Trump Weighs Major NATO Policy Shift Tied to Defense Spending

https://badlandsmedia.tv/ ^ | 3/6/2025 | ali tucker

[dfwgator]

We should be the backstop, and not the lead dog.

Besides, I have a feeling we’re going to have to deal with matters in our own hemisphere.

[dp0622]

No it’s silly.

Why do we have to invent monetary rules to decide who we defend in a treaty..then it’s not a treaty.

JUST WALK AWAY.

No matter what they spend, our men will still die, likely over some idiocy or another.

[faithhopecharity]

several NATO countries have already been sold out by their ruling elites to the Islamic invasion, conquest underway and

they’re probably lost causes now

but yes, I’d still try to help defend the other countries to the extent possible

[Reily]

This is a negotiation tactic. The end goal is NATO participation\membership reform like serious levels of defense spending by Europeans. Reform could include something completely different and not called NATO with minimum US participation.

Art of the Deal!

[Bratch]

National Security Advisor Mike Waltz Confirms That any EU/NATO Peacekeeping Troops in Ukraine Will NOT Have Article 5 Protection by USA Military

March 5, 2025 | Sundance

We continue to look suspiciously at National Security Advisor Mike Waltz because the emphasis on a U.S-Ukraine “minerals deal” comes directly from his strategic planning.  Waltz appears to be trying to get Trump enmeshed in the Ukraine conflict through economic ties which can be used to manipulate the U.S position.

However, that said, President Trump has clearly told his Nat Sec Advisor that he will not be coerced into sending U.S. military troops into Ukraine to support a peacekeeping mission. Nor will President Trump look upon his demand that EU/NATO members put their boots-on-the ground in Ukraine as any extended NATO Article-5 responsibility.

Mike Waltz spoke directly to the issue of European NATO troops being deployed as peacekeepers into Ukraine, and the possibility of those troops being attacked, thereby triggering Article-5 deployment of U.S. military to defend them.

NSA Waltz correctly confirms that Ukraine is not a NATO member, therefore any attack (which could include an IC false flag) within Ukraine is not considered an attack against a NATO country by the Trump administration.  

WATCH (prompted):

This puts a little context to the strategic position of President Trump against the backdrop of all the geopolitical navigation that comes with the USA having conducted a proxy war against Russia using the geography of Ukraine.

Additionally, last night Secretary of State Marco Rubio is the first Trump administration official who specifically said that the past three years have been a proxy war between the USA and Russia. 

Video Below:

Marco Rubio: Only Trump can make this possible

[FreedomPoster]

Paper

[cymbeline]

“to favor members that allocate a set percentage of their GDP to defense”

A foreign government could say they’re spending x on y. How do we know that’s true?

DOGE is revealing that there’s a lot we don’t know about our own government’s spending.

[icclearly]

It's a horrible idea. Just another step in the FOREVER WARS that always end in disaster and losses for us.

I've got an idea. Why don't we worry about the $35 trillion (and growing) debt and our crumbling society that is about to sink us and forget about saving the rest of the planet?

When we save our own beehinds then maybe we can help others.

In the meantime, we've got them nukes and two oceans on either side.

[cuz1961]

uch action as it deems necessary,

\/

we DEEM any action UNnecessary .

easy peasy.

[Lowell1775]

NATO Article 5 Requirements if member attacked.....

....”such action as it deems necessary”....

aka.....the exit.

Just to be absolutely clear.

We do not HAVE to do a thing and are still in compliance with the NATO Treaty. That is exactly why it reads the way
it reads....

But what do I know and I do not feel strongly about it. :->

[Cobra64]

We should have pulled out of NATO at the end of the Cold War. Why should America be the planet’s policeman? When has ANY country ever come to our aid during a natural disaster? Answer: Never. Were suckers.

[ansel12]

In a tight military alliance like this, everyone needs to be a full participant or else they can join the European nations that are cooperative with us and even on the same page as a friendly ally, yet are not so intertwined and teamed up as to be an actual NATO member.

[ansel12]

A lot of countries give us aid in natural disasters.

Here is a wiki page on Katrina as an example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina#:~:text=The%20Mexican%20Navy%20sent%20two,tons%20of%20food%20as%20well.