Discussion about this post

User's avatar
RetiredF4's avatar

This discussion about spending xxx% of GDP is the hype since Donald The Trump started his first election campaign and has dominated the press and the political rethoric since then. Is it usefull? Let's remember, it once started with providing military capabilities within a given alert time, and this contribution was regulary checked by NATO teams.

Now it is basically about spending money, wether it is for getting a new pavement in front of a military installation or money for public work or buy modern fighters, everything out of the budget counts, the US probably financed its Indycar adventure out of the defence budget. Let me stay with the US spending for a moment to make things clear, and my intention is not to devalue such spending. It will be interesting though how much of the US spending is out of NATO area of responsibility, in the Pacific and Indian ocean, all the aircraft carriers, the subs, the multiple US military bases around the globe, how much is NATO interest and how much is USA interest alone? In what areas would NATO had a say , and which are and would stay SECRET NO FOREIGN? How much of these large US assets is earmarked for NATO assignment or intended and useful for assignment in a NATO / Russia conflict?

Since Trump is ruling not only the White House but all governing agencies by the mood with which he comes out of bed in the morning, what leverage does this vast amount of US spending really carry in preventing a war in NATO territory? I haven't seen any statistic yet to look behind that money trap.

Or is it all about spending as much as possible and use the lump of it to buy American produced gadgets?

Expand full comment
AASS's avatar

Thanks, Ryan.

Expand full comment
18 more comments...

No posts