NATO

[Lord Protector]

 

Quote

 

Germans want Donald Trump to pull US troops out of Germany, poll finds

US president has said American military spending to protect Europe is not sustainable

 

Germans would actually welcome the withdrawal of American troops stationed in their country, a new poll has found – as Donald Trump threatens to pull the plug on military support.

The finding comes on the first day of a Nato summit in which the US president is urging Europe to spend more on defence if it wants to continue to receive American military protection.

But far from being seen as a threat, a YouGov poll for the dpa news agency found that more Germans would welcome the departure of the 35,000-strong American force than would oppose it. 42 per cent said they supported withdrawal while just 37 per cent wanted the soldiers to stay, with 21 per cent undecided. 

Last month the US media reported that the US government was in the process of assessing the cost of keeping troops in Germany ahead of a possible withdrawal, citing Pentagon sources. But the policy of actually pulling out of the country has not actually reached the negotiating table in his week’s Brussels summit and is not expected to be discussed as a possibility – for now. The cause of US withdrawal enjoys significant support from across the political spectrum in Germany but is particularly strong with the supporters of certain parties.

Voters for the left-wing Die Linke are particularly in favour of withdrawal, with 67 per cent backing it, as are supporters of the far-right AfD, on 55 per cent. Greens also back withdrawal by 48 per cent.

Less supportive of withdrawal are voters for the centre-right CDU, at 35 per cent, the SPD at 42 per cent, and the FDP at 37 per cent.

The same poll also found significant opposition to militarism in general in the country. Just 15 per cent of all Germans agree with Angela Merkel that the country should increase its military spending to 2 per cent of GDP by 2024, with 36 per cent saying the country's already spends too much on its military.

Mr Trump warned Angela Merkel and other European leaders in leaked letters last month that there was “growing frustration in the United States that some allies have not stepped up as promised” on defence spending.

“The United States continues to devote more resources to the defence of Europe when the Continent’s economy, including Germany’s, are doing well and security challenges abound. This is no longer sustainable for us,” he said.

 

 

Edited July 12, 2018 by slow

[Lord Protector]

 

Quote

 

Time for a Mercy Killing at NATO

by David Stockman Posted on July 12, 2018

The Great Disrupter was in fine fettle Wednesday. First he scolded Germany for investing in a natural gas pipeline from Russia that makes all the sense in the world and then blasted it for not spending money on defense it doesn’t need.

Well, I have to say, I think it’s very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia, where you’re supposed to be guarding against Russia, and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia……On top of that, Germany is just paying a little bit over 1 percent, whereas the United States, in actual numbers, is paying 4.2 percent of a much larger GDP. So I think that’s inappropriate also. You know, we’re protecting Germany, we’re protecting France. We’re protecting everybody. And yet we’re paying a lot of money to protect.

But not to worry. The talking heads of bubblevision say today’s market dip is the pause which refreshes. It’s still "risk-on" because by their lights when push comes to shove no mere politician – including the Donald – is going to do anything that the boys and girls on Wall Street might find troubling.

They apparently don’t dare – as was well and truly proven in late September 2008. When the remnants of principled Republicans voted down the TARP bailout of Wall Street, the Dow instantly plunged by 7% or $1.2 trillion, which would be equivalent to a 1700 point meltdown at today’s index level.

Of course, that particular hissy fit brought the GOP pols scampering back to the House floor. Having gotten their heads right in the interim, they marched back up the hill to approve George Bush’s $700 billion package of crony capitalist loot.

There hasn’t been even a close call since then. The only thing the gamblers really fear, apparently, is that a central banker might look at them cross-eyed. But as we told CNBC viewers yesterday, no central banker has the backbone to even wrinkle his brow in the direction of Wall Street.

We also told them that a bone-crushing trade war is coming. That’s because the Donald has no idea what he’s doing and is triggering an avalanche of bouncing billiard balls on the $17 trillion global trade table that is too complex and too interactive to even fathom and which, therefore, will be nigh impossible to stop.

