I'm not sure how

Well let’s revisit a few points.The UK couldn’t have done it on their own….you say. Actually the UK could never have landed back in France on their own. But even that is moot, without the lifeline from America and the convoys bringing food and military supplies to a struggling nation, defeat was inevitable.

Russia’s role was only possible because so much of the German army was anchored in the West. Kursk, the defining battle on the Eastern front was on a knife’s edge. If Germany had all their resources they would have prevailed and the war there would have been quite different.

The Ukraine war suggests the myth of Russian invulnerability was overstated.

As for Paris…the other big myth. You say Paris was liberated by the free French. It’s true Eisenhower had originally planned to bypass Paris to avoid a bloody urban battle and destroy the city.  But without the US divisions it would never have happened.  That in the next post.

And no, I know the difference between Versailles and Notre Dame having made modest contributions  myself to the restoration of both.

Here’s Paris:

On August 21, Eisenhower met with de Gaulle and told him of his plans to bypass Paris. De Gaulle urged him to reconsider, assuring him that Paris could be reclaimed without difficulty. The French general also warned that the powerful communist faction of the Resistance might succeed in liberating Paris, thereby threatening the re-establishment of a democratic government. De Gaulle politely told Eisenhower that if his advance against Paris was not ordered, he would send Leclerc’s 2nd Armored Division into the city himself.

On August 22, Eisenhower agreed to proceed with the liberation of Paris. The next day, the 2nd Armored Division advanced on the city from the north and the 4th Infantry Division from the south. Meanwhile, in Paris, the forces of German General Dietrich von Choltitz were fighting the Resistance and completing their defenses around the city. Hitler had ordered Paris defended to the last man, and demanded that the city not fall into Allied hands except as “a field of ruins.” Choltitz dutifully began laying explosives under Paris’ bridges and many of its landmarks, but disobeyed an order to commence the destruction. He did not want to go down in history as the man who had destroyed the “City of Light”—Europe’s most celebrated city.

The 2nd Armored Division ran into heavy German artillery, taking heavy casualties, but on August 24 managed to cross the Seine and reach the Paris suburbs. There, they were greeted by enthusiastic civilians who besieged them with flowers, kisses, and wine. Later that day, Leclerc learned that the 4th Infantry Division was poised to beat him into Paris proper, and he ordered his exhausted men forward in a final burst of energy. Just before midnight on August 24, the 2nd Armored Division reached the Hótel de Ville in the heart of Paris.

German resistance melted away during the night. Most of the 20,000 troops surrendered or fled, and those that fought were quickly overcome. On the morning of August 25, the 2nd Armored Division swept clear the western half of Paris while the 4th Infantry Division cleared the eastern part. Paris was liberated.

In the early afternoon, Choltitz was arrested in his headquarters by French troops. Shortly after, he signed a document formally surrendering Paris to de Gaulle’s provisional government. De Gaulle himself arrived in the city later that afternoon. On August 26, de Gaulle and Leclerc led a triumphant liberation march down the Champs d’Elysees. Scattered gunfire from a rooftop disrupted the parade, but the identity of the snipers was not determined.

So Paris was liberated by the French armored division and the American 4th Infantry division. But even disregarding all the logistical support the French division received…all this played out against a backdrop of the Allied forces rolling back German defenses. 

You may just want to take those glasses back off sunshine..... because your credibility has now dropped below gutter level.

Ohhhhhhh...I better get prepared for the spanking. Lets see what you got.

This is a blatant lie from you ..... not even just misinformation, or you being stupid, ignorant or misinformed..... it's just a downright blatant lie from you, that Europe did not commit to spending more with NATO, whilst Trump was president.

Paris abstained from the proposal but did not block the proposal, and all 29 NATO member states's contributions to NATO's annual budget would change after this proposed reform for all parties involved.

Under the new proposal that was negotiated for the 2021 NATO budget, under Trump's presidency, the USA's budget would be reduced from 22% to 16% and Germany's contribution would rise to the same level as the USA, as well as other contributions rising as well.

Okay I notice you omitted the part of the article where Germany said it wasn't anything to do with Trump (though the article implied it was) or that other members states had reservations about the proposal but you wouldn't by any chance be able be able to link where the proposal actually passed and took effect? Because genuinely I can't find any evidence the proposals where implemented. Because its all very well hearing someone say something or say their is an intention to do something, you need to actually check did it actually occur in reality.

