Donald Trump arrives in the UK for state visit, calls London Mayor Sadiq Khan a 'stone cold loser'

It is very simply. Who has reached the 2% of GDP NATO goal?

 

In that post you mention activities?

 

If the US pulled out of NATO, how strong do you think it would be?

 

Fair enough. I should have responded in this way:

Do you think that the US President is the only politician in the world that people can have a legitimate opinion about?

 

You don't bother to read replies anyway as clearly illustrated by Mandelus post where he states:

"Maintaining your military bases in Japan and South Korea, which have absolutely nothing to do with NATO, is many times higher ... with a total US military budget of $ 650 billion in 2018 ... more than the next 10 countries - opponents and friends - together!"

Or my post where I stated "Is the Far East or any part of the Pacific any concern of NATO."

Why should any NATO countries subsidize US military expansion worldwide

 

I would not care. I prefer an European army

 

What about decades into the future?

 

And how strong would that be on its own?

 

It shouldn't. Do you know how much the difference accounts for when you subtract the US's 'worldwide expansion' defense spending?

 

Yes, they will be destroyed by the useless Khan. It would be R.I.P British/American alliance.

 

Totally wrong question ....

When must this 2% goal be reached by contractual duty?

 

Sure ... we can start to plan now for what maybe can happen in 30 years or more about who can be then a potential enemy to what then the UK is depending on as ally at this time... but which sense has it? No sense at all!

 

Are you drawing a connection between immigration and rising knife crime? You should! After all, "73 per cent of knife offenders were from a black or ethnic minority background" according to Chief Superintendent Ade Adelekan, Head of the Metropolitan Police Service's Violent Crime Task Force. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/cri...-as-young-as-ten-police-figures-a4056596.html

Who is responsible for overseeing the police? The mayor! Or is that different with you in Germany? By the way, I don't live in America, neither does @alexa. I'm not even American. Do you think you're the only non-American on here?

Well London has a knife ban. And it hasn't made much difference!

When did I state that I support the travel ban?

Well I certainly have a reason to pity them now! They're being sent back to a much worse country!

 

@alexa, I can't see how you 'liked' this nonsense. Don't you know what a mayor does?

 

What didn't happen?

 

Contractual duty?

 

Oh well next time you might.

 

What do you mean, "which sense has it?" Maybe its a German to English translation issue.

 

It does nor matter, it did not happen anyway.

 

You don't even know what you were referring to?

 

I am not referring to anything, because it did not happen, Wednesday or Thursday. Since 1066 actually.

 

It's could be find out ... but not easy, because you have to tap into a lot of sources.
But then you will also come to things and details, where the classification is difficult ... Let's take your 10 large aircraft carriers as an example. It depends on where and for what these 10 carriers are currently used. The same with the US Marines with the ARG / MEU constellation ... where are they doing their cruise trip around the world with which task?

Anyway ... the main problem is that the US is acting in general worldwide. Accordingg to the Website of Pentagon, the US military had in 2017 (sorry, for 2018 no digits found) maintained 4,775 “sites,” spread across all 50 states, eight US territories, and 45 foreign countries. A total of 514 of these outposts are located overseas, according to the Pentagon’s worldwide property portfolio!.

Without starting now, how much USD in detail etc. ... just out of logic:
What does for excample the cost of the US bases in Japan and South Korea have to do with NATO and with Europe? Nothing ... absolutely nothing!
It is purely and exclusively concerned with local interests of the US in Southeast Asia ... including "alliances" with the two countries mentioned above, which in turn have nothing to do with NATO and the Europeans.
I'm pretty sure that we're talking about quite a lot of money here, which already makes up a nice share of the approximately $ 650 billion of the total budget.

But now the important point is that the Europeans do not have or do not want these global interests. So they do not have to bear these huge costs ... but only those for their interests that seldom go beyond Europe and if so, then only to deal with Afghanistan and the fight against ISIS or other UN / anti terror missions, where some Europeans volunteer to participate or fullfill their NATO duty as in Afghanistan.

But you have those costs all the time because of your global claim ... and even before I start dividing the $ 650 billion ... it's definitely not more than $ 50 or $ 60 billion that looks at anything and very benevolent with NATO and Europe and US operations or tasks

 

What sense does it make to think about something that could possibly be in many decades i future ... already as a given fact?

 

What are you saying is a given fact?

 

Look, I agree, but unless we know how much the difference accounts for when you subtract the US's 'worldwide expansion' defense spending, then all we can say is that the US exceeds the 2% percentage of GDP target by 1.6%.