Europe ‘would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine’

Defence chiefs’ hopes of a 64,000-strong ‘deterrence’ force is unlikely to be fulfilled, sources say

https://www.thetimes.com/article/72...1?shareToken=3ca7011d7449a5aa95ee6c112957e109

HYPERLINK has full article

snip

in subsequent meetings, defence ministers across Europe said there was “no chance” they could reach that number and that even 25,000 would “be a push for a joint effort”, a source privy to discussions in Brussels said............

Dovile Sakaliene, Lithuania’s defence minister, was said to have told her counterparts: “Russia has 800,000 [troops]. Let me tell you this, if we can’t even raise 64,000 that doesn’t look weak — it is weak.”..............

The reluctance among European countries to send ground troops to protect Ukraine is understood to have led to a shift in thinking about what the force would look like should there be a peace deal. There are also concerns about what the rules of engagement would be should Russia attack.

end snip

This is the reality of NATO that our current POTUS has been stating for years. We have heard the pathetic "we stand with Ukraine" messages from Europe when Trump spoke against Zelensky. Once again, all talk but no walk from NATO.

Why should the USA continue to be the world's army and listen to Europes utter BS of how arrogant, or disrespected we are?

Time for NATO countries to step up

 

Dwarfstan needs donkeys, golf carts, Zhigulis, KIA Sonatas, and Norkies for attacks in DonbA$$.

 

I suggest putting down the drugs and walking away from the keyboard

 

No drugs....and last I saw even conscripts on crutches and crawling.

 

That'd be great but he hasn't done it yet.

The EU is ran by a bunch of big-mouthed women. Deterrence force? Ain't happening.

 

Sberbank has asked for a bailout "Bill" .....some advice ....Run.

Thoughts?

 

So when NATO runs out of bombs, Europe becomes Russostan. A wake up call indeed!

 

The donkeys and golf carts have been confirmed!

 

This is the result of the Euros letting their defense forces either, while expecting The United States to do all the heavy lifting. Thank you President Trump for exposing these weaknesses.

 

The real question is what percent of GDP would Europe have to spend on military spending to replace American troops.

That percentage of GDP is probably similar to what the United State's is right now. Or even less than what the United State's is.

But the thing is, if they increase percentage of their budget that goes to military spending, they will have to cut other things, and most of those European countries have very big social spending programs.

In other words, if they want to pay for their own military spending, they're going to have to either cut free healthcare, or dramatically raise taxes.

But in reality, what's most likely to happen is racking up their debt much higher and several years of high inflation, and devaluing of the Euro.

 

US percentage of GDP on military spending: 3.4%
EU percentage of GDP on military spending: 1.9%

US spent $997 billion on military (for the year 2024)
EU countries spent €326 billion (equivalent to $368 billion USD)


And let's remember all the Liberals on the Left in the US keep saying the US should drastically reduce its military spending.

 

Let's point out that some countries in the EU, like Poland, spend 4.1% of their GDP on military spending, and Poland's president has vowed to increase that to 4.7% in 2025.

The real issue is those other wealthier countries in Western Europe, like France and the United Kingdom.
(France is 2.1% and UK is 2.3%. The Netherlands and Germany are less than 2.1%)

 

That's been the attitude of most NATO members, "We'll just let The United States foot the bill. They won't let us go down". That's certainly Canada's attitude. In 2024 Trudeau committed to meeting Canada's financial commitment by 2032.

 

I think one of the reasons they thought the US should foot the bill was because the US held the world's reserve currency, which meant other countries paid some of the price of inflation whenever the US printed more money. (Or when the US printed money, not all the burden of that inflation fell on the US)

(If I can draw a historical analogy, in late Medieval Europe the European kingdoms were willing to grant Venice all sorts of special trade privileges and monopolies, knowing that Venice would use some of that wealth to fund naval protection in the Mediterranean, both protecting their trade and keeping the Muslims on the other side of the Mediterranean at bay)

 

I think it's because they didn't want to spend the blood and treasure. They wanted us to do it.