As for Germany are you aware that in 2023 Germany rolled back on passing a law legally requiring it to hit the 2% spending on defense target. Why?...because the Germany are struggling to even hit 1.5% and it doesn't look like hitting 2% any time soon.

As of 2019, only 7 countries met or exceeded the NATO target of spending 2% of national output on defense, and they were USA, UK, Greece, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia.

Which supports my argument that very little changed under Trump. I believe two of the Baltic states hit the 2% target during his term but I believe they where on course to do so under the previous spending commitments and in the overall scheme of things they are not major powers in NATO.

This was all negotiated whilst Trump was president, and the fact that you refuse to even slightly recognize that Trump was involved with this, just shows your childish dislike for the man, whilst also completely overlooking and disregarding what he did achieve during his term with NATO.

Calm down man, all I've done is post NATO's own official data. They clearly do not show any significant increase in European defense spending during Trumps term and if your trying to argue that Trump got an agreement for NATO to increase spending from 2021 onward the graph appears to show a slight slow down. I suspect that's to do with how the European economies where doing after Covid. I also except a step rise in 2023 due to the war in Ukraine.

If you got some contradictory data that proves otherwise I'm willing to look at it.

But right now you have don't have much to back up a claim that Trump achieved much of note when it came to European spending on NATO.

As a matter of fact.... maybe put the glasses back on sunshine..... because the spotlight on your hypocrisy, ignorance or stupidity is very bright.

At least I know what continent Canada is in.

Well let’s revisit a few points.The UK couldn’t have done it on their own….you say. Actually the UK could never have landed back in France on their own.

Absolutely I agree with that.

But even that is moot, without the lifeline from America and the convoys bringing food and military supplies to a struggling nation, defeat was inevitable.

The UK is an island nation, it was always dependent on maritime trade for its survival even in peace times. Convoys where a British concept one which the American's ignored at high cost when they did enter the war. Defeat was not inevitable, neither the Battle of Britain or the Battle of the Atlantic (before America entered the war) where close run battles. Germany never at any point in the war had a realistic prospect of successfully invading Britain.

Russia’s role was only possible because so much of the German army was anchored in the West. Kursk, the defining battle on the Eastern front was on a knife’s edge. If Germany had all their resources they would have prevailed and the war there would have been quite different.

75-80% of the German army was on the eastern front. Kursk was not a defining battle. The Germans intended it as a quieting operation to neutralize the Russian army for the remainder of 1943 so it could deal with the Western allies. It was not an offensive design to regain the strategic initiative on the Eastern front for the Germans.  Germany had also already lost the war at that point, it was just a matter of Allied/Russian resolve holding. Its hard to say if the Germans could fully have concentrated on the Eastern front would they have won, its possible but one can't say for certain either way.

The Ukraine war suggests the myth of Russian invulnerability was overstated.

It does but I prefer Churchill's quote. Russia is never as strong as it seems, Russia is also never as weak as it seems.

As for Paris…the other big myth. You say Paris was liberated by the free French. It’s true Eisenhower had originally planned to bypass Paris to avoid a bloody urban battle and destroy the city.  But without the US divisions it would never have happened.  That in the next post.

My bad on omitting the American's role from the liberation of Paris, but basically it took de Gaulle doing the most French thing ever in threatening to remove French forces from Allied command to get the Allies to follow them into the city. And as for the French not being able to do it on their own with US support, well the Germans had just 1 division in Paris, about 20,000 men and maybe some French collaborators. Paris was already in the mist of armed uprising against them supported by the 3 million population. They could of done it on their own, but it would of taken longer and been more bloody.

And no, I know the difference between Versailles and Notre Dame having made modest contributions  myself to the restoration of both.

I wasn't aware there was restoration work going on in in Versailles going on. I was thinking back to the Notre Dame fire. But fair play to you on contributing to both.

So Paris was liberated by the French armored division and the American 4th Infantry division. But even disregarding all the logistical support the French division received…all this played out against a backdrop of the Allied forces rolling back German defenses.

And the French Resistance. But yes it was against the backdrop of the Allied forces liberating France.

