Comments by "TheGreatDane" (@thegreatdane3627) on "Can Europe Actually Spend 5% of GDP on Defence?" video.

  1. Yeah we should rather be talking about specific numbers of troops and equipment. Most nordic countries have mandatory military service, which can increase the numbers of troops available, without the cost of a massive professional army. .
    95
  2. Spending targets are pointless. What matters is how many troops and equipment each member state can deploy on a short notice. There are ways to reach a good number without spending 5%, such as conscription and ordering equipment together with other countries.
    47
  3. Portugal could just leave NATO if they wanted, they don't really need the protection. So Portugal is a net contributor to NATO, no matter how much they spend.
    11
  4. Yeah Finland is a perfect example of a country with a very capable army with a reasonable budget. All the smaller countries should do like Finland.
    10
  5. I agree. What is the point of an alliance, if everyone spends that much? Germany alone would spend almost as much as China...
    8
  6.  @I_H_M_N  good counter argument buddy... 🙄
    8
  7.  @NothingPersonalKido  this argument is too stupid for me...
    8
  8. Yeah, health care, education, and pensions are part of the US military budget.
    6
  9.  @LoonyCleo  i don't have anything bad to say about Portugal. My point is that Portugal don't really need to be protected because of your location, which makes Portugal a member that gives more than you take, no matter how much you spend.
    6
  10.  @ChristiaanHW  i was mostly thinking about Portugals geografic location. But the point you made is valid too.
    5
  11.  @NothingPersonalKido that makes no sense, stop commenting while drunk.
    4
  12. @pahowitzer446  learn to read before replying 🙄
    3
  13. ​ @chickenfishhybrid44 i agree with that, the Danish army is pretty pathetic these days. And it will cost more money to fix that. But the goal should not be to spend a specific amount of money, the goal should be a specific amount of troops and equipment available.
    3
  14.  @PizeFish  does anyone actually expect the US to do all the fighting?
    2
  15.  @chickenfishhybrid44  Denmark spent something like 2,5-3% of gdp on defense during the cold war. And we still had decent health care, despite having almost 1000 tanks at one point. Americans are actually spending more on health care per capita than most Europeans, even though not all Americans have access to it.
    2
  16. @pahowitzer446  what funding? The US pays around 16% of the NATO budget if that is what you mean?
    1
  17.  @Fatalitix3  of course there is a cost, but it is significantly lower than the cost of paying for a purely professional army. Most western armies today are way too small for a real war, even has the US has less than 400.000 infantry men in total, it's probably closer to 300.000. Finland has a very small population, but they can muster 280.000 troops on a short notice, with roughly 800.000 reserves.
    1