US Diplomat says "EU countrie need to spend more on Defence"

[Conserative Morality]

The only country to invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty has been the United States... and the other NATO member states all pitched in to ISAF operations as a result of that (with many states also contributing separately to Operation Enduring Freedom), and continued to do so even after many experiencing disproportionately high casualty rates relative to their populations.

All NATO member states have been pulling their relative weights, the issue is that there are drastic size differences between them.

I'm not denying the efficacy or bravery of the member militaries; only the funding, and there only because it doesn't meet the agreed-upon target. Apologies if it seemed otherwise.

[Ostroeuropa]

It is her business.
We're violating our treaty with the Americans and Canada.
It's her job to tell us we're violating that treaty, I would think.
If there was no NATO treaty, you'd be right.
But there is, so you're wrong.

I don't see how we are to respect a treaty with the very faction that spied on virtually every single citizen of ours, including government figures...

Separate issue, and blatant anti-americanism. You think America doesn't do good shit for us?
You think european countries never pull shenanigans?
You can use that type of bullshit to argue anything.
"YEH WELL, One time I heard he called someone fat, so fuck this Martin Luther King asshole!"
If you don't like the americans then argue we should pull out of the treaty.
Arguing that it's ok for us to stay in but break the rules is ridiculous.

[Slakonian]

It is her business.
We're violating our treaty with the Americans and Canada.
It's her job to tell us we're violating that treaty, I would think.
If there was no NATO treaty, you'd be right.
But there is, so you're wrong.

I don't see how we are to respect a treaty with the very faction that spied on virtually every single citizen of ours, including governments ...

Indeed mate, and do not forget they defended that very action as well without consulting our secret services first.

[Slakonian]

It seems cold war all over again.... and we are paying the price not they due they are on the other side of the Atlantic.

*sees your signature*

*Sigh*

We don't even need to bring Russia into this frankly.
This is a treaty we freely entered into. If we disagree with the percentage the treaty demands, we should renegotiate the treaty. Just breaking it is not acceptable.

Is there any particular problem with my sig that makes you sigh?.......

[Ostroeuropa]

*sees your signature*

*Sigh*

We don't even need to bring Russia into this frankly.
This is a treaty we freely entered into. If we disagree with the percentage the treaty demands, we should renegotiate the treaty. Just breaking it is not acceptable.

Is there any particular problem with my sig that makes you sigh?.......

I'd say it's pretty clear you're a sympathizer of the USSR.
You know, that country that was so terrible it's own people tore it apart rather than live in it.

[Conserative Morality]

If you don't like the americans then argue we should pull out of the treaty.
Arguing that it's ok for us to stay in but break the rules is ridiculous.

IIRC it's just a target and not an obligation, so the only real form of recourse here is bitching at whoever isn't pulling the 2%.

[Ostroeuropa]

If you don't like the americans then argue we should pull out of the treaty.
Arguing that it's ok for us to stay in but break the rules is ridiculous.

IIRC it's just a target and not an obligation, so the only real form of recourse here is bitching at whoever isn't pulling the 2%.

Would you say the existence of the target constitutes an obligation to attempt to meet the target?

[Memell]

I don't see how we are to respect a treaty with the very faction that spied on virtually every single citizen of ours, including government figures...

Separate issue, and blatant anti-americanism. You think America doesn't do good shit for us?
You think european countries never pull shenanigans?
You can use that type of bullshit to argue anything.
"YEH WELL, One time I heard he called someone fat, so fuck this Martin Luther King asshole!"
If you don't like the americans then argue we should pull out of the treaty.
Arguing that it's ok for us to stay in but break the rules is ridiculous.

Strawman.

I think that the US do what it's good for them, first of all. If it also keeps other countries in their sphere of influence, even better.
It's natural, it's what the US liek to do. What i'm saying is we shouldn't keep enduring their idiotic foreign policy.

Name one of those "shenanigans" the EU pulled (on their own, without the US' kind suggestion, of course)....

[Conserative Morality]

Would you say the existence of the target constitutes an obligation to attempt to meet the target?

Maybe a moral obligation, but I can't see anyone actually pulling a legal obligation about it.

[Memell]

Is there any particular problem with my sig that makes you sigh?.......

I'd say it's pretty clear you're a sympathizer of the USSR.
You know, that country that was so terrible it's own people tore it apart rather than live in it.

Wrong, people (Russians) loved the USSR, it was oligarchs who dissoluted it.

[Conserative Morality]

Strawman.

I think that the US do what it's good for them, first of all. If it also keeps other countries in their sphere of influence, even better.
It's natural, it's what the US liek to do. What i'm saying is we shouldn't keep enduring their idiotic foreign policy.

Name one of those "shenanigans" the EU pulled (on their own, without the US' kind suggestion, of course)....

Libya. Mali.

[Memell]

Strawman.

I think that the US do what it's good for them, first of all. If it also keeps other countries in their sphere of influence, even better.
It's natural, it's what the US liek to do. What i'm saying is we shouldn't keep enduring their idiotic foreign policy.

Name one of those "shenanigans" the EU pulled (on their own, without the US' kind suggestion, of course)....

Libya. Mali.

That was France...

[Slakonian]

Is there any particular problem with my sig that makes you sigh?.......

I'd say it's pretty clear you're a sympathizer of the USSR.
You know, that country that was so terrible it's own people tore it apart rather than live in it.