Actual the movie I most  want to see most related to WW2 is a Danish movie called Land of Mine, its the true story about young German prisoners of war that where ordered to clear land mines left the Germans had had planted in Denmark during the war.

Band of Brothers is a must watch for WWII...and Kelly's Heroes ofcourse. 

...and Allo Allo...Helga, come here!

https://moviesjoy.plus/watch-movie/watch-land-of-mine-13997.5355442

Completing the trilogy that began with Band of Brothers and The Pacific, this epic mega-budget TV series tells the brutal, thrilling story of the US bombing raids that left from East Anglia.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/jan/23/nazis-spielberg-hanks-masters-of-the-air-band-of-brothers-the-pacific-east-anglia-bombing-raids

Starts Friday

Or the English trilogy…..Reach for the Sky, The Dam Busters and Sink the Bismarck. Dated, but still great fun.

Douglas Bader played 10 for England, or were selected but crashed before could play?

Hope so ................... his only chance wus back then ............. bravo legless warrior.

"Okay first hole in your argument. Emm how do I put this correctly...oh yes CANADA IS NOT IN EUROPE"

Duh ..... yes, I said "not only".....and then straight after that I referred to the "actual NATO agreement"

You also included this specific comment below about Canada into your previous post which is also what I was responding to and why I included Canada and Turkey into my response

"Except................. here is a graph from July 2023 from NATO itself on European and Canadian defense spending"

So I included Canada and Turkey into my post because I was explaining to you how some countries did agree to increase their spend under Trump, which also included Germany which I also mentioned in that same post, which, when last I checked... was in Europe.... 

Trying to nit pick or misrepresent what I am posting will not take away the fact that you are now lying and being childish because you are starting to look a bit stupid.

"But the running costs of NATO HQ is not what we are talking about when we talk about European countries not hitting the 2% pledge on defense spending"

"Turkey itself should be spending about $16 billion on defense spending to meet the 2% pledge"

"because the Germany are struggling to even hit 1.5% and it doesn't look like hitting 2% any time soon"

You are the one who keeps talking about this 2% pledge.... not me.....and this is precisely where your deceitful nature comes in ....because you know you are losing the discussion.

Show me anywhere, where I said that Trump got countries to commit to this 2% pledge you keep harping on about .....because I didn't.... not once .....I specifically said that Trump put them all on notice to increase their percentage to NATO.... and in Germany's case, they agreed to do so, by matching the 16% that the USA would be paying to NATO..... as well as Turkey, Canada and other NATO countries.

You keep banging on about this 2% pledge to try and move away from your own stupidity .....all I said was that Trump put all the NATO nations on notice, to pay over more money to NATO..... 

Just admit you got it wrong dude..... 

What.t.f. with Trompie heaping praise on the Hungarian dictator Victor Orbad ?

pair of clowns

Duh ..... yes, I said "not only".....and then straight after that I referred to the "actual NATO agreement"

You also included this specific comment below about Canada into your previous post which is also what I was responding to and why I included Canada and Turkey into my response

You referred to proposed amendments to the actual NATO agreement from October 2019, there is no actual indication anywhere that I can find (and I have looked) that such proposed amendments where agreed upon and implemented. Again if you have information that the proposals where passed I'd be more than happy to look at it.

Even if the amendments where passed, the data I provided which was from July 2023 year shows no increase in the spending rate, it remained largely steady from the middle of Obama's term through all of Trumps term. In 2021 or 2022 it actually appears to slow a slight decrease. 

The only reason I mentioned Canada is that the NATO data included them with European countries. If there a graph for just European nations on their own I would have used it instead but there wasn't. Up till this point we where exclusive talking about European countries in relation to defense spending and their commitments to hitting the 2% of defense spending on GDP.

So I included Canada and Turkey into my post because I was explaining to you how some countries did agree to increase their spend under Trump, which also included Germany which I also mentioned in that same post, which, when last I checked... was in Europe....

Trying to nit pick or misrepresent what I am posting will not take away the fact that you are now lying and being childish because you are starting to look a bit stupid.

Getting 2 countries out of 29 to spend what in the grand scheme of overall defense spending for NATO countries is a pretty trivial amount is hardly any thing to write home about. Did that fundamentally address the issue Trump had with other NATO members not spending enough. He even at first wanted other NATO countries to match the US's 4% of GDP spending on defense. You're talking an increase into the hundreds of billions.

