Thanks to Paralus for the link!
via Defense-Aerospace.com
If Germany, owner of the strongest and largest economy on the continent is in this kind of shape then how are the other nations REALLY doing?
NATO is a paper tiger. "Nuff said.
via Defense-Aerospace.com
Last week, a single person pushed Germany's air force to the very limits of its capacities: Ursula von der Leyen, the country's defense minister. Von der Leyen requested that two Transall military transport aircraft with missile defense systems be transferred to Amman, the Jordanian capital. The defense minister and a pool of reporters then flew for eight hours on Thursday morning in one of the aircraft to Erbil in Iraq's Kurdish region. Back in Germany, the military had but a single additional Transall at its disposal.This is a snap shot of the most powerful military in the EU.
After her arrival in Erbil, von der Leyen proceeded to the palace of the Kurdish regional government's president. Her visit was to be concurrent with the delivery of German weapons, intended to aid the Kurds in their fight against Islamic State jihadists. Unfortunately, the machine guns and bazookas got stuck in Germany and the trainers in Bulgaria because of a dearth of available aircraft. One had been grounded because of a massive fuel leak. What could have been a shining moment for the minister instead turned into an embarrassing failure underscoring the miserable state of many of the Bundeswehr's most important weapons systems.
No other member of the government has been pushing as hard for Germany to increase its role abroad since taking office last year than von der Leyen. From the very start of her term, she has sought to distance herself from the "military reserve" preached by conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel and by former Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle. It is an approach which most notoriously manifested itself in Germany's abstention during the UN vote to conduct air strikes against Libya in 2011. At the Munich Security Conference in January, von der Leyen even proclaimed that "indifference is not an option for a country like Germany."
If Germany, owner of the strongest and largest economy on the continent is in this kind of shape then how are the other nations REALLY doing?
NATO is a paper tiger. "Nuff said.
Nato a powerful military? Bullshit!
ReplyDelete3 cheers for a eye catching headline.
where have you been? haven't heard from you for awhile oh and yeah...gotta get a hook!
DeleteWas out of town to give an exam for a course i was pursuing. But I am back in town and below this comment, I re-continue my rants.
DeleteBtw, did you hear about the Mars Orbiter Mission. Would love to hear an Honest no-BS assesment or post about it on your blog....if its possible.
I find it surprising that even the following events-
ReplyDelete- Growth in Europes population
- Growth in Europes total number of Tax Payers
- Increased Tax collections per person of that increasing tax payer base
- Rising Corporate earnings and shareholder wealth
- And many more factors
Why does Europe still deliberatly maintain a lower military ?
Recession or no recession, Europe is sill more wealthy and populous than it was during the Cold War when many European countries used to maintain fearsome militaries. Being more wealthy and populous should transform into not just maintaining old school military might but actually taking the next step logical step and expanding it. But most of Europe has taken a step in the opposite direction.
Europe, a centre for the latest world technology for centuries is not even trying to attempt to build a "next gen" fighter. Its given up on that regard.
For the Bureaucratic/Political elite who keep saying to their people that "Precision Air Power" will be enough to deal with most threats......even that arm of the Military is being cannibalized.
well stated but its worse than that. in much of Europe the air arms serve the the same role as the Navy for maritime nations. its the center of their expeditionary efforts. that means that we're really looking at a Europe that incapable of conducting any out of area operations.
Deleteto be quite honest the only nations that can arrive with credible forces out of Europe today is the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Netherlands and Poland. of those only the UK, France, Poland and the Netherlands have shown a "real capability", not just theoretical. taking it one step further, the Uk is in the middle of destroying its forces, France is doing the same, Poland has its eyes fixed on Russia and the Netherlands is whethering away like nothing i've ever seen.
NATO is fucked. proper fucked.
Europe's "Might Earth Conquering" armies came as a result of all that technical innovation called The Industrial Age and continued right through the recent past because too their credit, Europeans really extracted the most from the Marshal Plan and the grit and determination of a good citizen base.
DeleteMaybe Europe shall have Earth Conquering Armies only when the next equivalent of "The Industrial Age" dawsn upon them. We have seen that that "Financial Age" of elite high tax paying high consumption jobs havnt produced armies of the same might and scale. (Nuclear weapons Excluded).
My viewpoint of history may be wrong, but you only have to look at the current chinese and the ancient romans.....Physical Industry builds mighty armies. You may enter the Space age but unless you Physically make those Star Wars Drones, destroyers, capital ships, Halo Suits etc. rather than "Finance them".....you will never achieve real power. Tanks Trump Bank Accounts.....always and everytime.
