- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Rumors are swirling Trump will announce our exit from NATO tonight
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:48 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:48 am to AggieHank86
quote:
US military spending supports a global military hegemony with the ability to project power to every square inch of the globe.
Our ability to do that is approaching it's end. We can't afford it. The only reason it lasted this long was the dollar's privileged status as global reserve currency, which was sort of our reward for ending WWII and assuming a role as global "peacekeeper". That situation worked for a long time, but all good things come to end.
Best for all concerned if we gradually unwind that role now. Europe should determine what percentage of GDP is required to defend themselves and proceed apace. If they wish to maintain our NATO agreements while doing that, so much the better, but depending on the US for security will not end well for them, no matter which political party controls the US government.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 11:53 am
2
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:49 am to stout
I would rather hear him say that we are pulling 50% or more of our troops out of Europe and that they can defend themselves or pay back what it costs for us to do it.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:49 am to wdhalgren
I say why not? Chynuh and Russia aren't going to attack us. And at this point, the grift and outright theft of American''s tax money going to prop up corrupt governments that literally hate, abuse and use us is disgusting. Let Europe worry about themselves The US, Chynuh and Russia can just become the SEC version of Earth. We're the big dogs, leave us the hell alone.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:52 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Page 1 (not posted by me)
That graph lists total defense spending by NATO country, not NATO specific spending, as you are referencing.
It is a poorly titled graph, but totally different than the point you are attempting to make.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 11:53 am
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:54 am to wdhalgren
quote:
The only reason it lasted this long was the dollar's privileged status as global reserve currency, which was sort of our reward for ending WWII and assuming a role as global "peacekeeper". That situation worked for a long time, but all good things come to end.
Are you implying that our status as reserve currency is in doubt?
And, our military largely ensures that we remain the world's reserve currency and the petrodollar at the same time. Europe tried to compete with the Euro and failed horribly. No other potential competitor on the world stage has an economy close to the EU (especially if analyze din any way by per capita)
quote:
Best for all concerned if we gradually unwind that role now.
It will not be good for anybody if this happens, FWIW.
Again, the only potential competitor (the EU) failed pretty bad.
There is nobody to fill the gap of the US and it will create a vacuum and complete global economic instability.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:56 am to SlowFlowPro
SlowFlowPro
Surprised you are back after cubbies owned you yesterday causing you to poop your pants. Figured you’d at least wait a few weeks. Welcome back though
Surprised you are back after cubbies owned you yesterday causing you to poop your pants. Figured you’d at least wait a few weeks. Welcome back though
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:56 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
That graph lists total defense spending by NATO country, not NATO specific spending, as you are referencing.
The title of the graphic and implication in the constant posting is that it represents spending ON NATO, which is asinine when looking at the US number.
Another thread echoing the same argument with the same picture ("echoing" used intentionally)
quote:
This chart showing the breakdown of NATO spending is crazy
quote:
It is a poorly titled graph, but totally different than the point you are attempting to make.
The title is intentional, as is the spread among the willing participants.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:57 am to Mushroom1968
quote:
Surprised you are back after cubbies owned you yesterday causing you to poop your pants.
This didn't happen. I chose not to respond to her to avoid piling on cubbies.
Me and cubbies go way back. She likes me less than your average MAGAtard with an 85 IQ
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:57 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:The point is that withdrawal from NATO would not likely result in a significant reduction in US military spending. We would just move troops from Europe to CONUS and continue to keep them ready for deployment as needed.
It is a poorly titled graph, but totally different than the point you are attempting to make.
What would we save? The cost of maintaining bases in Europe, offset by the incremental cost of basing those same troops in CONUS?
Any benefit would be the "warm fuzzies" of thinking that our boys are no longer exposed to danger in Europe, but we would deploy them to Europe in response to Russian aggression regardless of NATO membership.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:57 am to High C
quote:
Don’t misconstrue my words. I didn’t say that I disagree with what he’s doing, for the most part.
God forbid someone misinterpret your political identity!
I'm sure we're all well aware of your virtues, no need to signal them for everybody.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:58 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This didn't happen
It happened, was funny to watch!! It’s ok
Posted on 3/4/25 at 11:59 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Only once you move it. Let me know when our bases in Korea are moved elsewhere
We don’t attack with “bases”. I forget how stupid you sound when you attempt to discuss the military.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:03 pm to CU_Tigers4life
quote:
He's not pulling out of NATO but he may threaten to close some military bases to clear their sinuses.
Military bases over seas are huge for the local economies and some nations will go nuts if they think they could be losing bases.
He should say the we will be reducing our contribution to the same level as the lowest member contributes. He wants them to increase their defense spending so we dont have to shoulder the entire burden.
That is how I would do it. Tell the other NATO nations to increase to the level required or we will withhold money at same level. These European nations get to use the money they should be spending on defense on infrastructure, welfare (for migrants), and healthcare.
Its time for them to pony up some cash.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Are you implying that our status as reserve currency is in doubt?
Yes, it is. The future value of our currency is in serious doubt.
quote:
It will not be good for anybody if this happens, FWIW.
Be that as it may. We're all headed for a decline in living standards. Government largesse and monetary laxity are not, contrary to popular ideology, a free lunch.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:05 pm to Flats
quote:Obviously, you attack with troops, but the troops in Korea are de facto immobile (globally), because their very purpose is to serve as a tripwire and thereby keep the Norks in line.
Can a fire extinguisher you keep in the bedroom be used in the kitchen?quote:We don’t attack with “bases”. I forget how stupid you sound when you attempt to discuss the military.
Only once you move it. Let me know when our bases in Korea are moved elsewhere
We aren't moving them anywhere else, so long as we are committed to South Korea and Japan.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
I
It amazes me that you have somehow convinced yourself that you're a smart guy. Your complete lack of understanding of any subject makes you the poster child for participation trophies.
quote:
NK's nuclear and missile programs are very obviously a threat to the whole world.
They are not. They aren't even a threat to Japan at this time, other than getting lucky with an errant missile launch.
We're not even sure Russia still has the ability to project missiles accurately to Western Europe. China's missile program is in shambles due to grift DOGE would be jealous of.
quote:
China's belligerent trade policies and increasingly aggressive resource grabs in Africa and South America
Note: not Western Europe.
quote:
are a direct security threat to Europe.
How?
Explain how Chinese investment in South America is a direct threat to Europe militarily.
It amazes me that you have somehow convinced yourself that you're a smart guy. Your complete lack of understanding of any subject makes you the poster child for participation trophies.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Even if we pull out of NATO, it will be more symbolic than anything.
We will still respond if someone attacks Western Europe. We can't afford not to present that threat
This is the correct answer.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:50 pm to stout
Lame attempt at a troll, OP.
We ARE nato. We don't 'exit' it, we dissolve it if we want.
And no, we're not 'dissolving' it tonight.
Dumbass.
He is very low IQ, in addition to low T.
We ARE nato. We don't 'exit' it, we dissolve it if we want.
And no, we're not 'dissolving' it tonight.
Dumbass.
quote:
It amazes me that you have somehow convinced yourself that you're a smart guy.
He is very low IQ, in addition to low T.
This post was edited on 3/4/25 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:56 pm to stout
I’m hoping it’s a voter identification/in person only EO but one can only dream.
Posted on 3/4/25 at 12:57 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The title is intentional, as is the spread among the willing participants.
Just because someone posted a poorly labeled graph that supports your talking point only due to it being incorrect, does not mean that your talking point is valid.
It's not. "NATO specific" spending is only a thing in your head.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News