Imagine you live in a apartment complex with 29 other people. Only yourself and 4 others are paying the their fair share of the electricity bill. The other 25 are negligent from anything between a thousand to a hundred dollars. They have promised to meet their fair share of the bill by increasing their spending on electricity over 8 years something they reached an agreement on with the person who previously lived in the apartment before you moved in. 2 years after moving into the apartment you've had enough of the other not paying their fair share so you demand they pay more and pay more quickly. After getting into a argument with the other 25 people, nothing changes, they simply tell you they are sticking to the original promise, but you tell all your friends that you got an agreement from the others to spend more. Over a year later 2 of the 25 people agree to increase spending of 25 dollars each on the apartment maintenance fee. The other people say they will consider paying more to the electricity bill in 2 years time but its unclear if they ever actual agree to do so. You then move out of the apartment. Apartment records from 3 and half years later indicate that after you left, that the rate at which the other people where increasing their spend on electricity slowed.

All your mates go around telling everyone how you great, respected and feared negotiator you are citing the time you sorted out the problem with the other people living in the apartment complex.

Everyone else is like...what???

Did I say you said Trump got countries to commit to the 2% pledge. I bring it up repeatedly because it given an indication on how much NATO countries are supposed to be spending on defense. It was kinda of the crux of Trumps issue with other NATO countries.

I specifically said that Trump put them all on notice to increase their percentage to NATO....

So did Bush and Obama, but putting people on notice doesn't mean a lot if they don't follow it up with actions.

and in Germany's case, they agreed to do so, by matching the 16% that the USA would be paying to NATO..... as well as Turkey, Canada and other NATO countries.

The German's considered a proposal to increase their spending to match the USA's contribution to NATO, I can find no evidence that the proposal was agreed to. Germany's military spending has been increasingly steadily since 2015 but I see no indication that the Germany has increased its spending significantly out of line to what was agreed to back in 2014 before Trump.

In fact some are suggesting Germany is in the process of taken measures that will inhibit European countries ability to meet the 2% pledge.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/germanys-financial-attack-nato

Canada and Turkey agreed to what amounted to a trivial increase in the grand scheme of NATO countries overall defense spending.

You keep banging on about this 2% pledge to try and move away from your own stupidity .....all I said was that Trump put all the NATO nations on notice, to pay over more money to NATO..... 

Just admit you got it wrong dude.....

Tell me how is putting NATO nations on notice any sort of achievement of any kind. The logic is insane. Just because (sorry Plum) someone says something doesn't mean it accomplishes anything. Biden has called out China on its human rights record. But who's going around bragging ah "Biden's put China on notice about human rights abuses" and think ah yeah that's great that issue is more or less sorted.

NATO where already put on notice by Bush and Obama. What's actually important is did Trump putting NATO nations on notice as you call it achieve any results of significance. And if your being honest with yourself you know the answer is no, it achieved trivial results that only the most biased of people could call significant. No amount of pretending a proposal is an actual commitment or spending increases that probably amount to less than 0.1% of total defense spending is going to convince anyone that Donald Trump achieved anything of note with NATO. 

In fact many believe Trumps actions did more to undermine NATO than strengthen it.

Here is a good read on what the head of NATO was doing while Trump was in power. Its actually quite funny in a way. Basically Stoltenberg played Trump like a fiddle, he even played along with Trumps demands on burden sharing and massaged his ego to keep Trump from pulling NATO apart and to keep him distracted and away from NATO's Russia policy which they thought he would undermine.

https://academic.oup.com/ia/article/97/6/1863/6384364

Donald Trump was the president of the USA from January 20th 2017 ..... till January 17th 2021.

This is the same website that your graph above came from.

NATA Allies Defense Expenditure

Look at "Table 1: Defense Expenditure" from all these NATO alliance members.

Look at their individual expenditure spend from 2013 - 2016 just before Trump became president

Then....look at their individual defense expenditure from 2017 - 2020 when Trump was president.

Then .... look at Table 3: Defense Expenditure as a share of GDP" 

Look at their individual % shares of their GDP that was paid from 2013 - 2016

Then ..... look at their individual % shares of their GDP that was paid from 2017 - 2020 when Trump was president.