Needless to say, our bubble vision hosts were having none of it. Since the Russell 2000 – the index of America’s home-based small and midsized companies – hit an all-time record yesterday, albeit at 90X its meager earnings, they averred the market is attesting that no serious trouble looms.

Really, that’s exactly what they said, as per the attached clip.

Likewise, when we mentioned 43-years of continuous and growing US current account deficits, Mike Santoli, a casino croupier if there ever was one, suggested there is nothing to see here, implying that viewers should move along toward the buy key on their trade stations.

After all, America’s huge current account deficits – $7 trillion in the last 15 years alone – are allegedly just the accounting record of happy campers all around the world cheerfully sending their savings to America so that we can buy their goods and live high on the hog.

Besides, Santoli intoned, what’s the "emergency" if it’s been going on for 43 years?

Which, of course, is exactly what the 43-year smoker said right before he was felled by lung cancer.

What we are saying is that its dangerous out there because the conventional wisdom has incorporated big memes and postulates that are fundamentally untrue.

In this particular case, for crying out loud, the world is not sending the US its "savings".

To the contrary, other central banks have spent 3o years pumping-up their own fiat monies in order to scoop-up unwanted US dollars, thereby sequestering America’s prodigious debt emissions in the vaults of foreign central banks. And that was done, of course, to suppress their own exchange rates and boost export industries so that they could sell America even more goods on credit.

This is sustainable? You can borrow your way to everlasting prosperity?

We will have much more to say on this topic in the future because in his blunderbuss manner, the Donald is finally bringing it all to a head. Not withstanding that a tariff war is exactly the wrong solution, Trump is actually asking the right question: To wit, how in the world can the US still be running an $800 billion trade deficit long after the world economy was allegedly fixed by ZIRP and QE?

The fact is, the US’ massively imbalanced trade accounts are the flip-side of the very hollowed out economy in Flyover America that put the Donald in the Oval Office.

And yet establishment groupthink doggedly insists that the richest big country in the world can borrow indefinitely from the mostly poorer ranks elsewhere on the planet, and that sooner or later the Donald will flinch from his quest to fix the problem because Wall Street will take him to the woodshed if he doesn’t.

We’d call that head-in-the-sand insouciance, and suggest it is exactly reason why the coming correction will be so tumultuous. And the comforting theory that the Donald is all bark and no bite on trade is not the end of the complacency, either.

Both ends of the Acela Corridor, in fact, are riven with dangerous groupthink that is utterly detached from reality.

With that in mind, the topic at hand is another of these groupthink falsehoods and provides another angle on why the current third great central bank fostered financial bubble of this century is fixing to burst.

Here’s the money quote from Trump’s harangue at NATO General Secretary Stoltenberg:

Trump: ….. I don’t know what you can do about it now, but it certainly doesn’t seem to make sense that they paid billions of dollars to Russia and now we have to defend them against Russia.”

Well, here’s a news flash for the Donald: You don’t need to your budget-busting $716 billion defense budget to defend Germany from Russia because there is absolutely no reason to believe the latter wants to attack Germany or any other country in Europe.

Indeed, the very idea is just plain madness – yet the quest for ever more funding for the Warfare State is exactly what is helping to bring-on a thundering crisis in the bond pits just ahead.

To the contrary, what Trump should have said was well capsulized by Bruce Fein in a recent post:

……. President Donald Trump should tell the other 28 other members what Congressman John Randolph of Virginia told Greek proponents of American military assistance during their war of independence against the Ottoman Empire: “Let us say to those seven millions of Greeks, ‘We defended ourselves, when we were but three millions against a Power, in comparison to which the Turk is a lamb. Go and do thou likewise.’”

Now that’s exactly right. As shown by the table below, the NATO-28 (excluding the US) are now actually spending $250 billion per year on defense (2017). That’s 4X Russia’s entire military budget of $61 billion.

