NATO's 2% goal

[Otern]

So, pretty much every party in Norway, except the hippies tend to say we need to reach the goal of spending 2% of our GDP on defense. And until recently I used to believe this too. We have a shit defense, and spend too little on our armed forces (just 1.6%).
It's pretty much the stated goal of NATO, that every member spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense. Few NATO countries actually do though. The US, Estonia, Greece, Poland and the UK are the only ones spending 2% or more. The rest of us spend less.

For years I've been saying we need to spend at least 2%. But lately, I've been having some second thoughts. Still supportive of NATO, but I don't really get why 2% should be the goal, other than as a symbolic gesture of NATO member's commitment to the alliance. So I looked into our potential enemies; Russia and China. As these are pretty much the only ones that could realistically pose any threats to any individual NATO members.

Looking at the money spent on defense, as of now, NATO in total spend almost 1000 billion dollars:
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014 ... -16-en.pdf
($956 974 000 000) (Let's just use 957 billion.)
This is quite a bit. If we remove the by far largest spender, the US, we get to around $271 017 000 000. Quite a bit less, but still, a lot. 271 billion.

Compare this to Russia during 2014: $69 300 000 000. 69.3 billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_ ... Federation
And China during 2016: 146 billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_China

So, even going with the unlikely scenario of the US pulling out of NATO. NATO outspends both Russia and China combined. Even if all the countries within NATO that spends more than 2% left, we'd still spend about as much as Russia and China combined. (UK spends about 55 billion yearly, Poland 10, Greece 5 and Estonia 0.5.)

What the fuck are we even doing? China and Russia aren't allied with each other now. But wouldn't an increase in spending now, when we already outspend them by a massive margin, just push them into each other's arms? NATO is supposed to be a defense alliance, but I can't stop thinking about how this spending looks like to the Chinese and the Russians.

Is all this really necessary? And even more, is it necessary to INCREASE military spending within NATO? Sure, I get that a lot of Americans are pissed at us because we're "not pulling our weight" and all. But should the weight really be that much in the first place?

I honestly think we're driving ourselves into economic ruin with this insane spending, just like the Soviets did in the eighties.

[Fife]

2%, 0%, 92%, what's the diff? I read somewhere on here that as long as you can buy a Bic Mac in Oklahoma City without having to commit murder, everything is cool.

[Smitty-48]

2% is symbolic, entirely political.

That being said, I don't find the Norwegian front to be all that significant.

Basically NATO will drive up the road and try to take Murmansk, the Russians will defend, likely resulting in a stalemate on the Northern Flank.

[TheReal_ND]

Pay debts. We need money for dem programs.

[Speaker to Animals]

2% is quite a lot of gibs for minority voters.

[Fife]

Percents don't mean shit. Just send the money, bitch.

[Martin Hash]

Long past time for the U.S. to get out of NATO

[Speaker to Animals]

Germany said they got this. We can nix NATO now, guys. Use the money for useful shit.

[C-Mag]

Long past time for the U.S. to get out of NATO

And the UN.

Why would we continue pledging to defend deadbeats that don't pay their bills and are willing to outsource their own defense ?

End Foreign Entanglements

[Smitty-48]

Long past time for the U.S. to get out of NATO

America is NATO, so it would be "dissolve NATO" rather than "get out of".