Trumps asking NATO Countries to increase defence spending again.

[welshandy]

From Davos World Economic Forum Donald said "I’m also going to ask all Nato nations to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP, which is what it should have been years ago”

[The Phantom]

Blimey! Most of them don't spend the 2% they're supposed to, so 5% seems unlikely.

[markranger]

Poland do i think. Think the USA are close to ,

To many countries rely on the fact that they assume other countries will join then in any conflict ,


I doubt he will get 5% but imagine even 3% - 50% increase is still considerable.

A good thing i say,

[Agent K]

Poland do i think. Think the USA are close to ,

? the USA is close to Canada and Mexico, like share a border with them, Canada is a NATO member, not sure of your point though?

To many countries rely on the fact that they assume other countries will join then in any conflict ,

Isn't that THE actual premise of NATO article 5? no assumption needed at all.

[cat1]

Poland do i think. Think the USA are close to ,

? the USA is close to Canada and Mexico, like share a border with them, Canada is a NATO member, not sure of your point though?

To many countries rely on the fact that they assume other countries will join then in any conflict ,

Isn't that THE actual premise of NATO article 5? no assumption needed at all.

Is he not referring to the percentage they spend on defence? Poland spend 5%, USA close to 5% etc.

[Tally-ho]

For the purpose of clarity and so that we all sing off the same hymn sheet. Below the percentages of GDP showing the delinquents who do not pay their fair share.

[Tally-ho]

Note how those who paid less than 2 percent during Trump's first term, suddenly remedied the deficit once he shook their cages. Rightly so!

[James Cutting]

That shows 2021, which was Biden. Unless I'm reading that wrong - 2021 vs 2024.

[Tally-ho]

The changes only took effect after Trump left office. Bear in mind financial remedies take time, it is not an on / off switch. Reference NATO speech in 2017, timeline at 06:10 - link below:-

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r ... &FORM=VIRE

[Doughnut]

Percentage figures are fine. But the problem is what is the Gross Domestic Product GDP for each country in cash terms and is thier population able to provide personal to guard thier own boarders ?

[TAFFEVANS]

Trump’s a business man who wants a deal so he’ll ask for 5 and settle for 3-3.5

[markranger]

Poland do i think. Think the USA are close to ,

? the USA is close to Canada and Mexico, like share a border with them, Canada is a NATO member, not sure of your point though?

To many countries rely on the fact that they assume other countries will join then in any conflict ,

Isn't that THE actual premise of NATO article 5? no assumption needed at all.

Is he not referring to the percentage they spend on defence? Poland spend 5%, USA close to 5% etc.

Apologies , Yes , I was referring to the percentage of GDP.

As said , Trump wants NATO to spend 5% GDP but basically is telling them to up their Spending , Can't see it being 5% but anything is better than what some are paying,

Mark

[Ken Cloke]

Perhaps interesting to know how much as a % of GDP is spent on "hardware" for each country. I am sure a large % is spent on the soldiers, sailors and air force people. Their salaries, pensions, uniforms, training, medical facilities,
sport and entertainment facilities etc are all part of the defence spend. How much does it cost to maintain and run a military facility without even starting on putting aircraft, tanks, ships bombs, bullets, missiles, vehicles and fuel there?

Just a thought

[Tally-ho]

Some, not all, of your queries are addressed in the attached link. It is an official NATO link. Specifics such as expenditure on "hardware" and / or weapon systems are not listed, security and confidentiality are obvious reasons.
The attached link (NATO Press Release) is easily accessible on a basic Google, as is much else pertaining to NATO.

The 16 page link is filled with tables, graphs and statistics and makes for analytical and investigative reading, and further reading. Page 16 gives a short analysis as to some of the content.

https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014 ... 024-en.pdf

[Ken Cloke]

Thank's for that. I shall have a read

[XWP29]

UK Governments have destroyed the armed forces.
The latest shower have created a situation for service people where school fees are subject to 20% vat but they have exempted US service personnel based here. Remembering that many service people use private schools.
Add in the proposed death tax on pensions for non married couples that’ll help boost the falling numbers of recruits.
It’s not only about the spending but also the conditions for those that serve.
Both need improving right now.

[James Cutting]

They are exempt from that under a NATO agreement, not UK Gov - https://whichschooladvisor.com/uk/schoo ... chool-fees

BUT it's defintiely something that should be changed going forwards.

[XWP29]

They are exempt from that under a NATO agreement, not UK Gov - https://whichschooladvisor.com/uk/schoo ... chool-fees

BUT it's defintiely something that should be changed going forwards.

Thanks James the difference now is the Government have imposed the charge on service people, for example from Coningsby, deployed outside the UK who are in scope as far as I can see the Government have not addressed that own goal, if anyone has more info that would be welcome.


Interesting statistics here: https://thedefensepost.com/2024/12/26/s ... -military/ be interesting to see the leavers since the last update which will cover the VAT introduction.

"The UK is experiencing an alarmingly high attrition rate in its armed forces, with many soldiers continuing to leave the service despite a salary increase approved by the government last summer.

Attrition in the military refers to the gradual loss of personnel due to factors such as retirement and resignation, which negatively impact operational readiness and force strength.

Around 15,000 British troops left the military in the year to October 2024, with more than half of these departures categorized as “voluntary attrition,” according to a report by The Telegraph.

Notably, the UK armed forces only enlisted over 12,000 personnel in the same period, resulting in a net decrease in military strength.

As of October, there are reportedly just two servicemen and women for every 1,000 people in Britain — the first time this has happened.

Earlier this year, data from the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) revealed that more people quit the military than joined in 2023, with factors such as poor living conditions and declining troop morale cited as the main causes".

[roughcutter]

Note how those who paid less than 2 percent during Trump's first term, suddenly remedied the deficit once he shook their cages. Rightly so!

Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Germany, Netherlands, Canada, Belgium, Luxemburg, you wouldn't exactly describe them as impoverished nations would you. Maybe Trump has a point?