So what is NATO doing with all those tens of billions that wouldn’t keep the Russkies at bay – even if they had aggressive intentions, which by the record they most surely do not?

Likewise, the GDP of Russia is but $1.4 trillion compared to $18 trillion for the NATO-28. So is Cool Hand Vlad so completely foolish and reckless as to think that he could invade and occupy territories that have an economy 13X biggerthan that of Russia?

Actually, it’s far more ludicrous than that. As we have often pointed out, Russia is a giant hydrocarbon province attached to some wheat fields, timber lands and mineral deposits – all dependent upon an aging work force afflicted with an undue fondness for Vodka etc.

What that means is that Russia must export its commodities big time or die. In fact, during 2017 Russian exports totaled $357 billion or 26% of its GDP. And 55% or nearly $200 billion went to Europe!

Moreover, when you breakdown Russian exports it is plain to see that the industrial maw of Europe is the port of first call for its vast tonnages of exported commodities. These included $173 billion of oil and gas and $60 billion of iron, steel, aluminum, precious metals, forest products, fertilizers, grains and copper, among others.

Finally, the table on defense spending by country below speaks for itself as to the purported Russian threat. If the German government really feared that Russian tanks would be soon rolling through the Brandenburg Gates, it would have more than 20 operational tanks, and it would spend far more than $40.6 billion or 1.2% of GDP to defend itself.

And the same is even more true of the former Warsaw pact countries that are located cheek-by-jowl on Russia’s border. Yet Romania spends the tiny sum of $2.8 billion or 1.2% of GDP on its military, while the figure for Hungary, which learned all about Soviet-style invasion in 1956, spends only $1.2 billion or barely 1.0% of GDP. And besides that, its intrepid leader, Viktor Orban, doesn’t even support NATO’s ridiculous sanctions on Putin’s cronies and allies.

And as for the allegedly threatened Baltic states, their combined defense budgets are less than $1.5 billion, representing a miniscule 1.7% of combined GDP; and Bulgaria, fast upon the Russian Lake called the Black Sea, spends only $660 million or 1.4% of its GDP.

In short, European policy action on the defense spending front trumps all the hot air that wafts from NATO’s spanking new Brussels headquarters. Their governments and parliaments positively do not think they are threatened by the Russian Bear because they aren’t.

What would help alot, therefore, is for the Great Disrupter to forget about his unfortunate infatuation with the idea that bigger is always better, and do what no other American politician in thrall to the Warfare State has been unable to do since 1991 when the Soviet Union slithered off the pages of history.

That is, declare "mission accomplished" with respect to NATO and disband it forthwith.

You could call it a Mercy Killing, and yet a couple more NATO summits like this one, and the Europeans themselves may well start begging for exactly that.

David Stockman was a two-term Congressman from Michigan. He was also the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan. After leaving the White House, Stockman had a 20-year career on Wall Street.

 

 

Edited July 12, 2018 by slow

[MancMellow]

Znaš koliko je stara ta rasprava? Preko 100 godina. 

[Lord Protector]

57 minutes ago, MancMellow said:

Znaš koliko je stara ta rasprava? Preko 100 godina. 

 

Da, ali to više nije samo rasprava,  postaje realna politička izglednost i dnevna politika... nikad to nije bilo na prvim stranicama, u ovakvom obliku. Ovo je sada realpolitika.

Meni je ovde jedna stvar zanimljiva, a to je novo pozicioniranje američkog establišmenta, posebno onog desnog, kako su locirali problem i kako počinju stvar da rešavaju, bez pardona i uvijanja. Neko je u Trampovom okruženju pravilno shvatio da je sadašnja struktura NATO-a preskupa i beskorisna i da ne služi američkim interesima i da je potrebna temeljna rekonstrukcija. Ovo što Tramp priča nije lupetanje već realnost, i ona je grubo saopštena u vidu poruke Urbi et Orbi, pre svega zapadnim partnerima i Rusiji. 

