Comments by "Emanon" (@Emanon...) on "Ireland: Why The Hell Aren't They In NATO? - TLDR News" video.

I still haven't heard a strong argument for Ireland to join NATO.
34
I'm from Denmark and "we" just decided to go from 5 billion USD in military spending to 7,5 billion to meet the NATO 2% spending goal. (Not much I know, but we're a small country) Here's the catch: We don't have the money in the budget. It's all loans for the next 8 years. 20 billion USD in loans, whilst inflation is rampant and the interest rate on loans is due to increase dramatically. All this, for something that contributes absolutely nothing in terms of adding value to the economy. Meanwhile, our health sector is buckling because of a lack of nurses and cuts to the health system the last 20 years. NATO spending 2021: 1.2 trillion USD Russian spending 2021: 60 billion USD Ireland should do what's best for them. We are certainly caught up in this spending black hole because of NATO. At least the Americans, French and Germans will get some jobs and tax money out of all of this...
9
Why? Is Ireland in any way, shape or form threatened by Russian aggression? They're of course free to do as they please, but I think the money is better spent on healthcare, education, infrastructure heck, even tax cuts...
4
PatchesRips You're jumping on the jingo propaganda, buddy. NATO has 1.2 trillion $ defence spending budget without Ireland. Russia spends 60 billion $ (that's before all the EU countries decided to up their spending) Using Ukraine as an example is a bad faith argument, as they have nowhere near the same geopolitical threats, relations and interests as Ireland.
2
@KonoHarpDa No one is forcing you to spend 4% of GDP on the military. Cut it in half and you'd still be outspending China and Russia (combined) by a huge margin. But the difference is that the US is the #1 arms manufacturer and no senator or congressman would go against a budget that could kill jobs of their electorate. US Armed Forces: The world's single largest social jobs program. A lighter US budget would allow NATO to become the primary military arm of all our nations, and any proactive military action would be built on diplomatic consensus instead of "spearheading" an invasion without a cause for war, as what happened in Iraq... I think 1,5 % is a perfectly fine yearly tithe to our vassal liege lord.
2
@Curtis69213 "We" already are. NATO spends x 20 of what Russia spends on defence. Let's for argument's sake say it's only equivalent to X 10 (purchase power, labor costs, cost of living etc) to what Russia spends. A hundred billion more won't make a big difference. But it'll make a huge difference in the respective countries of the money are spent on improving their lives instead. Finally, Ireland cannot be compared to Ukraine and Georgia. Not polically, economically or geopolitically. As it stand, there are no threats facing Ireland. Finland, Poland, the Baltics is a different matter entirely...
1
@H-Zazoo Did you even read my prior comment? NATO spends x 20 of what Russia spends on their military. And that's before all the new increases for 2022. There is no scenario where Russia would come out on top in a conventional conflict. And after Ukraine, unless Russia issues a draft, they simply don't have the manpower for a renewed sustained conflict. And God knows they definitely don't have the economy for it. So yeah, excuse me if I think that proper healthcare, education, greener infrastrucure is more important in the long run than a moment of panic that will pass. Stop the bullshit jingo and regurgitation of bullet points from the media and look at the actual facts.
1
@H-Zazoo Joining NATO (which is completely understandable) and increasing military spending are two very different things. For all intents and purposes, if you're already spending 2%+ on defence, then joining will have a very small impact on economics and services provided. Good on ya for taking in refugees. Truly. But how would 2% or even 5% budgetary spending in NATO have done anything to help them or Ukraine itself? My point: 1,5% defence spending across NATO is more than enough to meet the threat of Russia and/or China and still play an active role in peacekeeping efforts across the world. And spend the rest on your own people or on say refugees or foreign aid. Otherwise, the only way to be truly "safe" from Russia would be to acquire nuclear weapons, no?
1
@H-Zazoo Yes. And in the context of Ireland, that they're not threatened and would be better off not joining...
1
@H-Zazoo You haven't seen the havoc that a small group of drunken Irish can do to a city Square 😆
1
@guythomas7051 It's rich coming from a Brit to talk about opposing Russia, since your crooks in Londongrad have benefitted the most from whitewashing oligarch and mafia money. Maybe if you didn't actively enrich authoritarian dregs, they'd think twice about starting a war? But I digress. Yes, you're absolutly right that many countries including my own have not held up their end of the bargain with the 2% spending goal. My point is that 1,5% for all of NATO is more than enough, instead of taxpayers having to line the pockets of weapons manufacturers and their shareholders. Your logic with regard to Ukraine is outright wrong, mate. NATO combined spends 1,2 trillion $ compared to Russia's 60 billion $ as of 2021. And have 3 nuclear armed nations and US nuclear weapons in western Europe. You're frankly oblivious if you believe that X billion $ worth more military spending in Portugal, Canada or Denmark would have had any impact on Putin's decision to start this war. Finally a small suggestion: You can ask your fellow Brits about this. Would you prefer having 2 more nuclear submarines, or maybe giving free lunch to schoolchildren whose families have difficulty affording them proper meals? There's no right answer. Just a matter of priorities and perspective. I think I've made mine very clear by now.
1