Fat, lazy pacifists and delusion that Europe is safe and NEVER will war enter it again. This is happen when you lost the perspective, Poland fell threaten by Russia, and the military exclave of Königsberg is like Sword of Damocles. But even here the spending on military was lowered for some time, thanks (oh the irony!) for Russian action is Georgia and now Ukraine remind us that peace is not something that is given forever. Oh how fast we forget that lesson, that in even theoretical full stable Europe war can start in any minute and you need a proper force to protect own borders.
DeletePoland start to catch up with modernization, Baltic States move larger founds to Armed Forces also. Estonia in emergency action buy 44 exDutch CV-90-35, Lithuania rise defense budged by 30%. The closer the Russia you are the more you start to invest in defense.
Strong armed forces is very important card in deck, Russia understand this... it's time that the rest of Europe also start to notice that.
"military exclave of Königsberg is like Sword of Damocles"
DeleteI do not get this phrase, can you explain ?
Sword of Damocles represent the everlasting danger that is hanging over your head. Königsberg is an military exclave of Russia, many times they remind that nukes are there (many cases in form of infamous Iskander system) and in case of war half of Poland would be in range of it and will be glassed. It is very uncomfortable thing having that kind of installation just outside your border. This is one of the main reason why core of Polish heavy forces station in western Poland, outside of theoretically range of tactical nukes from Königsberg.
Deletedarn, I confused Konigsberg with Kongsberg....the defence company.
DeleteThey plan on screwing around till they start to lose and then go nuclear or surrender before it gets too bad.
DeleteYou only got the 1st part the machine that transported weapons to the kurds broke down in Bolgaria ,second machine was flown in to take over and as flight changed plane numbers Iraq denied its overflight permit , so it took another day or two to get a new one and just as they had everything in order the second plane broke down (missle defence system) so a third one had to be used and even that one had some minor trouble. But in all fairness brake downs were not mayor ,broken interior lighting ,missle defence system malfunction
ReplyDeletehttp://www.doku-gilde.de/en/irak-mission-der-bundeswehr-sitzt-in-burgas-fest/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11130506/Military-failures-stall-German-response-to-Ebola-and-Isil.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/ramshackle-army-at-odds-with-berlin-s-global-aspirations-a-994607.html
The real funny thing here is that a "Machine" built and maintaned by Ze Germans was found wanting right when you needed it the most. Oouch.....those old school cold war West Germans must be going bonkers.
DeleteConsider this scenario-
ReplyDeleteIf one day the Chinese wake up, look at Hong Kong and say "Fuck this Ambiguity called Democracy. Invade and take them over", there is no chance in hell that the Royal Navy will be able to pull off a Falklands over the Chinese. And outgunning everyone on the high sea's and establishing littoral domination has been a speciality of the Royal Navy since Centuries. When the population of England was smaller, and regular tax payers.....few and far between.
Hong Kong is not under any jurisdiction of Great Britain, it is not the territory of Commonwealth just like the Falklands were. There are not a single political or legal ways that they can order China what to do in HK. Just like in those demonstrations that take place some days ago, London express concern because he can only do that.
DeleteThat's true. RN has nothing to do about it.
DeleteBut, going further, Taiwan was garanted by US, rectius NATO. Any offensive operation by PLAN in there will trigger (IMO) a local but powerfull response by USN parked in Japan and in Pacific overral (in terms of convencional warfare). That's the main problem: none really know when it will happen. So, NATO military investments should be keep at meximum for a unknow period of time, what is impossible. US budget is already fucked and Europe is almost broken, leading to the follow (bad) strategic crackdown:
- as far as PLAN wait to invade, and as far west looks for RF, less advantage NATO will have (gap) to face the first or both in a convencional naval warfare ... PLAN is building lots of new vessels, as RF, with a diferente aproach (litoranean subs, frigs and corvetes with lots of capable anti-ships missiles) ... thus, close to their suply lines, im in doubt that even US could fight them in a convencional warfare ...
US fleets are splited over a global arena and cant be assembled entirelly on this theater, and i cant say that it will could even outgun PLAN alone (to not speak about RF pacific fleet) ...
About industrial output, China and RF have atm (in gross terms) double the US (with its 80+% on service sector) ...
My point: on this scenario (Taiwan, instead of HK), PLAN has already the capacity to interdict the most important comercial sea route (Malaca) with hundreds of naval vessels, outnumbering and outgunering any kind of FT NATO members can sent IN TIME ... iniciative will be with attacker, ofc
In the end, there's a fair question about air supremacy on their coastline ...