 

This spending is all fine at above 2%. Accumulatively this will build sufficient force.

However having the number of troops to mobilise that's a different matter.

 

You needed no encouragement and you were doing it anyway and of your own volition.

Europe supported the US in many wars that had nothing to do with Europe since World war II.

 

I suggest that Europe build up a very significant reserve force. This will cost a lot less to maintain than a full fledged military. Citizens with basic training can be more quickly upgraded then starting over from scratch - if Russia does push its military forward further into Europe.

There are no issues with money when a foreign country is invading you

Between 2% and 4% of GDP should be enough. Of course if the larger countries are pulling their weight more so then that makes a huge difference. But even 2% of a huge economic power like Germany is a lot of military.

Country | 2021 % GDP | 2024 % GDP
----------------|------------|-----------
UK | 2.3% | 2.5%
Germany | 1.4% | 2.0%
Poland | 2.1% | 4.1%
Finland | 1.3% | 2.4%
France | 2.0% | 2.1%
Estonia | 2.3% | 3.4%
Latvia | 2.3% | 3.2%
Lithuania | 2.0% | 2.8%
Romania | 2.0% | 2.5%
Denmark | 1.4% | 2.0%
Russia | 4.1% | 5.9%*
Ukraine | 3.2% | 8.2%*
Europe (NATO avg) | 1.7% | 2.0%

Country | 2021 ($B) | 2024 ($B)
----------------|-----------|----------
UK | 68.5 | 81.8
Germany | 56.0 | 90.9
Poland | 13.0 | 32.0
Finland | 4.5 | 7.5
France | 59.1 | 64.0
Estonia | 0.8 | 1.4
Latvia | 0.9 | 1.3
Lithuania | 1.3 | 2.0
Romania | 5.8 | 8.7
Denmark | 5.6 | 8.2
Russia | 86.4 | 120.0*
Ukraine | 6.0 | 22.0*
Europe (NATO avg) | 345.0 | 693.0

 

The problem is the left is anti-military... Unless it's to support....

 

I think that's a simplistic characterisation.

Both left and the right can be anti and pro military depending on the war. Sometimes they come together like Iraq.

 

Europeans have government supported health care.
Americans don't. MediCare / ObamaCare are evil jokes
on American working people working people.

Meanwhile "they" still expect us to be their military.
And likewise who pays the bill; monetary, lives, blood & bone.

TIME to divorce Europe
The Cold War is over
Time to resign from the North Atlantic Treaty

 

TO BE FAIR, THIS KIND OF THING KEEPS HAPPENING: Europe Just Proved Trump Right About NATO.

“In a shocking-not-shocking exclusive report in The (UK) Times, Europe ‘would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine’ as part of a postwar peacekeeping force. Defense Editor Larisa Brown ‘was given a rare insight into conversations between Europe’s defence ministers and military chiefs as they thrashed out plans for a ‘coalition of the willing’ force,’ and the results are as disappointing as they are sobering.”

They can't even put 25,000 troops with Britain kicking 10,000.

NATO is a total farce.

'"Europeans expect hundreds of thousands of Americans to immediately deploy to Europe to defend them against a nation with the GDP of Texas and a population 1/4th the size of European NATO." This is from countries that admit they could barely muster 25,000 troops for Ukraine, even if their national survival depended on it.'

 

Yes. Both of them are lock step when it has to do with the middle east (Israel).

 

It is a simplistic characterisation, but it's true.

All those wealthier countries in Western Europe are very politically progressive and their citizens and politicians do not want to spend too much on military spending. But even more than that, they want the government to spend large amounts of money in other places, which cannot be done if that money were going to military spending.

You'll notice how many of those countries in Eastern Europe spend a significantly larger percent of their GDP on military despite being poorer.

 

Why not have Europe build up NATO instead have America get the hell out of Europe and Ukraine.