Trump/Putin disaster summit. And also overseas visit w/ NATO & UK.

[Izzyeviel]

Lt Colonel: Merkel handled Trump like a child.

Ret. Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters tells CNN's Anderson Cooper that watching NATO diplomats deal with President Trump at the NATO summit was like watching "psychiatrists deal with a disturbed child."

Watch the 2.5 minute-long video here: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/07/12/ralph-peters-trump-merkel-nato-disturbed-child-sot-ac-vpx.cnn

Was that before or after he threw candy at her and said 'Never say I never give you anything'?

[Izzyeviel]

Trump's tack with NATO is what he said he'd so, and why people voted for him.  Why this is so shocking is beyond me.

NATO was not meant to be permanent, and as early as 1956 or so, John Foster Dulles proposed to President Eisenhower that America do a cost/benefit analysis of our present alliances.  Now I DO think that our most reliable allies in the World are the democracies of the World and NATO includes the World's most stable democracies.  But NATO was not meant to be permanent, and it is time other nations carry more of the burden of national defense.

Not only does the threat from Russia remain, but we have new threats to the world order like terrorism, Iran, North Korea, China. To suggest getting rid of it is ludicrous. It would have been a good argument in the 1990's, but with Russia eyeing up eastern europe again, never mind China making moves in the South China sea is would be complete and utter folly for the US to abandon it.

Americans forget it costs money to deploy troops. They have 2 million troops but can only afford to deploy around 150,000 at any one time. You could never have done the Iraq war without NATO help. (although that would ironically have been a good thing)

[Middle-aged Europe]

Assuming that all NATO countries would meet Trump's demands it's also unclear to me what America would specifically gain from that. It doesn't appear as if the United States plans to cut its own defense budget and save money in the process then, not under its current president anyway. The United States probably wouldn't call back its troops from Europe either, since it's more sound to conduct military operations in the Middle East from bases in Europe and not from the U.S. mainland. I'm aware that a couple of European countries (not all of them) spend significantly less on defense than the United States. Still, considering the points I just made what's the purpose of Trump's temper trantum except maybe firing up his base with nationalistic fervour with regards to the upcoming midterms? Donald Trump is a man who can't take any criticism and who apparently feels being treated unfairly pretty quickly, and now he's projecting this feeling of "injustice" upon his country as a whole.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Assuming that all NATO countries would meet Trump's demands it's also unclear to me what America would specifically gain from that.

Arms sales. I'll grant that we'd only get a portion of the contracts, but every little bit would help our economy.

[JA]

I honestly don’t see how it’s in the interest of European countries to continue a military alliance with the United States at this point. All it will do is help perpetuate their ongoing refugee crisis sparked by American-led interventions overseas, force them to waste more taxpayer money on defense rather than spend it on social services, and make them have to deal with America’s retarded right-wing even more than necessary. NATO is outdated, unnecessary, and a net negative for European welfare and security at this point. They’d be far better off forming a European Army.

[Middle-aged Europe]

So, at the end of the NATO summit Trump practically said at his improvised press conference: "Everything is great now! They promised me more money! I WON!" European leaders on the other hand differ from that view saying that no significant concessions were made to Trump:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/12/donald-trump-nato-summit-chaos-germany-attack-defence-spending
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-says-leaving-nato-unnecessary-claims-allies-will-boost-funding-n890806


Somehow this reminds me of the outcome of the North Korea summit: "The nuclear threat from North Korea is over! Sleep well!"

I suppose that's what the Trump administration is basically about... it's about simulating success. Trump acted like a testosterone-poisened tough guy at the NATO summit and afterwards he claimed that every goal was met only because of him. Problem is, due to Trump's temper tandrums and his efforts to put himself at the center of attention, other meetings on important subjects like a further Eastern enlargment had to be postponed or shortened at the summit. As a result, there wasn't much substantial progress made. Nowadays, it's already a success that the status quo could be maintained against the U.S. government's attempt to use a  diplomatic wrecking ball.

[KingSweden]

They should just start sending Mattis or Pompeo or hell even Pence instead at this rate. Besides Mattis I don’t care for them, sure, but at least they behave like adults

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Any European Country who doesnt pay 2% of their GDP in defense then should not have the audacity to criticize US foreign policy then since it is the US who is spending their own money to defend them.

Don't be an idiot. If a friend gives you something, knowing that it antagonizes your beliefs or is something you generally hate, of course you have the right to criticize them for it. The only thing is that in addition to criticism, they should be prepared to develop capabilities that enable them to have a more independent foreign policy.

If Europeans problem with the US is the fact that the US has military bases in Europe then they should tell that to the US and then I would support the US withdrawing their troops from European bases(except maybe the UK) .


The thing is Europe wants America to defend them but are not willing to spend their own money on it either to maintain their own defenses and that is the part which is maddening

Germans want Donald Trump to pull US troops out of Germany, poll finds

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[BudgieForce]

Any European Country who doesnt pay 2% of their GDP in defense then should not have the audacity to criticize US foreign policy then since it is the US who is spending their own money to defend them.

Don't be an idiot. If a friend gives you something, knowing that it antagonizes your beliefs or is something you generally hate, of course you have the right to criticize them for it. The only thing is that in addition to criticism, they should be prepared to develop capabilities that enable them to have a more independent foreign policy.

