Aristides Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 3 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: You gave your opinion already. Facts are what matter. I know I said facts are hard to find, but you have to at least look. It only took me a few minutes to find this data, showing "Annual real change in defense expenditure among NATO countries from 2014 to 2023". I think the info is fairly clear, speaks for itself. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293399/nato-defense-spending-annual-change/ Yes they do. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/military-spending-defense-budget https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/military-balance/2020/02/global-defence-spending/ How much of that increase China and Russia? 2 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: So now you dodge your baseless claims about how Nato defence spending didn't increase under Trump in 2019. You were shown the data. I knew you wouldn't accept it and change the argument. But there it is in the link. The yes-no back and forth arguments you give are uninteresting. Opinions are like arsholes as the saying goes. Everyone's got one. 🤷♂️ Not baseless at all, most of the increase was by the US as I already posted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 5 minutes ago, Aristides said: Not baseless at all, most of the increase was by the US as I already posted. Well at least that is interesting and shows that the US under Don Trump increased its defence spending quite a lot. But that is not Nato defence spending as I showed. As the links I showed earlier, Stoltenberg attributed the increase in spending of all countries to the work of Don Trump. "Thursday November 14 2019. Mr. Stoltenberg highlighted rising defence investment across European Allies and Canada, amounting to more than $100 billion extra" Headline from CNN article I already posted. You are making me repeat myself while you obfuscate and confuse the issue. Trump praises NATO chief, says he’s happy allies are ‘paying’ 9 minutes ago, Aristides said: How much of that increase China and Russia? China and Russia are not Nato countries, so they do not count. This shows you are barking up the wrong tree. As per usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 Ukraine is spending 34% GDP on defence. You would think Trump would be supporting them instead of trying to stab them in the back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Aristides said: Ukraine is spending 34% GDP on defence. You would think Trump would be supporting them instead of trying to stab them in the back. Non sequitor. I know you are giving weak arguments because you try to change the topic. More than a few people in the US feel they have given enough to the fund the war in Ukraine. There are other serious problems. Besides the more money you throw at things like this, the more gets wasted in a corrupt environment. There are real problems with accountability in the Ukraine. But although Trump criticizes Nato members and said that Nato is weak, he fought to make it better, and the fact is it is in a better place to deal with Russia because of it. CNN wrote: "While previous presidents had made similar critiques of NATO members’ defense spending, Trump has made it a central theme of his presidential campaign and his administration’s foreign policy, once calling the alliance “obsolete” and repeatedly slamming allies over the spending issue and linking it to trade disputes with the European Union." "Stoltenberg has repeatedly cited defense spending increases among the non-US members of NATO, thanking Trump Tuesday “for your very strong leadership on burden sharing. After years of cutting defense budgets NATO allies have now started to invest more and by the end of next year they will have added $100 billion more into their defense budgets since you took office, and that helps and it proves also that NATO is a strong alliance,” he added." So much for your theories. Edited February 14 by OftenWrong Added bolding to the quotes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 26 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: So now you dodge your baseless claims about how Nato defence spending didn't increase under Trump in 2019. You were shown the data. I knew you wouldn't accept it and change the argument. But there it is in the link. The yes-no back and forth arguments you give are uninteresting. Opinions are like arsholes as the saying goes. Everyone's got one. 🤷♂️ US is still part of NATO unless Trump pulls them out, so increases in US spending are increases in NATO spending. Your link gives defence spending by NATO countries, not NATO specific spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 2 minutes ago, Aristides said: US is still part of NATO unless Trump pulls them out, so increases in US spending are increases in NATO spending. Your link gives defence spending by NATO countries, not NATO specific spending. You can hold on to that little belief that the increase was mainly by the US if you want. The quotes from Stoltenberg on CNN are clear and unambiguous. I bolded the most relevant parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 33 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: You can hold on to that little belief that the increase was mainly by the US if you want. The quotes from Stoltenberg on CNN are clear and unambiguous. I bolded the most relevant parts. Your quotes from Stoltenberg are five years old, three years before Russia invaded Ukraine. You need to keep up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted February 14 Report Share Posted February 14 1 minute ago, Aristides said: Your quotes from Stoltenberg are five years old, three years before Russia invaded Ukraine. You need to keep up. I accept your surrender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted February 14 Author Report Share Posted February 14 This is a classical example of the cult conditioning: the cult leader gives the herd two logically contradictory statements and they have to cheer for both. The result: switching off their brains; objective perception of the reality and critical analysis. He is destroying the alliance by annihilating its credibility in the face of a real and rising danger. And at the same time he's claiming to be saving it. Works like a charm: with brain-dead people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.