Ja bih voleo da dođe do nekog dogovora između Vašingtona i Moskve, ( to bi za nas bilo najbolje rešenje, bili bi deo paketa dogovora), samo mislim da je mala verovatnoća da dođe do njega jer  takav dogovor bi podrazumevao antikinesko angažovanje Moskve, a to je u ovom trenutku nemoguće jer je upravo Kina spasila Rusiju u zadnjih nekoliko godina od ekonomskih sankcija i finansijskog sloma. Pored toga Rusija i Kina imaju velike dilove i projekte i niko takve dogovore ne bi kvario pri zdravoj pameti, posebno ne Putin i njegova ekipa oportunista. Rusija se okrenula istoku i tamo će ostati neko vreme u pokušaju da maksimizuje profit. Uostalom i Amerika se okreće Aziji i Pacifiku kao prvorazrednom području. I jedni i drugi shvataju da Evropa više nije vredna ovolikog političkog i ekonomskog angažovanja.  To izgleda samo Evropi nije jasno.

Problem je što Amerika faktički nema šta da ponudi Rusiji u takvoj igri, i tu je najveći problem  onog dela američkog establišmenta koji bi rado video Moskvu u antikineskom taboru. Pored toga, sa ruske strane nema poverenja, iskustvo u zadnjih 25 godina pokazuje da je skoro svaki dil od strane Amerikanaca prekršen i da su gledali na sve moguće načine da ponize Rusiju i ne uvaže njene legitimne interese. Ako nema poverenja nema ni dugoročnih alijansi, ni dilova.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2018 by slow

[MancMellow]

Ne mogu sad duže, ali ključno, apsolutno ključno pitanje nije čak ni opstanak NATO. Ključno pitanje je kako se Amerika postavlja u prostoru između Rusije i Nemačke. 

[Lord Protector]

13 minutes ago, MancMellow said:

Ne mogu sad duže, ali ključno, apsolutno ključno pitanje nije čak ni opstanak NATO. Ključno pitanje je kako se Amerika postavlja u prostoru između Rusije i Nemačke. 

 

To je bilo ključno pitanje 20 veka, za 21 su se kandidovale nove teme...

 

Za Trampovo okruženje to uopšte nije ključan problem, za njih je ta stvar za red veličine manja u odnosu na dva ključna globalna problema koje mogu da poremete američku globalnu dominaciju: kineska ekonomska ekspanzija i radikalna islamska ekspanzija. 

Oni bi najradije videli Nemačku i Rusiju zajedno sa Amerikom u hrišćanskom/zapadnom bloku zemalja kako bi očuvali globalnu dominaciju zapadne ekonomije i civilizacije. Ovde pod Zapadom mislim i na Rusiju, jer je tako u tim krugovima i vide.

Edited July 12, 2018 by slow

[MancMellow]

2 minutes ago, slow said:

 

To je bilo ključno pitanje 20 veka, za 21 su se kandidovale nove teme...

 

Za Trampovo okruženje to uopšte nije ključan problem, za njih je ta stvar za red veličine manja u odnosu na dva ključna globalna problema koje mogu da poremete američku globalnu dominaciju: kineska ekonomska ekspanzija i radikalna islamska ekspanzija. 

Oni bi najradije videli Nemačku i Rusiju zajedno sa Amerikom u hrišćanskom/zapadnom bloku zemalja kako bi očuvali globalnu dominaciju zapadne ekonomije i civilizacije. Ovde pod Zapadom mislim i na Rusiju, jer je tako u tim krugovima i vide.

