Utopia Talk - Politics - Trump leaves NATO

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Apr 24 23:16:04 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / Trump leaves NATO

Paramount
Member Wed Dec 04 10:46:10
Trump calls Trudeau ‘two-faced’, cancels press conference and leaves Nato summit early after video of world leaders making fun of him

‘I called him out on the fact he’s not paying 2 per cent, and I guess he’s not very happy about it,’ says US president

http://www...s-johnson-latest-a9232496.html

Donald Trump has reacted furiously to footage of world leaders apparently making fun of him, calling Justin Trudeau “two-faced” then cancelling a press conference and cutting short his attendance at a Nato summit.

The US president was asked whether he had seen the clip in which his international counterparts appeared to joke about his explosive press conference with Emmanuel Macron, and his erratic diplomatic style, at Tuesday night’s Buckingham Palace reception.

“You just watched his team’s jaws drop to the floor!” Mr Trudeau apparently said of Mr Trump while speaking with Boris Johnson, Mr Macron, Mark Rutte and Princess Anne.

“Well, he’s two-faced,” Mr Trump said of the Canadian prime minister when questioned on Wednesday afternoon, and suggested the unguarded comments were based in frustration at US demands that Canada contribute more to Nato.

Speaking alongside Angela Merkel on Wednesday, Mr Trump added: ”Honestly, with Trudeau he’s a nice guy, I find him to be a very nice guy.

“But you know the truth is that I called him out on the fact that he’s not paying 2 per cent, and I guess he’s not very happy about it.”

swordtail
Anarchist Prime Wed Dec 04 10:52:11
putin winning again!

Paramount
Member Wed Dec 04 11:01:07
If Trump leaves the Nato summit early, it can only mean that Nato is not important. What if everyone left early? No point in having a meeting then.

Im better then you
2012 UP Football Champ Wed Dec 04 11:18:40
What a shallow pathetic man.

obaminated
Member Wed Dec 04 11:27:26
So Canada isn't paying 2 percent of their GDP to their defense, as they are required too. And ibty is such a desperate cuck that he sides with Canada. Fuck em.

Paramount
Member Wed Dec 04 11:41:02
Well, it is in America’s interest that Canada and Europe is defended because the US does not want Europe and Canada to fall under Russia’s influence or to be invaded by Russia, because that would in the end be a threat to the US. So I think it is fair that the US should pay the moneys for Nato.

obaminated
Member Wed Dec 04 11:46:11
Yeah, that's a wise decision, you stupid fuck.

Habebe
Member Wed Dec 04 13:30:59
Well in all fairness...i imagine that these nations also have it in there own self interest to not be attacked.

The other thing Trump really wants is to boost expoets and the US makes a shit load of military equipment.

I think we are number one though in manufacturing the shit. Considering it's NATO....who else can they realistically buy it from, Russia? Lol.

kargen
Member Wed Dec 04 14:23:52
Paramount do you think it is more in the USA's interest that Europe be defended or more in Europe's interest that Europe be defended. If they can't be bothered to defend themselves does it really matter how much money we pump into the agreement?

Paramount
Member Wed Dec 04 14:57:15
It’s obviously in everyone’s interest to not be invaded. But take Canada for an example. Why do they need a defense? They could manage with a police force only. Because, if Russia or China invaded and annexed Canada, I doubt the US would say: ”Hi welcome, new neighbor”. Nope, the US would try to kick Russia or China out of Canada. And perhaps Canada would only need to pay (the US) for a defense when they really need to (when they are being invaded). It is like, if you only travel abroad once in a life time, you don’t buy an entire airliner, you fly charter :o)

kargen
Member Wed Dec 04 15:06:59
"Because, if Russia or China invaded and annexed Canada, I doubt the US would say: ”Hi welcome, new neighbor”. Nope, the US would try to kick Russia or China out of Canada."

and that means Canada shouldn't kick in for that defense. Canada might not need the defense but they should at the very least pay some for the countries that will defend them.