It's an unlike scenario for the short run, tho
ps: RF new frigs 22350 and ddgs 21956 could turn the tide on northern atlantic and baltic too in the next 2 years, and im looking for a mars ticket before things turns really hot ... and sorry for my poor english
Russia's industry sector is much weaker than the US. Besides energy and defense, can you name one another manufacturing field that Russia enjoys the leading edge? I don't think so.
DeleteUsing purchasing power measurement, Russia GDP is less than a quarter of the US. In gross term, US based manufacturing is still #2 in the world which dwarfs Russia. BTW, I am not even mentioning the qualitative edge of US manufacturing over Russia. US are #1 in semiconductor, software, nano-tech, etc. Russia’s contribution in those areas is neglectable.
As stated, i said combined RF-China output ... and US are playing only with fiat USD, so it must take assertive actions to keep this market running ... but ... talking about RF, looks that they will be far closer to China than any western strategist (in the long run) would like ...
DeleteAbout economy ... US GDP (pumped by real inflation) is barrely 16,8T USD ... you're right, its a huge number, as its debt too ... 18T USD on central gov, plus states and local debts around ... 60T considering households and more ... now, try to figure out: with 3T of renevue, its a long run to even catch the debt service ... like decades ... or (eureka!), the reset, because any treat to US supremacy could hit the fiat so hard ... and it wont going to be fun :(
About the subject of this sub-topic, none is saing that US can't outgun anyone else atm, but just wondering about local scenarios where US (NATO) doesnt have the iniciative ... and if your statement about RF is true, the same dont apply for China ... their industrial output is already 50% bugger than US, with lots of hi-tech (licenced, reversed copied or simple stolen, doesnt matter) ... the fact is: NATO must do alot to keep the gap, but its narrowing faster and faster ...
About 22350: cheap, with 2 Kash and s400 sub-system, plus onix or klub ... its impressive, imo, if packed, even against aegis monsters, in confined waters and with air cover and suport ... im not a RF fan, thats why im stating it here after reading this blog for a long time ... and, look, for a small fraction of the cost of an LCS ... that cant fight really
Sorry, Im pro-US, but its a complete mess nowadays, and high-tech programs are just fucking it alot more ...
ps: i wont talk about DDX (3 units), IFV for marines, F35, F22, etc etc ...
your arrogance is astounding.
Deletelets talk europe. italy, spain, protugal and france are all under serious economic pressure. they're one step away from total economic collapse. germany, the largest economy in europe has slid into recession. then you can start talking about weapons development in europe.
its doesn't exist.
so between economies that are teetering on the brink and will probably drag the world into a global recession, coupled with no defense industy, plus a lack of natural resources and you have a europe that is not designed to meet the future.
quite honestly europe should be going worldwide to try and find natural resources, instead its being buffeted by market forcces that will drive in under.
"your arrogance is astounding"
Delete@Solomom: sorry if i sounded like it ... its my first post and i didnt pretend to "own" the truth ...
I was trying to met the sub-topic subject over chinese likely scenarios in a short term ...
Again, sorry
Hong Kong needs to STFD and STFU and realize the reality of the situation, Hong Kong is Chinese.
DeleteChina is Communist, therefore Hong Kong is Communist.
There is no chance of Democracy there.
There is a fact the Chinese will use Hong Kong to test out their assault by Airborne and amphibious forces to make sure. Just for training shits and giggles. Just to practice for Taiwan.
to adaptus primus
Delete@Russia's industry sector is much weaker than the US. Besides energy and defense, can you name one another manufacturing field that Russia enjoys the leading edge? I don't think so.@
Of course, you are absolutely right! Russians are monkeys on a tree. These animals develop a “closed atom circle” based on fast neutron to use U-238, and some other elements do not used in traditional Nuclear plants before. At this time shining elves deploy an old like Mammoth shit (but greatly more stinky) technology of shale gas, blow up the next PR and financial bubble.
There is a catch – who will give technologies to renew NATO mighty and who will give money for it?? And what will be the aim of such renew – to buy some more old weapon? Or change all the system and develop new systems, for example AA systems – Patriot is not enough IMHO. And the main question – will agree or not agree EU-citizens for reducing their wealth because of military spending? I guess Russia must play our best to show how peaceful we are, and do not stop develop our army “under the carpet” as well.