Some examples .... look at these in countries in particular 

Albania

France

Hungary

Germany

Czech Republic

Norway

Poland

Romania

Slovak Republic

Slovenia

Spain

Turkey

United Kingdom

United States

The increase in spend is not just minimal..... in fact very far from it.

I could export the information into Excel and work out the averages for each term..... but when you look at these graphs... you simply don't even need to do that.... it is clear as mud when the increase in spend started.

If you want to argue that this sudden increased spending could have been for other reasons, even though it all ties in to exactly the time that Trump was president....go for it.... and if you want to argue that some figures are estimates, go for it, then use the 2017 - 2018 numbers..... but you just cannot deny an increase in spend whilst Trump was president and making these demands on the NATO allies

"The only reason I mentioned Canada is that the NATO data included them with European countries. If there a graph for just European nations on their own I would have used it instead but there wasn't"

Then don't blame me for responding with information on Canada, even if it isn't part of Europe.

Yes the CNN news "Mud Island" is very popular with its citizens.

Thus most UK citizens are flying with "Blinkers" on  and follow one of the most corrupt and leftwing media sources know to man.

Shame.

Donald Trump was the president of the USA from January 20th 2017 ..... till January 17th 2021.

I could export the information into Excel and work out the averages for each term..... but when you look at these graphs... you simply don't even need to do that.... it is clear as mud when the increase in spend started.

If you want to argue that this sudden increased spending could have been for other reasons, even though it all ties in to exactly the time that Trump was president....go for it.... and if you want to argue that some figures are estimates, go for it, then use the 2017 - 2018 numbers..... but you just cannot deny an increase in spend whilst Trump was president and making these demands on the NATO allies

The increase in spend was already factored in back in 2014. It was always meant to go up year on year. 

Look at graph 6. European and Canadian spending goes from approximately $255 billion at the start of 2015 to about $280 billion by the end of 2106 so an increase of around $23 billion. In Trumps term it goes from $278 at the start of 2017 to about $323 billion at the end of 2020 a rise of about $45 billion. Divided by the number of years the rate of spending is pretty much the same.

BB

I got through half of that list of CNN and it was 100% BS and lies.    Let me explain  something  to you.   When on anything  you negotiate with  somebody on anything  it is better to be friendly rather than agonistic.      The idea that leaders of countries should be otherwise is BS.   Trump acted against Russia when it was needed.   Trump stopped completion of the Nordstream pipeline and when Biden took over the pipeline was completed,    He scrapped the Nuclear armaments treaty with Russia because they were cheating on it.

When Trump was President the world situation was stable - what happened since Biden took over?   Wars and desertion of former US Allies joining BRICS followed.   The world at present is unstable and the main reason goes back to a weakling as US President.   Biden's only achievement in that regard was farting before royalty - so badly that his wife was invited to attend the crowning  of King Charles.   

I can comment on each of the CNN allegations and  the comments will be repetative.    So lets take the alleged hacking  of the DNC computers in the 2016 election.   The DNC claimed their computers were hacked by the Russians - but never called in the FBI to confirm the hacking and trace the hackers.   Instead they called in a Ukrainian firm  using Crowdstrike to deal with the issue.    Fact is subsequent things the DNC claimed was hacked was in the USA media and basically covered things like opinion poll results.    The DNC had a fit when Trump asked  Zelenskyy in 2019 about the usage of crowdstrike because it would comnfrim their BS.   

Now about the so-called Ruisan bounty claims mentioned three times.    That BS was first alleged in the  New York Times, CNN and MSNBC.   There were aside from USA soldiers from four other countries in Afghanistan - namely the UK, Italy, The Netherlands and Germany.    All four denied the claims in the media and the thing died down as BS.    The problem also was that during the period of a year during which their was negotiations between the Taliban and Trump there was not a single US or allied soldier killed in  Afghanistan  so that was treble BS .    

CNN lied for years about Trump and they started badly losing viewership.as a result.   They were even forced to fire their principal workers because they were part and parcel of the lies.                          .   .                       .   

What list??

You do so much ducking, diving & lying ............ confusing Arthur with Martha

BB

That CNN BS lies you published above.    Are you now afraid of quoting  l;es on site because you will be exposed as a liar yourself?

