Syrian Kurds are close to declaring Independence

#529
#529
BigOrangeD said:
Trump is doing what Libs have been wanting. Unfortunately it's Trump doing it and not Obummer so Libs are mad along with some Neocons.
Click to expand...


Your viewpoint is interesting considering it is counter to just about every Republican. But, yeah "it's what the Libs want so..."

Whose opinion do think you are actually swaying here?

At least he's calling it what it is
.. "An attack on the Kurds".
 
#539
#539
Mick said:
It's your turn to do the research. After all they are your questions.
Click to expand...

You brought it up, biscuit. That Turkish number has been reported as being higher, so I took the lowest estimate I've seen so far.
 
#540
#540
Grand Vol said:
You brought it up, biscuit. That Turkish number has been reported as being higher, so I took the lowest estimate I've seen so far.
Click to expand...
No I asked the question of how many they have and had to answer it myself. How many they have on the border is your question.
 
#541
#541
Prediction now that Paul Ryan is on the board at Fox News...OANN will replace it within 2 years as prominent right wing network news
 
#546
#546
BigOrangeD said:
Trump is doing what Libs have been wanting. Unfortunately it's Trump doing it and not Obummer so Libs are mad along with some Neocons.
Click to expand...



It is not NEARLY that simple, and you know it. Plenty of Republicans are unhappy with the way he did this, as well.

For the record, my gripe is not that he withdrew troops. I am for that in the big picture, too. But doing it on a whim, in such a manner as to capture everyone by surprise so that people suddenly have to leave as war refugees, leaving the Kurds unprepared to defend themselves from an invasion, creating an opportuniy for ISIS fighters to be released or easily escape and merge into the background, and not consulting with anyone at all beforehand, was just stupid. Plenty of Republicans feel the same way.
 
#547
#547
VolnJC said:
I know we pay 75% of the expenses and one of 3 who actually fund our military at 2% gdp. Actually 4.5% So 26 countries aren't abiding by the treaty
Click to expand...

Those numbers are false. This is how it actually works. NATO’s “common funding” budget, the part of the alliance budget administered by its international civilian and military staff, is divided into three main categories:

• Civil Budget
• Military Budget

• NATO Security Investment Programme (for capital expenditures)

As NATO explains, “These are the only funds where NATO authorities identify the requirements and set the priorities in line with overarching Alliance objectives and priorities.”

Allies provide money for these three budget categories according to a two-year cost-sharing formula, based on each ally’s gross national income, meaning the wealthier members pay a proportionally bigger share.

According to the formula for 2016 and 2017 — the United States pays 22.14 percent (rounded to two decimal places; NATO is even more specific on its website). Germany, which has been castigated by Trump, is the next biggest contributor, paying 14.65 percent, followed by France, which pays 10.63 percent, and the United Kingdom, which pays 9.85 percent.

For 2017, NATO’s total budget is roughly €2.18 billion, or $2.44 billion, divided as follows:

• Civil Budget: €234.4 million, or $262 million

• Military Budget: €1.29 billion, or $1.44 billion

• NATO Security Investment Programme: maximum of €655 million or $734 million

From here on, let’s keep the figures in U.S. dollars, just so it’s easier to follow in Washington.

According to the cost-sharing formula, the approximate total share of the wealthiest major allies (presuming NATO spends the maximum allowed on capital investments) for 2017 is:

• U.S. $540.32 million

• Germany $357.46 million

• France $259.46 million

• U.K. $240.3 million

On a per capita basis, that means Americans are paying far less than Germans, roughly $1.68 per person for the 2017 NATO budget. On a per capita basis, Germans are paying more than 2.5 times as much: $4.39 per person. (By this same math, the French are paying $3.88 per person, and Britons $3.69 per person.)

the U.S. spends far more than 2 percent of GDP on its own military is a sovereign decision that reflects its unique role as the world’s only superpower.

“It’s also about the US’s global reach and global responsibilities,” the NATO official said. “Because the U.S. has this global reach and global responsibility then of course the military defense expenditures are going to be very different from a country like Slovenia or Luxembourg.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mick and Rifleman
#548
#548
carlos86 said:
Those numbers are false. This is how it actually works. NATO’s “common funding” budget, the part of the alliance budget administered by its international civilian and military staff, is divided into three main categories:

• Civil Budget
• Military Budget

• NATO Security Investment Programme (for capital expenditures)

As NATO explains, “These are the only funds where NATO authorities identify the requirements and set the priorities in line with overarching Alliance objectives and priorities.”

Allies provide money for these three budget categories according to a two-year cost-sharing formula, based on each ally’s gross national income, meaning the wealthier members pay a proportionally bigger share.

According to the formula for 2016 and 2017 — the United States pays 22.14 percent (rounded to two decimal places; NATO is even more specific on its website). Germany, which has been castigated by Trump, is the next biggest contributor, paying 14.65 percent, followed by France, which pays 10.63 percent, and the United Kingdom, which pays 9.85 percent.

For 2017, NATO’s total budget is roughly €2.18 billion, or $2.44 billion, divided as follows:

• Civil Budget: €234.4 million, or $262 million

• Military Budget: €1.29 billion, or $1.44 billion

• NATO Security Investment Programme: maximum of €655 million or $734 million

From here on, let’s keep the figures in U.S. dollars, just so it’s easier to follow in Washington.

According to the cost-sharing formula, the approximate total share of the wealthiest major allies (presuming NATO spends the maximum allowed on capital investments) for 2017 is:

• U.S. $540.32 million

• Germany $357.46 million

• France $259.46 million

• U.K. $240.3 million

On a per capita basis, that means Americans are paying far less than Germans, roughly $1.68 per person for the 2017 NATO budget. On a per capita basis, Germans are paying more than 2.5 times as much: $4.39 per person. (By this same math, the French are paying $3.88 per person, and Britons $3.69 per person.)

the U.S. spends far more than 2 percent of GDP on its own military is a sovereign decision that reflects its unique role as the world’s only superpower.

“It’s also about the US’s global reach and global responsibilities,” the NATO official said. “Because the U.S. has this global reach and global responsibility then of course the military defense expenditures are going to be very different from a country like Slovenia or Luxembourg.”
Click to expand...
I got them from here We Need NATO Now More Than Ever
20191010_114132.jpg
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top