump is correct on two points: 1) Germany (and others) is not living up to its commitment, and is relying on the efforts of other nations to defend it militarily. He is not the first US president to say so, but he is certainly the most direct/least polite about it. 2) Germany in particular needs to up its defense budget just to make its own military work, and Germany is not doing it. The German minister of defense has said as much.

Do you honestly believe Trump knows or cares about any of that?

Would an increase in German defense spending result in a decrease in US military spending? Especially given how much Trump has increased it by.

As has been said before, Europe is spending as much as Russia or China so I fail to see the big deal from Trump's point of view if France is overspending (or whoever) is covering for Germany. If the funds are not being spent appropriately that is a different story.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

In fact this calls bull on it being underfunded. Again it might be misused but about 2/3rds of Russia's spend is not a terrible place (unless you feel only the Chinese and US spend enough which seems ridiculous given the issues in both countries).

Unless Putin goes way more gung ho and suicidal Germany is unlikely to need much to defend itself in any case. OK ISIS would be the exception there but they operate weirdly in comparison to a military force.