Your post reads like you think defense only happens after an invasion starts. The defense agreement is in place in part to prevent invasion through a strong alliance. Failing to provide the agreed to support for that alliance makes it weaker.

jergul
large member Wed Dec 04 15:27:14
Habe
Well, Turkey just bought weapon systems from Russia. There is a surprising amount of Soviet style stuff knocking about in Nato countries.

You are partly right on the transactional bit, but mostly it has to do with trying to maintain global supremacy. The US simply cannot do it alone because supremacy in one geographical region would mean parity other places as forces surge to elsewhere.

It would be helpful if European pawns could fill in for supremacy purposes in the European theater if the US ever had to focus on Asia.

jergul
large member Wed Dec 04 15:45:52
http://dig...rticle=7871&context=nwc-review

tumbleweed
the wanderer Wed Dec 04 15:46:31
"So Canada isn't paying 2 percent of their GDP to their defense, as they are required too"
~ misinformed supporter of misinformed idiot child prez

well in 2014, countries pledged to increase to 2% by 2024... so whatever it was before that was weaker than a pledge (i believe it is a "guideline")

find a signed agreement that says countries not spending 2% must pay the difference to the USA as our idiot leader continues to believe (as he never has his constant misinformation corrected)

Habebe
Member Wed Dec 04 17:44:35
Jergul, However regarding that Russian shit that turkey bought, hasnt that been a point of argument?

My point is that I think Trump has a double motive here. One that im ok wit.

Habebe
Member Wed Dec 04 17:52:16
I also think this is another part in an effort to be "Tough on China"

1. They've got NATO to focus more on China.

2. Get better trade deals globally to put the US in a better position to counter China.

3. Banning Huawei.

4. Supporting HK.

5. Drawing attention towards China's treatment of others while pulling out troops/ presence from the middle east.___ I see this as the US trying to get Islamic terrorists less focused on the west and more focused on China ( win win for the US)

Pillz
Member Wed Dec 04 18:59:10
3 is irrelevant. Europe won't ban them.

5 is counter intuitive. China has limited recent deployments. Limited combat experience amongst troops, no immediate reasons to modernize, and limited ability to test new equipment in combat theatres.

Mostly they just practice on ugyhurs in caves.

Do you really think Islamic terrorism is going to bother the Chinese? Militarily it's advantageous to them and they've no degenerate western liberalism to hold them back domestically.

You're just going to prod the into catching up sooner, establishing even stronger alliances with your enemies in the middle east, and feel ashamed China beat the Muslims and you couldn't.

Habebe
Member Wed Dec 04 21:16:52
Pillz,

3. Are they popular in Europe? Even still id say it makes a dent.

Idk whether

1. This is US intent...just my opinion.

2. Of it is wherher it will work. However I've read that some groups namely ISIS has been contemplating China's rise as " the new head od the dragon"

Only time will tell. Imho though this seems to be another layer of US " Tough on China" while Trump os meetimg with the Taliban, pulling out US troops and buddying up to the Raids all things that could* play into this while athiest China ramps up anti- Islam sentiment even if its over played by the west.

Pillz
Member Wed Dec 04 21:27:56
Germany has already agreed go forward with use of Huawei equipment for wireless infrastructure.

Popular enough.

Rest of your post is gibberish. How is it the US intention to give the chinese military combat experience, practical test environments for new equipment, and a pretense to expedite martial modernization?

Isis and turkey and the rest of the terrorists are toothless little shits. They have no ability to hurt an Orwellian police state with no institutions to protect them either domestically or aboard.

The US at least as the institution of free press and public opinion to hold them back, and over a half century invested in creating the islamist bad guy to profit off of monetarily and politically.

China has no such inconveniences, and no investment in Islamic terrorism.

Habebe
Member Wed Dec 04 21:43:20
So the Soviets had no problem with Islam?

jergul
large member Thu Dec 05 00:45:30
The Chechen military forces rigorously patroling in Syria bring along their prayer mats.