ReplyDeleteInfo a little offtop I will do here but check this out. Not to promote company or game (and I'm a seasoned player in it) but to show how the good trailer can be done. Or maybe you already saw it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-J5Vg0SxLc
DeleteI saw it. A THING! No doubt.
DeleteGerman defense spending as a % of GDP from 2009-2013
ReplyDelete1.4 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.3
nough said.
A friend of mine did an analyisis of NATO's last major military action, Odyssy Dawn in Libya, and what he found was astounding. He wrote this when arguing with someone else over the net about it:
ReplyDelete"The European militaries have been and are continuing to be hollowed out in favor of relying on us. No where was this more evident than in the 2011 military intervention in Libya, which was primarily carried out for European interests, most notably Italy. (Italy receives about 25% of their oil and 10% of their natural gas from Libya, and they aren't the only Europeans that rely on them for energy). Granted, the Libyans did get their freedom and we did succeed in stopping a massacre. Those both played a part in why we did it, but we always look out for our own interests when we start a conflict. This time we were looking out for Europe's.
We launched 110 tomahawk cruise missiles (each which costs anywhere from $1M to $16M depending on the block model) into Libya and sent several UAVs, EA-18G jammers, F-15E and F-16 fighters, and an assortment of other weapons to take care of the major fighting and destroy major weapons systems. After we had done all of that we handed it over to the EU because it was their show. They still needed to ride the US logistics supply bus to get to the fighting, which is literally just south of their continent. European air forces ran into the most ridiculous problems. When they got to the fighting they ran out of bombs and other munitions. They ended up using canisters of concrete with a laser seeker mounted on the front to drop them and literally crush targets (which I found surprisingly innovative by the way). They didn't know how to do a lot of the close in support missions like CAS/precision ground strike missions. They didn't have the equipment to do it either in many cases, which we were all too happy to supply them with. The countries involved in the fighting against Libya included:
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Denmark
France
Greece
Italy
The Netherlands
Norway
Romania
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Jordan
Qatar
Sweden
United Arab Emirates
I'm NOT saying that any of these countries lack brave men or good character. By the way, Germany didn't want any part of this and refused to participate. My ultimate point is simply this: EUROPE COMBINED ITS RESOURCES AND STILL COULDN'T DEFEAT A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY THAT IS LOCATED LITERALLY RIGHT TO THEIR SOUTH WITHOUT HELP FROM THE UNITED STATES. By the way, the military contributions of Britain and Canada combined were greater than that of Italy's."
France dropped dummy ( training ) bombs because it could avoid collateral damages, plus it was a very good promotion for AASM bomb guidage system ( You litterally kill tanks without explosive !!! ). The price of the bomb is nothing next to the price of the guidance system.
DeleteBut our bomb stockpile is tiny too, ~1000 bombs over 5 years
We could crush them, but that was story of time and casualties : more RISK to see aircraft downed before tomahawk wave than after...
This was, at first, the cost of wars that made european relying on USA : We simply couldn't pay the full cost of this war....
The libya expedition was certainly a move from OTAN to get Europe less dependant of Russian Gas.
Don't speak to be about humanitary bullshit, we all know it was just a pretext...
US Navy was, I believe, happy to get rid of obsolete weapons ( Yes, it's good for third world but this 70's Weapon isn't credible versus russia/china in terms of range, penetration ).
You're absolutely correct.
DeleteMy experience with NATO forces (which first began in 88 as a FNG tanker in Germany, all the way to French forces in Afghanistan) indicates that they have become significantly weaker, not the stronger or even the same, since the end of the cold war.
From a infantry perspective in Afghanistan, they couldn't even equip units with adequate numbers of small arms ammunition. It should be no surprise that more complex munitions, such as bombs and whatnot, will be in short supply or outright depleted should NATO have to get off their asses and do something.
The worst are the British by far. With the high tech debacles such as the new (heli) carriers and F35s, they are losing any real ground capability they had with their high readiness, light and fast units that won the Falklands War. Or maybe the Dutch and the castrating of their entire armed forces to accommodate four (4!) F35s.
and they think they'll be able to provide a defense against the Russians. ha. fat chance.
Training bombs at high speed and low drag are deadly.
DeleteI've heard it said French forces during Desert Storm dropped their bomb at the end of the runway to protest being there, or was that Italy?
I believed the UK were the first to use 500 lbs "bombs" filled with concrete. It was used to "knock out" tanks without the shock wave. The force of the projectile was strong enough to pry the turret off the chassis.
