- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
NATO defense spending
Posted on 2/27/24 at 6:47 am
Posted on 2/27/24 at 6:47 am
The U.S. is by far the largest contributor to NATO’s budget. In 2023, the country accounted for $860 billion spent by the organization, representing 68% of the total expenditure. This amount is over 10 times more than that of the second-placed country, Germany.
Country 2023 Defense Spending (USD, Millions)*
???? United States $860,000
???? Germany $68,080
???? United Kingdom $65,763
???? France $56,649
???? Italy $31,585
???? Poland $29,105
???? Canada $28,950
???? Spain $19,179
???? Netherlands $16,741
???? Türkiye $15,842
???? Norway $8,814
???? Romania $8,481
???? Finland $7,325
???? Greece $7,125
???? Belgium $7,076
???? Denmark $6,775
???? Hungary $5,036
???? Czechia $5,033
???? Portugal $4,167
?? Other $12,400
ZeroHedge
10
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:02 am to Night Vision
While I think we should pull out of NATO, we shouldn't be spending more than what the highest country in Europe spends if we stay.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:02 am to Night Vision
This is not new. NATO is using daddy’s debit card
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:07 am to Night Vision
We should be $0 and if all them countries want protection from the big bad boogie man pay us.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:07 am to Night Vision
The military footprint of the US is ridiculous. Roughly 750 bases on foreign soil. All for “democracy”. What a joke. We are the problem.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:09 am to Night Vision
quote:
The U.S. is by far the largest contributor to NATO’s budget
That isn’t how NATO military funding works.
These numbers are how much each nation spends on its own military. Our number would remain unchanged if we left NATO.
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 7:12 am
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:10 am to Nosevens
UK spends 65 billion (third most) yet i read where you could put all of their army in wembly stadium and still have 20k empty seats. their military isn't much anymore. i think NATO may be a paper tiger outside of us.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:14 am to Indefatigable
quote:
These numbers are how much each nation spends on its own military. Our number would remain unchanged if we left NATO.
If we left NATO we wouldn't keep all those overseas bases open and our numbers would go down. We might not close them all, but many of them would be closed.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:16 am to Night Vision
quote:
If we left NATO we wouldn't keep all those overseas bases open and our numbers would go down.
No, then we would just pay to be there.
Thinking we would somehow retract our global military presence is silly.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:17 am to Night Vision
How did we ever find ourselves in a position where we are in this massive one-sided alliance that obligates us to go to war on behalf of 30+ countries? I guess no one remembers WWI and its causes.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:22 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Our number would remain unchanged if we left NATO.
Possibly but I would imagine the closure of foreign bases would change the number somewhat... Those closures would also significantly impact the host country as well..
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:39 am to Night Vision
Now compare the GDP's of these countries. All combined they are (about) 18 trillion.
The USA (alone) is 24 trillion.
So wouldn't it be logical that we pay more as one nation that the others pay combined?
LINK
ALSO KEEP IN MIND - The USA is the only country that gives a poop about the Pacific, helping protect Japan and Taiwan and South Korea.
Of course some country like Albania or Iceland won't spend all that much - they have no Asian presence.
Icelands total population is only 370,000 people - roughly four Tiger Stadiums.
The USA (alone) is 24 trillion.
So wouldn't it be logical that we pay more as one nation that the others pay combined?
LINK
ALSO KEEP IN MIND - The USA is the only country that gives a poop about the Pacific, helping protect Japan and Taiwan and South Korea.
Of course some country like Albania or Iceland won't spend all that much - they have no Asian presence.
Icelands total population is only 370,000 people - roughly four Tiger Stadiums.
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 7:41 am
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:46 am to texas tortilla
Britain has problems from an army aspect. Its Navy although smaller than in the past is still very effective. They and Norway could easily close down the Baltic.
Really can't get onto the French too much. They work with us in providing security for shipping lanes in the Med, Caribbean and parts of the South Pacific. Plus they help us in containing fires in out of the way places that could be problematic.
Really can't get onto the French too much. They work with us in providing security for shipping lanes in the Med, Caribbean and parts of the South Pacific. Plus they help us in containing fires in out of the way places that could be problematic.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:51 am to Wee Ice Mon
quote:
We are the problem.
Exactamundo
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:57 am to Night Vision
I can’t blame the Europeans one bit.
If I lived in Europe, I’d want my defense and security paid for by a bunch of suckers (US taxpayers) too.
If I lived in Europe, I’d want my defense and security paid for by a bunch of suckers (US taxpayers) too.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:02 am to LSUSUPERSTAR
quote:
we shouldn't be spending more than what the highest country in Europe spends if we stay.
Meh. We're currently projecting power into multiple theaters, while Europe only has to worry about Europe. While the numbers are definitely skewed, we couldn't maintain our multiple military footprints on a Europe-only budget.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:15 am to Tantal
quote:
we couldn't maintain our multiple military footprints
We could stand to significantly reduce our military footprints... Power projection today is not the same as it was 50 years ago...
Posted on 2/27/24 at 9:24 am to Indefatigable
quote:
These numbers are how much each nation spends on its own military. Our number would remain unchanged if we left NATO.
100% correct.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 10:11 am to Wee Ice Mon
quote:
We are the problem.
took me a long time to understand this, but it's true.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 10:34 am to The Maj
quote:
We could stand to significantly reduce our military footprints.
I don't disagree; however, the risk in that is that you allow another country (or coalition of countries) to rule over Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia. If we're going to go that route, we had better be prepared for a multi-polar world again and to completely wall off the Western Hemisphere militarily.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News