Ne, to je problem koji oni hoće da reše pre nego što pređu na drugo tj ono što vide važnijim. Ali američka politika je komplikovana i u njoj ima mnogo struja. I ta raznovrsnost je u stvari opasnost po svet. Ne zato što namerno rade nešto sve vreme uz neki hive-mind, nego upravo zato što na izborima genuinely može da pobedi ova ili ona struja i onda se stvari menjaju. Nije čak ni bitno, pri tom što možda Tramp pobedi 2020. Nije bitno čak ni to što ja lično ne verujem da bi recimo Bernie suštinski vodio drugačiju politiku prema Kini samo što bi mnogo lepše izgledala. Bitno je to što - sa kim se Putin dogovara? Ili bilo ko? To je osnovni razlog zašto NATO garantuje stabilnost zapadnom svetu - zato što stvara predvidljivost. One cifre budžeta su delom besmislene. Koliki deo tog američkog budžeta uopšte ide na bilo šta što ima veze sa Evropom? Drugim rečima tu ima i demoagogije, tj spoljna politika kao deo unutrašnje. 

[urkozamanje]

12 minutes ago, MancMellow said:

Drugim rečima tu ima i demoagogije, tj spoljna politika kao deo unutrašnje. 

 

pa zar to nije ocekivani populisticki model? on konstantno mora da odrzava vezu sa evridz (enabit bilou evridz) dzoom, a sta dzo zna o svrsi nato-a. za dzoa je i ovo amerika frst. 

 

 

mislim, to sto se nama trese tlo pod nogama, a njima dogadjaj u redu velicine jednog, recimo skandala (u nizu ostalih), to je nesto drugo  

[MancMellow]

21 minutes ago, urkozamanje said:

 

pa zar to nije ocekivani populisticki model? on konstantno mora da odrzava vezu sa evridz (enabit bilou evridz) dzoom, a sta dzo zna o svrsi nato-a. za dzoa je i ovo amerika frst. 

 

 

mislim, to sto se nama trese tlo pod nogama, a njima dogadjaj u redu velicine jednog, recimo skandala (u nizu ostalih), to je nesto drugo  

naravno

[Lord Protector]

47 minutes ago, MancMellow said:

Ne, to je problem koji oni hoće da reše pre nego što pređu na drugo tj ono što vide važnijim. Ali američka politika je komplikovana i u njoj ima mnogo struja. I ta raznovrsnost je u stvari opasnost po svet. Ne zato što namerno rade nešto sve vreme uz neki hive-mind, nego upravo zato što na izborima genuinely može da pobedi ova ili ona struja i onda se stvari menjaju. Nije čak ni bitno, pri tom što možda Tramp pobedi 2020. Nije bitno čak ni to što ja lično ne verujem da bi recimo Bernie suštinski vodio drugačiju politiku prema Kini samo što bi mnogo lepše izgledala. Bitno je to što - sa kim se Putin dogovara? Ili bilo ko? To je osnovni razlog zašto NATO garantuje stabilnost zapadnom svetu - zato što stvara predvidljivost. One cifre budžeta su delom besmislene. Koliki deo tog američkog budžeta uopšte ide na bilo šta što ima veze sa Evropom? Drugim rečima tu ima i demoagogije, tj spoljna politika kao deo unutrašnje. 

 

Ono što je zanimljivo je da tu ima veliki broj ljudi iz Reganovog okruženja i administracije, da je iz tog kruga ljudi koji su dobili Hladni rat i koji su učvrstili NATO kao pobedonosni vojni savez nad SSSR-om i komunističkim blokom u Evropi došla ideja o ukidanju saveza i zamena nečim efikasnijim i optimalnijim. Mislim da je snaga američke politike upravo ta što njena unutrašnja dinamika ne dozvoljava spavanje na lovorikama i brežnjevljevizaciju i sklerozu sistema, što se upravo desilo sa NATO-om u zadnjih 25 godina. NATO je postao ogroman i skup birokratski aparat zagledan u sopstveni pupak nespreman da odgovori na nove globalne izazove i bezbedonosne pretnje. 