DeleteIn regards to the weakening of NATO, it ain't just NATO. When Australian troops went to Afghanistan, they were issued clothing and equipment not meant for the nature of the battlefield. Arm-chair-generals here in Australia refused to listen to the on-the-field-complaints and stuck their head in the sand. Troops had to ask wives and friends back home to buy them the necessary goods (out of their own pocket because ADF wouldn't re-imburse them). Some actually took unprecedented steps and went to US camps and BEGGED from US Supply Sgts. It took one newspaper article to get things rolling.
When Australian Navy wanted to purchase AWD they had a choice between Spain and US.
Australian Navy wanted Burke class AWD because this platform was "battle proven". Australian politician decided to award the contract to Spain because they are the CHEAPEST.
All throughout the world, nations (other than the US) are buying the cheapest or cutting a lot of corners because platforms are getting more and more expensive.
France has almost the same budget as germany but do much more, and can even more...with one third of that budget for nuclear branch...
ReplyDeleteIt's not only budget but experience... and germany has just see some battlefield since 3-4 years...
And don't speak about serbia... was just bombing and blue helmets...
---
And GDP means nothing except for fucking bankster that rape economy over the world.
In fact Bankster will rape ourselves before russia or china go here... they have just to wait occidental suicide to be waited like saviors.
I've no hope that we will kill by ourselves all this bankster to save our countries...
It ain't GPD that will decide, it will be GUTS.
DeleteNo offense but you lack knowledge of the situation on the ground.
ReplyDeleteGermanys militarys recession since the end of the cold war has been relatively wide knowledge for over a decade. This is much caused by their own attitude and way of handling things and it won't get better until they recover from their anti-militarism caused by the WWII trauma and pressure to keep the germans down.
Ukraine is another example of a military that looks good on paper but is hopeless in reality.
And the operations in foreign soil have been conducted with peacetime budgets and questionable motivation. Like we don't need heavy lift to move armor from western europe to eastern europe.
And one should be careful about looking at defence budgets only with a tunnel vision. European countries count defence spending in different ways and some downplay it to make it look more politically correct.
Example of things that may not be counted in defense spending: Coastguard vessels with sonar and depth charges, borderguard SF, comm towers shared by different gov agencies, borderguard AT-weapons, pensions&benefits of military personnell, border/coastguard helis, underground hospitals, spare air strips, classified extra budgets for SIGINT and secret weapons, ect.
Overall I agree that defence spending should be increased but the situation could be much worse.
If true, this is amazing. I had no idea NATO might be that weak. I had assumed that any weakness would be the US's lack of long-term staying power (expensive, irreplaceable systems with huge logistics footprints), but this would indicate that Europe would lack even the US's glass cannons.
ReplyDeleteNATO was always weak, and at the first sign of an Assault by Warsaw pact forces circa 1980's would have gone to ground or gone to rout instantly.
DeleteNow? hell they wouldn't even be a ghost on the sights of the Russian tanks.
Good book to read "Red Army" by Ralph Peters.
What kind of forces EU was suposed to be, really?
ReplyDeleteIt's a honest question and I've already asked Solomon sorry about my "arrogance" ...
There wont be a "Fulda Gap" scenario with tactical warheads IMO, so the first contact aproach shouldnt apply atm due a very likely escalation (it implied a massive soviet tanks reaching the Channel in a couple of days, facing a softened defenses by tactical nukes)...
In a simple calc of cost-benefit, it could be more probable the use of nukes (if someone is crazy enough) on US regional allies outside the NATO shield, like, for example (to use the IS theater), Qatar or Saudi, turning ME worthless to future operations ... On this case, NATO may have to face or (1) discredit, without reaction due possible escalation into full scale nuclear war; or (2) cost, going to retaliate in the same way into RF interesests (Iran, Venezuela, etc), thats not soo important to RF in really ... or (3) mutual destruction, without coments ...
On the (1) scenario, USD will be fucked and will drag the 700T USD in derivatives to ground, killling all the modern economy (maybe leading the post-modern one?)...
On the (2) scenario, NATO will maybe decide to go convencional against RF, limited goals, justifiying EU armed forces existence ... if not, only france and uk could play, barelly ... im assuming that, in this case, Europe is just a buffer zone, tradable to avoid extinction ...
That's why im asking what should be the EU forces main goals or roles: act as police, pacekeeper or really intend to fight a real war (even in coalition)?
Fulda gap was a deception.
DeleteThe real strike would have crossed into West Germany farther North and drive across Netherlands and the Belgium after those nations and NORTHAG had been destroyed by the rolling drum fire of tactical Soviet nukes.
