Originally Posted by Guest

THAT THOUGHT is very naive and very Trump like

Please explain your reasoning.

$2,957,000,000: U.S. Taxpayers Will Fund Lion’s Share of UN Budget Again in 2016

Originally Posted by Guest

Please explain your reasoning.

$2,957,000,000: U.S. Taxpayers Will Fund Lion’s Share of UN Budget Again in 2016

Your link is about the United Nations. Your original thought was that we do not need other countries. Two different scenarios.

If you are saying we do not need any help, then we will have a heated conversation, because I can show you how dependent we are on allies, pacts and treaties with others.

If you are simply speaking to our share of United Nations budget, I would need to do some research to see exactly the method of determing hat. You will admit, we got more money, thus we pay more, but still need to check how it's done before saying more.

So which is it ?

Originally Posted by Guest

Please explain your reasoning.

$2,957,000,000: U.S. Taxpayers Will Fund Lion’s Share of UN Budget Again in 2016

Just quickly thought would share. Not detailed enough but a start to understand


"As expected, United States of America contributes the highest with a share of 22%. USA’s GNP is approximately 27% of the total GNP of all the member countries of the UN and thus its highest share of contribution is justified."

How much do various countries contribute to the UN Budget?

Originally Posted by Guest

Your link is about the United Nations. Your original thought was that we do not need other countries. Two different scenarios.

If you are saying we do not need any help, then we will have a heated conversation, because I can show you how dependent we are on allies, pacts and treaties with others.

If you are simply speaking to our share of United Nations budget, I would need to do some research to see exactly the method of determing hat. You will admit, we got more money, thus we pay more, but still need to check how it's done before saying more.

So which is it ?

My original post was, as I stated, "not as much as they need us". I NEVER stated that we DO NOT need other countries as allies.

The link to the article stating America's contributions to the UN is just ONE example of our contribution to our allies. Review your world history, America has ALWAYS done the heavy lifting when it comes to international and global affairs.

I stand by my original premise: Other countries DO need us more than we need them.

Originally Posted by Guest

My original post was, as I stated, "not as much as they need us". I NEVER stated that we DO NOT need other countries as allies.

The link to the article stating America's contributions to the UN is just ONE example of our contribution to are allies. Review your world history, America has ALWAYS done the heavy lifting when it comes to international and global affairs.

I stand by my original premise: Other countries DO need us more than we need them.

Maybe you are right.

I feel a bit more comfortable knowing we have allies, that supply to us needed assets we either do not have or could not supply if we carried the entire load.

Originally Posted by Guest

Hillary has clearly demonstrated her ability to work with other countries, as evidenced by her "successes" in Syria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Iran, etc. And, let's not forget her success in filling the coffers of the Clinton Foundation with foreign government donations in exchange for influence and special favors.

Exactly! Hillary might as well work in Vegas with a sign over her home that says "FOR SALE." Apparently, liberals have no problem with her being more open to being bought than a Bangkok whore. After all, ALL liberals are for sale to highest bidder for their vote.

Originally Posted by Guest

Exactly! Hillary might as well work in Vegas with a sign over her home that says "FOR SALE." Apparently, liberals have no problem with her being more open to being bought than a Bangkok whore. After all, ALL liberals are for sale to highest bidder for their vote.

Funny how the whore meme fits liberals so well...they ARE after all mostly women. Most women are used to "selling the goods"...after all...what IS marriage? Room and board for sex? What is dating? Dinner and a movie for sex. What do women bring to the table? Sex. So, "whoring" comes natural to them. It's what they do. They get things by promising sex.

Originally Posted by Guest

Hilarious, Pew research polled multiple countries and internationally there's only 9% confidence that Trump would be a good leader, make good foreign policy choices, etc. The exception was that CHINA, yes China has a 40% confidence rating of Trump.

Most foreigners believe he's ignorant to foreign relations, is too quick to react and reacts with poor judgement, and the negative views go on.

Looks like Republicans are the only ones with their heads in the sand about Trump. Everyone else even internationally can see how horrible of a President Trump would be.

I'm rather surprised it's as high as 9%.