If Europeans problem with the US is the fact that the US has military bases in Europe then they should tell that to the US and then I would support the US withdrawing their troops from European bases(except maybe the UK) .


The thing is Europe wants America to defend them but are not willing to spend their own money on it either to maintain their own defenses and that is the part which is maddening

Germans want Donald Trump to pull US troops out of Germany, poll finds

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd bet that has more to do with Trump than anything else.

[Calthrina950]

This is actually an issue that I agree with Trump on. I don't think it is too unfair to ask all of the various NATO nations to contribute their fair share to the organization's overall defensive budget. Of course, if I were President, I would be making efforts to deal with our national deficit and adjust our own military spending. Yes, the United States should continue in its role as the primary force in this alliance, but asking others to contribute as they should isn't that ridiculous of an idea.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This is actually an issue that I agree with Trump on. I don't think it is too unfair to ask all of the various NATO nations to contribute their fair share to the organization's overall defensive budget. Of course, if I were President, I would be making efforts to deal with our national deficit and adjust our own military spending. Yes, the United States should continue in its role as the primary force in this alliance, but asking others to contribute as they should isn't that ridiculous of an idea.

Except who decides what they should? The US, with its bloated defense establishment, or NATO as a whole?

[ProudModerate2]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

This is actually an issue that I agree with Trump on. I don't think it is too unfair to ask all of the various NATO nations to contribute their fair share to the organization's overall defensive budget. Of course, if I were President, I would be making efforts to deal with our national deficit and adjust our own military spending. Yes, the United States should continue in its role as the primary force in this alliance, but asking others to contribute as they should isn't that ridiculous of an idea.

Except who decides what they should? The US, with its bloated defense establishment, or NATO as a whole?

The member states of NATO all agreed years ago to increase spending to 2% of GDP by 2024 and are on track to meet that goal. This is not controversial.

This is not an issue. It's just what Trump has chosen to rant about, either because of his mental impairments, or because he really is trying to destroy America's alliances.

"America shouldn't pay for other nations' defense" is an ancient Soviet talking point. It's bull excrement. There are legitimate discussions about America's role abroad, and about military spending. But no one - least of all Trumpy - has brought up any legitimate criticsm of NATO or its structure and funding.

[ProudModerate2]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Calthrina950]

This is actually an issue that I agree with Trump on. I don't think it is too unfair to ask all of the various NATO nations to contribute their fair share to the organization's overall defensive budget. Of course, if I were President, I would be making efforts to deal with our national deficit and adjust our own military spending. Yes, the United States should continue in its role as the primary force in this alliance, but asking others to contribute as they should isn't that ridiculous of an idea.

Except who decides what they should? The US, with its bloated defense establishment, or NATO as a whole?

I would argue NATO as a whole should. I don't think Trump's confrontational style is the best means to approach this, but it is a legitimate issue that should be looked into. And I did mention in my post that if I were in office, I would be taking steps to reorganize our military and to make it more efficient.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Any European Country who doesnt pay 2% of their GDP in defense then should not have the audacity to criticize US foreign policy then since it is the US who is spending their own money to defend them.

Don't be an idiot. If a friend gives you something, knowing that it antagonizes your beliefs or is something you generally hate, of course you have the right to criticize them for it. The only thing is that in addition to criticism, they should be prepared to develop capabilities that enable them to have a more independent foreign policy.

If Europeans problem with the US is the fact that the US has military bases in Europe then they should tell that to the US and then I would support the US withdrawing their troops from European bases(except maybe the UK) .


The thing is Europe wants America to defend them but are not willing to spend their own money on it either to maintain their own defenses and that is the part which is maddening

Germans want Donald Trump to pull US troops out of Germany, poll finds

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As we've seen with Stormy Daniels, Trump is very adept at pulling out.

[ProudModerate2]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump, once again, strengthening relations and being cordial with our allies.
Idiot-In-Chief blows another visit.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's adorably optimistic.

[Reaganfan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The irony of all of this is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Trump blasts Prime Minister Theresa May in interview published during his first official visit to Britain

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He's also apparently avoiding London, for fear that his bigger, smarter doppleganger will steal his spotlight:

[ProudModerate2]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Okay I got to get this off my chest. Does anyone else think Trump wants an alone meeting with Putin because he’s going to give Vlad the go ahead to hack our voter rolls this November? Am I just being overly paranoid?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Okay I got to get this off my chest. Does anyone else think Trump wants an alone meeting with Putin because he’s going to give Vlad the go ahead to hack our voter rolls this November? Am I just being overly paranoid?

Yes, because Vlad won't worry about having permission.

[KingSweden]

Okay I got to get this off my chest. Does anyone else think Trump wants an alone meeting with Putin because he’s going to give Vlad the go ahead to hack our voter rolls this November? Am I just being overly paranoid?

Yes, because Vlad won't worry about having permission.

^^^

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Okay I got to get this off my chest. Does anyone else think Trump wants an alone meeting with Putin because he’s going to give Vlad the go ahead to hack our voter rolls this November? Am I just being overly paranoid?

If you think Putin needs the permission of the star of the pee-tape for anything, you're not paranoid enough.

I think there's a possibility that Trump is insisting on it just because he knows it will be a good way to troll his critics, and because he likes how Vlad flatters him. But I wouldn't bet money on it.