Support NeoGAF

[Captain Tuttle]

It's fair that the European military gets more funding.

It's also fair that they then buy less American hardware.

At the bottom line I'm not convinced this will be beneficial to the USA.

How much American arms do European countries buy?

Honest question, I have no idea

 

[frontovik]

What's the point of encouraging NATO members to pay more if the US maintains the largest armed arsenal?

 

[Rödskägg]

As I explained before, Russia doesn't need nor want to conquer Eastern Europe. Maybe the Baltics. What Russia wants is a broken EU that cannot back it into a corner nor retaliate when Putin is being a jackass. A broken EU means a bunch of quarreling nations with little weight in the world stage that can be bullied into Russia's sphere of influence. Russia's strategy also calls for the creation of buffer zones along its borders very much in line with Eastern Ukraine and made up, bullshit nations like Transnistria that cannot survive without Russian assistance and exist solely to provide some space between the motherland and potential adversaries.

Back in the day the Baltics and the Visegrad four used to play that role. It's understandable that they are immensely alarmed by Russia's increasing political interference and aggression in Ukraine.

I was under the impression that you thought Russia is an existential threat to the EU since your first response was to this particular post:

Russia is far from innocent but I still don't see them as a major threat to the EU, like, at all.

...which was a continuation of a discussion about whether Russia has the capabilities to invade Europe.
I'm glad we cleared that up and if I understand you correctly we agree that Russia does not pose as a military threat to Europe.

 

[Koren]

While I agree with the sentiment of disarmament, I don't think that it's a realistic goal at this time. The world is trending towards arms races right now. And as these races are primarily fueled by China and India's growing industrial might coupled with a need for a military to go along with that growth, it's unlikely for that trend to reverse any time soon.

Well, you could argue that China increase its defense budget because it's dwarfed by the USA's one...

From a China point of view, you could very well say that the arm races is fueled by USA...

(playing devil's advocate here, but unless I'm totally out of touch, I don't think their military spending are unreasonable... I prefer more "democratic" nations having the biggest power, but that's a western point of view)

 

[MisterFalcon]

Army budgets IIRC.

The Dutch are counting pension payments to retired armed forces personel as defence spending. I suspect many other countries do the same which explains why despite all those billions most countries can't scrape together more actual combat troops then your average Syrian militia.

 

[4Tran]

China is currently spending about a third of what the US is spending on weapons. I can understand why they feel the need to strenghten their military even if I think that it's ultimately counterproductive. Especially with several US military bases right in their neighbourhood.

With all of the American bases near China, it makes a lot of sense to improve their military; especially the Navy. For decades it was a lot weaker than it should have been, and it's now conceivable for the PLAN to grow powerful enough in the next few decades to rival the USN's strength in the Pacific.

What's the point of encouraging NATO members to pay more if the US maintains the largest armed arsenal?

The point is that the US would have more resources to draw on if they need help from their allies.

Well, you could argue that China increase its defense budget because it's dwarfed by the USA's one...

From a China point of view, you could very well say that the arm races is fueled by USA...

(playing devil's advocate here, but unless I'm totally out of touch, I don't think their military spending are unreasonable... I prefer more "democratic" nations having the biggest power, but that's a western point of view)

The strength of the USN in the Pacific is one of the main catalysts to the PLAN's growth, but it growing was inevitable anyways. China's primary strategic vulnerability was the security of its seaways all the way to the Persian Gulf. They needed to grow the PLAN's strength to secure their interests to at least some degree, and it's still far from achieving that on the chance that someone were to be in conflict with them.

 

[Valhelm]

If anything, the US has made the world a more dangerous place for European values. But that works out nicely, since they're selling everyone the arms used for military preparedness. I think the US can continue to live in its fearful bubble. What holding them back from reducing their spending in Europe to match whatever is fair on their eyes? Right, because all these contractors have their hands deep into the government's hand and military fetishism is blinding everyone else. The United States' govt is a peacekeeper only in the most shallow, and imperial sense, and the way in which it is performed is exactly what feeds the extremism we see in the world today. What a fucking farce. The US is the most warmongering and backwards country in NATO, so why should the rest lower themselves to their standards?

Hey, we're only second-worst. Turkey is a NATO member, after all.

 

[Koren]

How much American arms do European countries buy?

Honest question, I have no idea

Not much...

SIPRI reports says there's no EU country in the top 10.

If I found the right numbers, EU as a whole account for as much as Australia.

UK representing 40%, Italy 25%, then Norway, Finland, Greece.

France and Germany are only a couple of %, Beijing contries like Yemen or Niger. I'm noy even sure thiose countries buy really more from the US than they sell to the US.

 

[Gallbaro]

What's the point of encouraging NATO members to pay more if the US maintains the largest armed arsenal?

Not really, land war, Europe, non-nuclear, Russia had the your hand even against the full US military.

 

[Rödskägg]

With all of the American bases near China, it makes a lot of sense to improve their military; especially the Navy. For decades it was a lot weaker than it should have been, and it's now conceivable for the PLAN to grow powerful enough in the next few decades to rival the USN's strength in the Pacific.

Yes, though I'd rather see the US cutting down on their military presence and hopefully encouraging China to do the same.

 

[Lucumo]

Yes, though I'd rather see the US cutting down on their military presence and hopefully encouraging China to do the same.

Won't be happening as the USA continues to pursue their interests around the world.

 

[Sushi Nao]

Every last dollar saved will be given to corporate interests

 

[Rödskägg]

Won't be happening as the USA continues to pursue their interests around the world.

That's why it's important to keep discussing and not ignoring the subject. Sooner or later humanity will wisen up as it has many times before.

 

[mr2xxx]

It's like at a BBQ where the US brings the meat and drinks, while the Netherlands just brought the napkins and they're on their third plate already. Nah bruh.

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

Figure this can go in this thread
AP - Pence tells European allies US 'strongly supports' NATO and will be 'unwavering' in its commitment to the alliance.

Is no one on the same page lol.

Maybe he's trying to be presidential. Might as well, considering he's probably going to have the job in five months or so. I can't imagine Trump lasting a year.