From "the Russians" actually. Remember the Trump is going to leave NATO posts where every Democrat promptly threw a massive tantrum? Lets assume that's a serious threat, and not just anti-Trump/pro-hegemony whining and do the math.. If the rest of NATO wanted to maintain the level of security US military spending provides, they're going to have serious issues funding their social programs. The "big 3" (France, Germany, UK) would need a 10x increase in their submarine forces, massively scale up their F-35 purchases, build hundreds of billions worth of carriers & associated air wings, Germany would have to start a nuclear program, etc, etc. Our spending per GDP is about 5%. Theirs is 2%, with much smaller economies, which would ramp up to 10%+ to try and match the military force we deploy on their behalf.
#169 | POSTED BY SITZKRIEG AT 2017-03-18 01:33 PM | REPLY
Those are some nice made up numbers you've got there. You miss two crucial points: the first is that, even with a dramatic scaling back of US forces, NATO badly outmatches Russian conventionally in both technology and training. The second and more important point is that NATO doesn't even need to match Russia conventionally: nuclear deterrence will prevent conventional conflicts from occurring.