12th of July 2018 NATO Headquarters Brussels.

A concerned General Stoltenberg hurriedly enters a large private conference room, within it are the heads of all European NATO states and President Justin Tradeau of Canada.

Stoltenberg: Okay guys, quiet down please....quiet down. Guys come on settle down, this is urgent.

A general hush comes over the chamber.

Stoltenberg: Okay guys as you're no are doubt aware Trump is making one hell of an unholy mess out front.

A collective irritated groan can be hard across the chamber.

Stoltenberg: I know, I know but he's really not going let this go. He wants you all to stump up some serious extra cash on defense.

Sanchez: Why are going over this again, we already had an agreement about funding with Obama and I'll be tickled pink if you think I'm going to give into that ignorant idiot Oompa Loompa.

Hear hear comes the collective refrain as if its the House of Commons.

Stoltenberg: Ah come on lads I know he's a clown but he does kinda have a point, even with your previously agreed too commitments NATO could always do with a bit more funding.

Hushed annoyed mummers can be heard.

Stoltenberg: Britain what about you.

May: Well Jen, I'd love too but I kinda wrecked our economy with Brexit so I don't have the fiscal space.

Stoltenberg: Okay what about you France.

Macron: I am French, I do French things.

Stoltenberg: Which is?

Macron:  Shrugs shoulders

Much eye rolling occurs across the chamber.

Stoltenberg:  Okay moving on...Angela maybe Germany would consid...

Merkel: Nein

Stoltenberg: But perhaps as the biggest...

Merkel: Nein

Stoltenberg: But....

Merkel: I said NEIN!

Stoltenberg: Alright...alright, Jesus.

Stoltenberg: Look there is got to be some of you who can....wait a second...Viktor who you on the phone too?...and why is it on speaker mode?. Are you on to Putin again!!!. TURN THAT OFF NOW!

Orban sheepishly switches his phone off. In the background with a sly smile Erdogan quickly puts his mobile out of sight.

Stoltenberg: For crying out loud. Lads this serious. Surely someone of you can afford to pay more. Poland what about you?

Before Duda can speak...an Italian voice is heard.

Conte: Sorry to interrupt Jen, but I've spoken to the rest of the chamber in the background here and I think I can save us all a bit of time by speaking for all of us.

Stoltenberg: You found some countries willing to increase their defense spending?

Conte: No we just want you to tell Trump to f**k off.

Great howls of approving laughter and giggling flood the chamber in addition to much table thumping occur.

Stoltenberg becomes visibly red and enraged and in a fit of rage flips over his table.

A visibly stunned chamber instantly quietens down.

Stoltenberg: (in agitated and scolding voice) . Guys this is deadly serious. Trump is threatening to pull out of NATO. The man's an absolute wrecking ball. He's just dumb and crazy enough that he might actually do it, and then where will you be...paying for the entirety of your own defense, that's where!...is that what you want!!!

Such silence filled the chamber you could hear a pin drop.

Stoltenberg: (in a somewhat exasperated tone ) Guys looks, I understand you don't have the money to pony up and I know giving into a man so obnoxious is pretty unpalatable but we gotta give the guy a win somewhere. Anything just to get him to calm down and stop trashing the place. So think guys, think really careful we gotta come up with something.

Much hushed and hurried discussion goes on in the chamber but the minutes tick buy without anyone speaking up.

Stoltenberg: President Trudeau, did you say something. Speak up please.

Tradeau: Oh em...(pointing to his foot) I'm wearing nice socks. Look they have a little maple leaf on them.

Stoltenberg: Thanks Justin...that's very helpful. (for f**ks sake he mumbles in quiet voice)

Another few moments pass, before a thought pops in Stoltenberg pops into his mind...he thinks "nay that couldn't possible work"...but thinking on it a bit more a grin starts to develop on his face but he immediately hides it.

Stoltenberg: Say guys, what where you together planning on increasing defense spending by next year anyway.

Conte: Well just doing a very brief checking of the sums. Around about $11.5 billion dollars next year, give or take a few million. Why?

Stotlenberg: Well, I'm thinking we could just tell Trump you have agreed to increase your defense spending by $11.5 billion and tell him that's he responsible for it.