... Have you ever heard the "the particular nation doesn't reflect my views?" I guees not, also it says proud member of USSCR, a fictional organization that is long dead(like two years ago) & the Greek Officer Reserve, so that makes me a ultra-nationalist or a militarist as well?

Anyhow as for the USSR, I am not ignorant on the particular issue, my mother grew up in communist Yugoslavia so I know how to it is in some way.....

[Conserative Morality]

That was France...

If you're asking "What has the organization known as the EU and not its constituent member countries done militarily in the complete absence of military powers across the organization?" then I really don't know what to tell you, other than, perhaps, that it's pointless then to consider the EU as an organization in this context.

[Blakullar]

America wants other people to spend their money for America's purposes that will benefit America.

Nothing new here, but I despair of the brain-dead politicians in my home country that actually pander to this insanity.

I suppose a Russia supporter WOULD oppose Europe having any defenses.

Please cite my saying that I was in favour of a defenceless Europe.

Maybe I do support Russia in this kerfuffle*, but I would do so only because of the West's massive hypocrisy in this situation.
*Before you start hollering about my purported treachery against all things Freedom™ with no warning whatsoever, I have not actually taken any sides in regards to the Ukraine conflict.

[Dooom35796821595]

And why is that that you want us to sign that garbage called TTIP?

Right, because streamlining international trade is garbage.

International trade is great, but TTIP needs to be killed with fire. We can try again with a better framework, one that doesn't screw Europe over.

If the Americans want to make a point they should start formal procedures to kick NATO member states that spend less then 1.7% of their budget on defence, starting with the lowest as if an invasion of a sovereign state won't motivate them, then what will?

[Conserative Morality]

Please cite my saying that I was in favour of a defenceless Europe.

Maybe I do support Russia in this kerfuffle*, but I would do so only because of the West's massive hypocrisy in this situation.
*Before you start hollering about my purported treachery against all things Freedom™ with no warning whatsoever, I have not actually taken any sides in regards to the Ukraine conflict.

What is 'the West's' massive hypocrisy in this situation?

This is infighting within the West.

[Herskerstad]

Right, well, if you few EU members who aren't in NATO want to roll over and surrender to Russian influence for the foreseeable future, go ahead. Ukraine's situation of economic coercion and political meddling for years previous to our little crisis now was just absolutely wonderful.

Or you could, you know, present a strong united front against the aggression of other countries.

Just a thought.

Oh Conservative Morality. Do you not know that hard-line negotiations based on mutual security can be offending to those who seek to instead appease?

Have a heart.

[Blakullar]

What is 'the West's' massive hypocrisy in this situation?

They are slamming the Russians for military aggression while just 11 years earlier they kicked out an unfriendly regime in Iraq and replaced it with a puppet over pure suspicion.

There is also the minor issue that the Americans wrote an entire policy based upon military aggression.

[Krieg-Deathworld]

NATO is currently a great defense against the Russians. Ukraine would still be whole if it was in NATO. Although some on this site would deny it, NATO is very helpful for Europe and they should contribute what they agreed on.

[Ostroeuropa]

What is 'the West's' massive hypocrisy in this situation?

They are slamming the Russians for military aggression while just 11 years earlier they kicked out an unfriendly regime in Iraq and replaced it with a puppet over pure suspicion.

Um.
A "Puppet"?
It's... a democratically elected state.
Overseen by the UN, those elections, by the way.

Not comparable to Crimea, where the UN wasn't allowed to check the referendum.

[Camelza]

I'd say it's pretty clear you're a sympathizer of the USSR.
You know, that country that was so terrible it's own people tore it apart rather than live in it.

... Have you ever heard the "the particular nation doesn't reflect my views?" I guees not, also it says proud member of USSCR, a fictional organization that is long dead(like two years ago) & the Greek Officer Reserve, so that makes me a ultra-nationalist or a militarist as well?

Anyhow as for the USSR, I am not ignorant on the particular issue, my mother grew up in communist Yugoslavia so I know how to it is in some way.....

Greek officers post on NSG now? Our army's doomed.

[United North Atlantic States]

Maybe I do support Russia in this kerfuffle*, but I would do so only because of the West's massive hypocrisy in this situation.
*Before you start hollering about my purported treachery against all things Freedom™ with no warning whatsoever, I have not actually taken any sides in regards to the Ukraine conflict.

How is hypocrisy on one side a reason for you to side with the other? How does that logically follow???

[Krieg-Deathworld]

What is 'the West's' massive hypocrisy in this situation?

They are slamming the Russians for military aggression while just 11 years earlier they kicked out an unfriendly regime in Iraq and replaced it with a puppet over pure suspicion.

Don't you know that's different? In Ukraine it's white semi-westerners dying, and that's not okay. Iraq was arab, nobody really cared. (Semi-Joking)

[Ethel mermania]

We'd love to, but half of Europe is depending on us spending 21% of our GDP so they don't have to even spend 2%.

Really, it would be awesome to be able to scale down defense spending and focus on America's infrastructure, which is mostly decades old at this point.

4.4% of your GDP actually. I don't get why my country pays 2,7%-3% of its GDP for military spending, especially when we have far more important cases to deal with, like battling poverty. So, I don't like it when a US diplomat says we have to pay more to buy their jets and shiny boomsticks.

Bae makes jets and shiny broomsticks, don't have to buy ours.