Russia generally uses Chechens for ground operations in Syria.

In case you are using Soviet Sammy style :-)

show deleted posts

Paramount Member	Wed Dec 04 10:46:10 Trump calls Trudeau ‘two-faced’, cancels press conference and leaves Nato summit early after video of world leaders making fun of him ‘I called him out on the fact he’s not paying 2 per cent, and I guess he’s not very happy about it,’ says US president http://www...s-johnson-latest-a9232496.html Donald Trump has reacted furiously to footage of world leaders apparently making fun of him, calling Justin Trudeau “two-faced” then cancelling a press conference and cutting short his attendance at a Nato summit. The US president was asked whether he had seen the clip in which his international counterparts appeared to joke about his explosive press conference with Emmanuel Macron, and his erratic diplomatic style, at Tuesday night’s Buckingham Palace reception. “You just watched his team’s jaws drop to the floor!” Mr Trudeau apparently said of Mr Trump while speaking with Boris Johnson, Mr Macron, Mark Rutte and Princess Anne. “Well, he’s two-faced,” Mr Trump said of the Canadian prime minister when questioned on Wednesday afternoon, and suggested the unguarded comments were based in frustration at US demands that Canada contribute more to Nato. Speaking alongside Angela Merkel on Wednesday, Mr Trump added: ”Honestly, with Trudeau he’s a nice guy, I find him to be a very nice guy. “But you know the truth is that I called him out on the fact that he’s not paying 2 per cent, and I guess he’s not very happy about it.”
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Wed Dec 04 10:52:11 putin winning again!
Paramount Member	Wed Dec 04 11:01:07 If Trump leaves the Nato summit early, it can only mean that Nato is not important. What if everyone left early? No point in having a meeting then.
Im better then you 2012 UP Football Champ	Wed Dec 04 11:18:40 What a shallow pathetic man.
obaminated Member	Wed Dec 04 11:27:26 So Canada isn't paying 2 percent of their GDP to their defense, as they are required too. And ibty is such a desperate cuck that he sides with Canada. Fuck em.
Paramount Member	Wed Dec 04 11:41:02 Well, it is in America’s interest that Canada and Europe is defended because the US does not want Europe and Canada to fall under Russia’s influence or to be invaded by Russia, because that would in the end be a threat to the US. So I think it is fair that the US should pay the moneys for Nato.
obaminated Member	Wed Dec 04 11:46:11 Yeah, that's a wise decision, you stupid fuck.
Habebe Member	Wed Dec 04 13:30:59 Well in all fairness...i imagine that these nations also have it in there own self interest to not be attacked. The other thing Trump really wants is to boost expoets and the US makes a shit load of military equipment. I think we are number one though in manufacturing the shit. Considering it's NATO....who else can they realistically buy it from, Russia? Lol.
kargen Member	Wed Dec 04 14:23:52 Paramount do you think it is more in the USA's interest that Europe be defended or more in Europe's interest that Europe be defended. If they can't be bothered to defend themselves does it really matter how much money we pump into the agreement?
Paramount Member	Wed Dec 04 14:57:15 It’s obviously in everyone’s interest to not be invaded. But take Canada for an example. Why do they need a defense? They could manage with a police force only. Because, if Russia or China invaded and annexed Canada, I doubt the US would say: ”Hi welcome, new neighbor”. Nope, the US would try to kick Russia or China out of Canada. And perhaps Canada would only need to pay (the US) for a defense when they really need to (when they are being invaded). It is like, if you only travel abroad once in a life time, you don’t buy an entire airliner, you fly charter :o)
kargen Member	Wed Dec 04 15:06:59 "Because, if Russia or China invaded and annexed Canada, I doubt the US would say: ”Hi welcome, new neighbor”. Nope, the US would try to kick Russia or China out of Canada." and that means Canada shouldn't kick in for that defense. Canada might not need the defense but they should at the very least pay some for the countries that will defend them. Your post reads like you think defense only happens after an invasion starts. The defense agreement is in place in part to prevent invasion through a strong alliance. Failing to provide the agreed to support for that alliance makes it weaker.