Loud delirious and derisive laughter fill the chamber that continues for what seemed like an entirety but eventually subsides though some struggle to contain the giggles.

Macron: Look I know Trump is stupid.... but he's not that stupid,

Marcon and the chamber erupt into laughter once more.

Stoltenberg stares back silently, pokerfaced.

Eventually the laughter subsides.

Macron: I mean come on, surely he's not that stupid.

Again laughter rings out but a bit less than before.

Stoltenberg remains emotionless.

But gradually as the laughter subsides everyone finds themselves looking at each in other in silence as a collective epiphany hits every person in the chamber. And then at once they all turn to face Stoltenberg.

Stoltenberg cracks the faintest of smiles and says, "Shall we give it a go lads?"

15 minutes later:

Stoltenberg: President Trump never in all my years have I meet such a capable negotiator, you might quite possibly be the greatest negotiator who has ever graced these halls. I mean the vision, the clarity of purpose, extremely tough yet fair, but above all the sheer genius of your arguments, their utterly irrefutable.

Trump: Thank you, thank you, very kind of you General. I have to say you really are top top General, one of the best I've ever met. In fact I've never met a man who understands the military as well as you do...other than myself, because I know a lot about the military and windmills. But tell me have those free riders agreed to my demands.

Stoltenberg:  Yes Mr President, when I stressed how serious you where about pulling out of NATO and the validity of your arguments they couldn't get the cheque book out quickly enough. I thought we might get an extra billion out of them, two at most, but can you believe this, their going stump up an extra $11.5 billion. All down to your extraordinary negotiating skills.

Trump: Well you see Jen,I can call you Jen right... that's what a great business man like me can achieve. Have you ever watched me on the apprentice? I was really good on that. But I have to say sometimes I surprise even myself with how good I am.

30 minutes later.

Tump addresses the world media:

Trump: Ladies and gentlemen, Its I...Donald J Trump..the greatest President since Abe Linocln... and I would like to announce the following... I have made NATO great again.

Meanwhile back in the private conference room

Everyone in the entire stares at the screen and collectively they all speak the very same words "No f**king way!" in stunned disbelief!

Soltenberg, Smiling to himself thinks back to the episode of the Simpson when Springfield gets a monorail and Lenord Nimoy's line..."my work here is done!"

Meanwhile back in America: Trump supporters hearing Trumps announcement on TV start chanting USA, USA. Finally they think Trump has got NATO sorted, he made NATO great again.

Also Trump supporters in 2022: It's NATO's fault that Russian invaded Ukraine!

That CNN BS lies you published above.    Are you now afraid of quoting  l;es on site because you will be exposed as a liar yourself?

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/17/politics/trump-soft-on-russia/index.html

All lies ????

Yes they were all lies.    Mueller could find no evidence of Russian collusion by Trump and the FIC court found out that the FBI was involved in illegally getting  permission from the Court to spy on the trump election in 2020 - using  the famous Steele Dossier for the purpose.    The relevant Inspector General found that it was based on lies.    The Durham Report indicates that  the whole collusion story was a lie concocted by Hilary Clinton and her election campaign, the  DNC  and the Obama Administration - using the FBI and CIA for the purpose.

By the way the FIC court recently ruled that the FBI spied on 278 000 US citizens opposed to the Biden Regime - they must by now be severely irritated by the political usage of the FBI to undermine democracy.   

The fact is the above came out in Senate and House hearings under oath where the FBI and the Justice department was grilled by the Republican Members of Congress on issues relating to the  above.   It was admitted in questioni.ng and the fact is the Justice Department will not act against people if they lie to Congress. under oath- watch the following video on one of the issues raised:-

https://www.google.com/search?q=senator+hawley%27s+videos+-+wray+interviews&sca_esv=601608324&rlz=1C1YTUH_enZA1068ZA1070&sxsrf=ACQVn09UIwl_M01A_NkScUtnanT8OnVLBg%3A1706233390807&ei=Lg6zZdzpMLqbhbIP7_uDyAg&oq=senator+hawley+videos&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiFXNlbmF0b3IgaGF3bGV5IHZpZGVvcyoCCAEyBxAjGLADGCcyBxAjGLADGCcyChAAGEcY1gQYsAMyChAAGEcY1gQYsAMyChAAGEcY1gQYsAMyChAAGEcY1gQYsANI8k5QAFgAcAF4AZABAJgBAKABAKoBALgBAcgBAOIDBBgAIEGIBgGQBgY&sclient=gws-wiz-serp#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:0267507a,vid:SWmDQPGEbnc,st:0