Edited July 12, 2018 by slow

[urkozamanje]

inace, da citiram nesto od pre par nedelja

 

Quote

Elem, neki ameri misle da nije bas tolika budala. Sa kinezima malo da se odmere snage, dok sa evropom mogu da priuste malo nesuglasica, ionako i da danas krenu nema sanse da razviju recimo odbranu, pa onda i ostatak platforme za politicko i finansijsko jedinstvo, pa onda i autonomiju najmanje sledecih 5-10 godina. A danas vreme tece brze. 10 godina je vise nego dovoljno da neko sledeci obnovi. Uostalom, rizik je skoro minimalan, jer ce evropa uvek birati usa kao "prirodnijeg" saveznika (pored rusa i kineza).

 

u sustini se ne desava nista neocekivano, jedino sto je evropa iznenadjena sto dobija isti tretman kao i svi ostali. ide dilmejker okolo i gleda huz tvicin. on fazon dize na flopu, a ekipa iza vice ne ne pusti budalu, nemamo nista  

[Time Crisis]

11 minutes ago, slow said:

 

 NATO je postao ogroman i skup birokratski aparat zagledan u sopstveni pupak nespreman da odgovori na nove globalne izazove i bezbedonosne pretnje. 

 

Ne znam ni kako bi u teoriji i mogao, kad se pogleda kakvi su izazovi i pretnje po SAD ili kakve su po Kanadu, Norvešku, Slovačku...?

[MancMellow]

11 minutes ago, urkozamanje said:

inace, da citiram nesto od pre par nedelja

 

 

u sustini se ne desava nista neocekivano, jedino sto je evropa iznenadjena sto dobija isti tretman kao i svi ostali. ide dilmejker okolo i gleda huz tvicin. on fazon dize na flopu, a ekipa iza vice ne ne pusti budalu, nemamo nista  

Apsolutno je moguce. Mislim, moguce je da se desava neka sumanuta i malo ostrija repriza Niksona. Prosto nije jos jasno

[dillinger]

1 hour ago, MancMellow said:

Ne, to je problem koji oni hoće da reše pre nego što pređu na drugo tj ono što vide važnijim. Ali američka politika je komplikovana i u njoj ima mnogo struja. I ta raznovrsnost je u stvari opasnost po svet. Ne zato što namerno rade nešto sve vreme uz neki hive-mind, nego upravo zato što na izborima genuinely može da pobedi ova ili ona struja i onda se stvari menjaju. Nije čak ni bitno, pri tom što možda Tramp pobedi 2020. Nije bitno čak ni to što ja lično ne verujem da bi recimo Bernie suštinski vodio drugačiju politiku prema Kini samo što bi mnogo lepše izgledala. Bitno je to što - sa kim se Putin dogovara? Ili bilo ko? To je osnovni razlog zašto NATO garantuje stabilnost zapadnom svetu - zato što stvara predvidljivost. One cifre budžeta su delom besmislene. Koliki deo tog američkog budžeta uopšte ide na bilo šta što ima veze sa Evropom? Drugim rečima tu ima i demoagogije, tj spoljna politika kao deo unutrašnje. 

 

Ne sumnjam da je kod  prosečnog Nemca prisutan najveći strah trenutno od Putinovih nuklearki.

 

Trampove tarife, skupi energenti, nametnuta ograničenja u poslovanju sa Rusima, Kinezima, Irancima....sve to ih ne brine ni najmanje.

 

Nemaš pojma u kojoj od zemalja sveta smeš da sklopiš unosan ugovor, tj kome ćeš morati za pola godine da lupiš sankcije po diktatu. Kod Amera/NATO-a je baš predvidivo! 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2018 by dillinger

[marv]

ja jedno ne razumem, zasto nemacka (a i japan) ne iskoristi ovu zlatnu priliku da se transformise u ozbiljnu vojnu silu i naravno nuklearnu. posle trampa tesko da ce imati ovakvu dobru sansu