Armor and Motor rifles would roll across these areas under fire from NATO atomic missiles and arty with an end destination at the Channel Ports.
Coastal areas would be used to land Soviet supplies and Marines to aid the right flank of their attack.
France would be unmolested with a warning to stay out of the war, England would get Nuked to oblivion.
The next Major action would be the sub and surface fleet actions with Atomic weapons in the GIUK gap.
The Soviets would not have taken on the Central Army groups.
And now that they are gone would not have too, Netherlands and Belgium would now surrender without a shot fired and no doubt France and England also, faced with nuclear destruction the Euro's would rather be Red than dead.
NATO is a dead duck if it acts, and nothing but uniformed civilians and EPW's if they don't and they won't.
so, on that scenario?
DeleteEdson Jr: Yup actual battle plans for Warsaw forces and NATO during an assault on NATO and Europe.
DeleteThe plan was to have the major combat happen across North Army Group arena, take the Ports at Amsterdam and Rotterdam as an Fait accompli and simply dig in as the German's did during WW1 and hold out for Massive and rising US and NATO casualties to make them sue for peace.
The region that was once Netherlands and Belgium would not be worth fighting for being irradiated, destroyed and soaked in Chemical weapons. The civilian populations all on the roads as massive and sick refugees would over whelm the West as they tried to save and succor them. Warsaw pact forces in the first wave would have been non Russian, Polish, Czech and such, Pushed by Russian troops who would not allow them to halt or go to ground then left to die from the effects of the fallout and replaced by Russian reserves held back for the break out. The Ports were the prize, warm water Ports that are right on the Channel shores. The Ports would not be nuked or destroyed. Rendering the GIUK gap arena moot.
The Battles planned for the North Sea were to be highly illuminating and radioactive.
Quite a plan if ya ask me, thank the Gods of war we did not see that.
Now, Russia wouldn't even have to nuke anyone, just bluff their way across, the US will not be there in the North Sea nor the GIUK gap this time.
Ed I think we agree on the results if not the actual plan. I know your post seems right on the mark.
DeleteSo, the purpose of NATO is to as a defensive military alliance. And yet it is abundantly clear that apart from perhaips some domestic stability operations, it has clearly disarmed itself to the point of irrelevance. It might be able to dispatch some special forces to take out terrorists here and there, but the point is clear.
ReplyDeleteThere is no real military capability in NATO. Thus, NATO exists on paper only.
So why are the Russians so paranoid?
And why are we continuing to prop up this paper tiger? Apart from Poland and certain other countries we can ally with, Western Europe should be given the following note. "Welcome to Dumpsville, Baby, Population: You"
They aren't wealthy nations, they may have wealthy economics and corporation, but they keep losing their money to tax havens in Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands,
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/03/offshore-secrets-offshore-tax-haven
So, the wealthy and powerful have their own little economy because they don't want to pay for taxes.
No wonder Europe is broke.
More like speed bump sign for a speed bump that is a slight rise in inches.
DeleteEurope ain't the only ones "wealthy" and broke. Have you heard of a term called "double Irish Dutch sandwich"? It is being used WORLD WIDE by large multi-national corporations. Combine all the large electronics/computer company in the US and their offshore funds amount to > a trillion US dollars. And they pay ZERO taxes. Government buys from these companies. These companies make huge profit but pay little or no corporate tax.
DeleteThis is why a lot of world government's budget are tanking.
To make matters worst, these large corporations also contribute (or "donate") to the ruling political parties (and opposition), so cracking down on them is not an easy task.
Just this year, the last G20 Summit has forced Ireland to change their laws to stop this practice.
We should just make the 2% of GDP on military spending a requirement not, not a 'pledge' or goal. If you can't meet the membership dues, you are no longer a member.
ReplyDeleteGive them 5 years
They will need to reform their tax codes and crack down on tax dodgers. We spy on worldwide communications, we can give them the names, accounts and amounts to help them out.
Without US Forces, Lifters and shipping NATO couldn't fight it's way into Alabama and if they did mange to get inside the Alabama line it would become their graveyard.
ReplyDeleteThe deer hunters would hunt them for sport.
And here is more proof that NATO is hollowed out.
ReplyDeleteThe Dutch can't even keep 10 F-16s flying.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-dutch-can-barely-support-10-f-16s-in-the-middle-east-ff56f55ca59
What chance will they have with the F35 and its operating costs? Four would be lucky.