Also learn from the following  video about how the USA has become a slav e country a gain under Biden.   Watch it and comment on whether what is discuss here is acceptable to you lot.   

google.com/search?q=senator+hawley+videos&rlz=1C1YTUH_enZA1068ZA1070&oq=&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCQgGEC

    .           

Stav

I know you ae always write BS  propaganda on site and the above story takes the cake about that verbal discussion in 2018 in the NA TO Headquarters takes the cake.   Where did you get those minutes from?   The Guardian again?      

In any event Trump told the NATO leaders clearly they are not even remotely contributing to the defense budgets at 3% of GDP that was required in terms of the original NATO membership agreement.     If they are not prepared to contribute that percentage he will withdraw a percentage of the US Army stationed in Europe to the USA.    They promised him to meet that target and that was it.    

The EU armed forces are totally inadequate and the lies used are the fear that Russia will attack them - which is poor propaganda BS without any facts whatsoever.   .           

Let’s accept your argument Stav and say 2017 was baked in. The increase by 2020 over 2017 remains the largest 3 year increase going all the way back to 1989. And given that there were large increases in the prior 3 years makes that even more impressive. 

In fact that increase is larger than the 3 year period from 2020 through 2023 which includes the effects of the Ukraine war.

Would that have happened if Trump hadn’t intervened ….I doubt it

"Let’s accept your argument Stav and say 2017 was baked in. The increase by 2020 over 2017 remains the largest 3 year increase

100%, which is what I meant about doing the averages, but one does not even need to do that, because the increased numbers are just that obvious.

"In fact that increase is larger than the 3 year period from 2020 through 2023 which includes the effects of the Ukraine war. "

We all know that the Ukraine war had a huge effect on how the NATO allies increased their defense expenditure with NATO, which then makes the other numbers I am referring to, even more impressive.

Maybe not all of this increased spending had everything to do with Trump, but to sit here and say he never had an impact on the increased NATO expenditure spend... is just bollocks.

"So one last final time the narrative that Trump got Europe to spend more on NATO is false. At the very most he had a minor effect on it and at that came no where close to making European NATO hit its 2% commitment"

Not one single person, myself included.... ever stated, inferred or implied that Trump got European NATO to hit it's 2% commitment.... not once ever. 

What was said very clearly in this post, by myself, was that Trump put pressure on the NATO allies to increase their percentage spend to NATO....simple .....and that cannot be made anymore clearer... and according to the graphs from the official NATO website... this indeed happened whilst Trump was in office.

"I'm not saying Trump got absolutely nothing out of the other NATO countries"

Yes... actually you are ... and yes you already did.... so make up your mind dude

"Its true to say Trump made a bigger deal about it but he still achieved exactly jack shit"

"Jack shit a turn of phrase but when the only evidence you have possibly indicates a spending increase of less than something around  0.002%  I think its pretty apt"

That's not apt at all.... not even close .....and to be fair to you, afterwards you did mention "not significant", but again you only did that after your statement on Trump's initial input on this topic was disputed.

Those graphs illustrate nowhere near just a 0.002% increase in spend and you know it.

Anyway, quite clearly we are not going to convince each other of anything else on this issue, and we will continue to have our own opinions on this topic... so thanks for the debate

Your problem Stav is a common one with respect to Trump….you think emotionally. So does the likes of HasBeen who sees him as a Messiah. 

Trump is a reasonably bright man. I doubt he would be much good at calculus, but he has good social intelligence.

One of his premises is politicians, thinking the US has endless resources, give away the country. And he’s right. The US should never be carrying 70% of the NATO burden. 

So he set about trying to tilt the balance, with respect to NATO and China, but you would swear that was treason from the response. He had an important effect in both instances.

Seriously, when your major partner, who is overspending to help you makes it clear you have to do better, do you you not respond? Of course you do, and it’s clear in the numbers.

Chat bot alert!!!

ccl