Kanada steht vor der ‚massiven Herausforderung‘ als NATO Augen neu 5% Ausgabenziel: Experte
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/canada-faces-massive-challenge-as-nato-eyes-new-5-spending-target-expert/
Kanada steht vor der ‚massiven Herausforderung‘ als NATO Augen neu 5% Ausgabenziel: Experte
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/canada-faces-massive-challenge-as-nato-eyes-new-5-spending-target-expert/
6 Kommentare
I am massively challenged to care about NATO targets at this point. When the US was openly threatening to invade us, our NATO allies didn’t even say a word, much less come to our defence.
If we have to cut heath care spending to hit this defence target it will absolutely not be worth it. Just say yeah we’re working on it and do what is actually best for Canadian citizens instead of governments in Europe and America.
Mark Rutte is a Trump’s meat puppet at this point. After Trump threatened Canadian sovereignty right in front of his face and he did jack shit I was suspicious of him. Now the only Trump needs to do is shove his tiny little hands up Mark Rutte ass and speak through the NATO Secretary General, and say everybody needs to kick up defence spending to 5%.
Edit: I think its time for Denmark (with Greenland’s consent) and Canada should file for Article 4.
„Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.“
5% is insane. Nobody is anywhere near that and nobody can afford to be. Even the US isn’t that high. How the hell do they think countries will afford to pay that?
Of course, Canada does need to increase our spending somewhat. But instead we’re cutting revenues with this tax cut, with no increases on the higher end to actually pay for any of it.
I’d honestly be surprised if this target stays post-Trump. Especially if the Democrats get back in by 2028 & go on a global apology tour to clean up the mess, I feel like making the targets more practical will be a big part of keeping member states invested etc. I think realistically a target of 2.5% to 3% of GDP would be the best course of action. (higher than the previous 2% target, but more achievable and would help foster NATO’s rearmament to counter Russia & China etc.)
If anything, the U.S going rogue under Trump is justification for the rest of NATO to pull more weight to make up the difference in the event that this isn’t just a one off to ensure it’s collective survival. However, at the same time, it’s obvious that the 5% target is ridiculous.