jergul large member	Wed Dec 04 15:27:14 Habe Well, Turkey just bought weapon systems from Russia. There is a surprising amount of Soviet style stuff knocking about in Nato countries. You are partly right on the transactional bit, but mostly it has to do with trying to maintain global supremacy. The US simply cannot do it alone because supremacy in one geographical region would mean parity other places as forces surge to elsewhere. It would be helpful if European pawns could fill in for supremacy purposes in the European theater if the US ever had to focus on Asia.
jergul large member	Wed Dec 04 15:45:52 http://dig...rticle=7871&context=nwc-review
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Dec 04 15:46:31 "So Canada isn't paying 2 percent of their GDP to their defense, as they are required too" ~ misinformed supporter of misinformed idiot child prez well in 2014, countries pledged to increase to 2% by 2024... so whatever it was before that was weaker than a pledge (i believe it is a "guideline") find a signed agreement that says countries not spending 2% must pay the difference to the USA as our idiot leader continues to believe (as he never has his constant misinformation corrected)
Habebe Member	Wed Dec 04 17:44:35 Jergul, However regarding that Russian shit that turkey bought, hasnt that been a point of argument? My point is that I think Trump has a double motive here. One that im ok wit.
Habebe Member	Wed Dec 04 17:52:16 I also think this is another part in an effort to be "Tough on China" 1. They've got NATO to focus more on China. 2. Get better trade deals globally to put the US in a better position to counter China. 3. Banning Huawei. 4. Supporting HK. 5. Drawing attention towards China's treatment of others while pulling out troops/ presence from the middle east.___ I see this as the US trying to get Islamic terrorists less focused on the west and more focused on China ( win win for the US)
Pillz Member	Wed Dec 04 18:59:10 3 is irrelevant. Europe won't ban them. 5 is counter intuitive. China has limited recent deployments. Limited combat experience amongst troops, no immediate reasons to modernize, and limited ability to test new equipment in combat theatres. Mostly they just practice on ugyhurs in caves. Do you really think Islamic terrorism is going to bother the Chinese? Militarily it's advantageous to them and they've no degenerate western liberalism to hold them back domestically. You're just going to prod the into catching up sooner, establishing even stronger alliances with your enemies in the middle east, and feel ashamed China beat the Muslims and you couldn't.
Habebe Member	Wed Dec 04 21:16:52 Pillz, 3. Are they popular in Europe? Even still id say it makes a dent. Idk whether 1. This is US intent...just my opinion. 2. Of it is wherher it will work. However I've read that some groups namely ISIS has been contemplating China's rise as " the new head od the dragon" Only time will tell. Imho though this seems to be another layer of US " Tough on China" while Trump os meetimg with the Taliban, pulling out US troops and buddying up to the Raids all things that could* play into this while athiest China ramps up anti- Islam sentiment even if its over played by the west.
Pillz Member	Wed Dec 04 21:27:56 Germany has already agreed go forward with use of Huawei equipment for wireless infrastructure. Popular enough. Rest of your post is gibberish. How is it the US intention to give the chinese military combat experience, practical test environments for new equipment, and a pretense to expedite martial modernization? Isis and turkey and the rest of the terrorists are toothless little shits. They have no ability to hurt an Orwellian police state with no institutions to protect them either domestically or aboard. The US at least as the institution of free press and public opinion to hold them back, and over a half century invested in creating the islamist bad guy to profit off of monetarily and politically. China has no such inconveniences, and no investment in Islamic terrorism.
Habebe Member	Wed Dec 04 21:43:20 So the Soviets had no problem with Islam?
jergul large member	Thu Dec 05 00:45:30 The Chechen military forces rigorously patroling in Syria bring along their prayer mats. Russia generally uses Chechens for ground operations in Syria. In case you are using Soviet Sammy style :-)
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: