Did a man with multiple bankruptcies just lecture NATO members about paying their bills?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Here comes Jt, dragging up that same tired subject of bankruptcies that has been well covered. I ask you Jt, why not lecture them?
jtdavis posted:Did a man with multiple bankruptcies just lecture NATO members about paying their bills?
What's your point.?? Or what does that have to do with NATO.??
Or what man,?? Or who's paying what to bills.?? Talk to me Odie...
Kraven posted:jtdavis posted:Did a man with multiple bankruptcies just lecture NATO members about paying their bills?
What's your point.?? Or what does that have to do with NATO.??Or what man,?? Or who's paying what to bills.?? Talk to me Odie...Where's crash.pizzpants when you need an answer Odie,??
well, since NATO members are 3 years into the 10 year agreement to reach the pay arrangements ... a man with zero clue as to how NATO works...and multiple bankruptcies... just made himself look like a fool, again by lecturing world leaders on something he was obviously clueless about.... . so, what part of that do you republicons have a hard time understanding?
jtdavis posted:Did a man with multiple bankruptcies just lecture NATO members about paying their bills?
And did a man who supports a political party with policies that bankrupted other countries just lecture us about Trump.
http://time.com/venezuela-photographers/
http://www.heritage.org/market...-big-loser-socialism
With over 2,000 business ventures, Trump had four bankruptcies. Hillary only ran one private enterprise and bankrupted it.
No Action Talk Only aka NATO, time to pony up you deadbeats.
As a reminder, the Democrats bankrupted the city government of Washington, DC and just bankrupted Puerto Rico.
Well it's a good thing they left Calif****** alone
just a reminder... the agreement to pay into NATO is a 10 year agreement.. this is year 3. exactly what part of that is so darn hard for the republicons to understand... if you have a 10 year home mortgage, should you be paid off in year 3? dire has a bad habit of deflecting the issue to some rt. wingnut talking point.. and away from the ignorance of the republicon party and trump.
Kraven posted:Well it's a good thing they left Calif****** alone
Californication?
Crash.Override posted:well, since NATO members are 3 years into the 10 year agreement to reach the pay arrangements ... a man with zero clue as to how NATO works...and multiple bankruptcies... just made himself look like a fool, again by lecturing world leaders on something he was obviously clueless about.... . so, what part of that do you republicons have a hard time understanding?
The agreement dates to 2006, the euro-slackers are now late and that agreement was for 2% GDP each year, not cumulative over a decade.
The United States has a point in noting that its commitment is disproportionately large. Last year it spent 3.6% of its GDP on defence, the highest ratio of any NATO member (and the highest total military budget in the world by a hefty margin). That is almost double the target of 2% of GDP that NATO members all agreed to in 2006. At the time six members reached the threshold; last year five did.
copied directly from nato's transcripts.
In 2014, we decided to stop the cuts in defense spending, gradually increase and move towards spending 2 % of GDP on defense within a decade.
Crash.Override posted:copied directly from nato's transcripts.
In 2014, we decided to stop the cuts in defense spending, gradually increase and move towards spending 2 % of GDP on defense within a decade.
And that is also a non-binding agreement just as in 2006. The only way that those freeloading bums will divert money from their flat-lining "democratic" socialist entitlement "economies" is for someone to prod and berate them into putting money into their own defenses. Russia is failing economically and failing empires often overrun their neighbors when they have run out of other peoples money in their own borders.
it may be a 'non-binding agreement just as in 2006', but wouldn't that make your claim that "the agreement dates back to 2006" a lie by your own admission? or at the very least, your attempt to deceive or deflect from the truth?
regardless of who's paid or not, you made an attempt to make trump's statement true, when in fact it wasn't. that's my whole point.. and thank you for admitting it.
Crash.Override posted:it may be a 'non-binding agreement just as in 2006', but wouldn't that make your claim that "the agreement dates back to 2006" a lie by your own admission? or at the very least, your attempt to deceive or deflect from the truth?
regardless of who's paid or not, you made an attempt to make trump's statement true, when in fact it wasn't. that's my whole point.. and thank you for admitting it.
The agreements might be non-binding, but the liars are the ones who agreed to abide by them when they had no intention of implementing the agreements. They are just like those politicians who signed the non-binding gaseous plant food agreements for political visual effects, they are a bunch of lying political hacks who must be forced to do the right thing. The only worse liars are the ones who try to cover for those liars like you. No one canceled the 2006 agreement, they only agreed to magically turn 2016 into 2024 and later when this latest lie plays out, they might add another decade.
Can NATO go bankrupt just like Trump did?
BTW, Trump urges; use american material and build it in America. Is any of his or Ivankas' products made in America? Just asking.
jtdavis posted:Can NATO go bankrupt just like Trump did?
BTW, Trump urges; use american material and build it in America. Is any of his or Ivankas' products made in America? Just asking.
JT, your deflection shield is on.
Obviously, if the deadbeat nations would increase their contributions, the losers would be ISIS and Russia. Who could be against that except terrorists and Russian agents.
jtdavis posted:Can NATO go bankrupt just like Trump did?
BTW, Trump urges; use american material and build it in America. Is any of his or Ivankas' products made in America? Just asking.
What plants in America could they use? Give us a list.
giftedamateur posted:Kraven posted:Well it's a good thing they left Calif****** alone
Californication?
Nope,,, I went full frontal,, they earned it..
Stanky posted:Crash.Override posted:it may be a 'non-binding agreement just as in 2006', but wouldn't that make your claim that "the agreement dates back to 2006" a lie by your own admission? or at the very least, your attempt to deceive or deflect from the truth?
regardless of who's paid or not, you made an attempt to make trump's statement true, when in fact it wasn't. that's my whole point.. and thank you for admitting it.
The agreements might be non-binding, but the liars are the ones who agreed to abide by them when they had no intention of implementing the agreements. They are just like those politicians who signed the non-binding gaseous plant food agreements for political visual effects, they are a bunch of lying political hacks who must be forced to do the right thing. The only worse liars are the ones who try to cover for those liars like you. No one canceled the 2006 agreement, they only agreed to magically turn 2016 into 2024 and later when this latest lie plays out, they might add another decade.
so, once again, thanks for admitting your false claims.
Crash.Override posted:Stanky posted:Crash.Override posted:it may be a 'non-binding agreement just as in 2006', but wouldn't that make your claim that "the agreement dates back to 2006" a lie by your own admission? or at the very least, your attempt to deceive or deflect from the truth?
regardless of who's paid or not, you made an attempt to make trump's statement true, when in fact it wasn't. that's my whole point.. and thank you for admitting it.
The agreements might be non-binding, but the liars are the ones who agreed to abide by them when they had no intention of implementing the agreements. They are just like those politicians who signed the non-binding gaseous plant food agreements for political visual effects, they are a bunch of lying political hacks who must be forced to do the right thing. The only worse liars are the ones who try to cover for those liars like you. No one canceled the 2006 agreement, they only agreed to magically turn 2016 into 2024 and later when this latest lie plays out, they might add another decade.
so, once again, thanks for admitting your false claims.
And thanks for admitting that you will always lie for lying politicians who promote your views. Those politicians lied when they promised to increase their defense spending and you lie when you apply the left's newspeak to cover for them.
no... i showed the last/latest reports from nato... you tried to cover trump's ass... you showed your willingness to distort the facts to fit your narrative. you showed your willingness to lie for your party and/or president to look better. it didn't work and now you're applying the same tactics trump uses daily, gas-lighting... accusing me of doing EXACTLY WHAT YOU DID! thanks for allowing me to prove my point. thanks for showing exactly what 'trump's base' will do to serve the party and/or president. mostly, just thanks for doing what republicons do every single day, on these forums.
The newspaper article shows that the agreement dates to 2006 and the signatory countries failed to live up to the bargain, so they got an extension. Where's the lie? The article shows that the US provides the majority of spending for the protection of Nato. Where's the lie? Trying to imply that Europe was just two and a fraction years into the process of expanding their military spending, pants-on-fire lie!
I bet that unless ISIS or other terrorist organizations or Russia misbehave, the euro-zone will be asking for another extension without a good bit of coercion. Covering for deadbeat liars who rob the US taxpayer just because you have need to besmirch Trump because you wanted something for president so corrupt that even the flawed showboat Trump could beat her; well, I don't think the English language has a proper descriptive word for you.
no... i showed the last/latest reports from nato... you tried to cover trump's ass... you showed your willingness to distort the facts to fit your narrative. you showed your willingness to lie for your party and/or president to look better. it didn't work and now you're applying the same tactics trump uses daily, gas-lighting... accusing me of doing EXACTLY WHAT YOU DID! thanks for allowing me to prove my point. thanks for showing exactly what 'trump's base' will do to serve the party and/or president. mostly, just thanks for doing what republicons do every single day, on these forums.
What plants in America could they use? Give us a list.
Gifted, I don't have to give a list, I asked a question, don't answer a question with a question. I think I know the answer, NOT ANY AT ALL.
JT, your deflection shield is on.
Dire, just answer the question. Trump uses the bankruptcy laws when his projects don't go right, can he try that with NATO.
jtdavis posted:JT, your deflection shield is on.
Dire, just answer the question. Trump uses the bankruptcy laws when his projects don't go right, can he try that with NATO.
There is no precedent. However, the Europeans are the deadbeats, not the US.
jtdavis posted:JT, your deflection shield is on.
Dire, just answer the question. Trump uses the bankruptcy laws when his projects don't go right, can he try that with NATO.
Hey jt, is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully. As a matter of fact, when you first ran this by us, we gave you lists of others. Instead of puking up your same tired claim to re-chew, why didn't you just go back to your other rants and re-read them?
Crash.Override posted:no... i showed the last/latest reports from nato... you tried to cover trump's ass... you showed your willingness to distort the facts to fit your narrative. you showed your willingness to lie for your party and/or president to look better. it didn't work and now you're applying the same tactics trump uses daily, gas-lighting... accusing me of doing EXACTLY WHAT YOU DID! thanks for allowing me to prove my point. thanks for showing exactly what 'trump's base' will do to serve the party and/or president. mostly, just thanks for doing what republicons do every single day, on these forums.
From the article: "At a summit in 2014, NATO reiterated its commitment to the 2% target. Members that fell short at the time promised to meet their obligations by 2024."
The agreement dates to 2006; you lied about Nato just starting the process, and I might add that the agreement is still not compulsory just like most modern agreements. Take the Paris Climate Agreement, it is legally weasel-worded where compliance is optional on controlling gaseous plant food but it does mandate converting gazillions of gallons of jet fuel into CO2 and turning forests into paper pulp for compulsory meetings and reports. Even one of the left's climate gods knows that: https://www.theguardian.com/en...ge-paris-talks-fraud
Jt sez: "I may repeat myself, but at least I don't repeat myself".
Hey jt, is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully.
I try to do things the honorable way. Not screwing people when it don't go to suit me.
jtdavis posted:Hey jt, is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully.
I try to do things the honorable way. Not screwing people when it don't go to suit me.
best is the type of employer/ employee who thinks the company/customers owe her their business... and if by 'perfectly legal ways' she means trump refuses to pay for work done until he's sued for it, she's right.
example.. a little paint company just won a case against trump/maralardass for $32,000.00 that trump refused to pay... it took them so long to win the case because of trump's stalling tactics, the judge awarded them over $330,000.00 in legal fees and suffering caused by trump's antics.
jtdavis posted:Hey jt, is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully.
I try to do things the honorable way. Not screwing people when it don't go to suit me.
Oh I bet you'd screw them so fast their heads would spin. You've almost said as much at times. But that didn't answer the question.
==========================
"Is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully".
Bestworking posted:jtdavis posted:Hey jt, is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully.
I try to do things the honorable way. Not screwing people when it don't go to suit me.
Oh I bet you'd screw them so fast their heads would spin. You've almost said as much at times. But that didn't answer the question.
==========================
"Is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully".
what in the holy hell do republicons know about honor? hypocrisy, deceit, insults, scandal... republicons have those covered.. honor, that's a strange concept to them.
republicons like trump don't think the laws apply to them.. and 'the base' couldn't care less about it.
I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way,
I understand doing things the honorable way. I understand keeping my word. I understand paying my debts. I don't think any of those things are unlawful, but they may be strange to you.
jtdavis posted:I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way,
I understand doing things the honorable way. I understand keeping my word. I understand paying my debts. I don't think any of those things are unlawful, but they may be strange to you.
Ah, but you see jt, that has nothing to do with the question. You started it, and now all of a sudden you don't want to play. I don't think anyone that votes for slops can take the high road at all. I'll ask again, I'm sure you will dodge again.
"Is Trump the only person that has ever used perfectly legal ways (such as bankruptcy) to do business? I know you slops don't understand doing things the lawful way, but surely you've heard of others that have done things lawfully".
Trumps situation is in the hands of lawyers. Nothing you can do about it even if you did understand it.
What y'all / we should all be concerned about is the national debt that is slowly bleeding our country into bankruptcy.
https://www.thebalance.com/us-...-and-percent-3306296
Wonder what the $$ difference is between warm and fuzzy social programs and those programs that create non - governmental jobs that contribute to the GNP.
i just read an article that stated "there was a lot of russian money pouring into republicon coffers last election cycle'.... no wonder the republicon platform on the ukraine changed overnight. ha
