Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 04/03/2026 10:52:01 PM PDT by John Semmens
President Trump's suggestion that the US might withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) drew criticism from former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) and Sen. Chris Coons (D-Conn), both members of the Senate defense appropriations subcommittee, who asserted that "Americans are safer when NATO is strong and united. NATO troops fought and died in Afghanistan and Iraq alongside American forces."
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) pointed out that "NATO stood by America and came to our aid after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Remember, the obligation of NATO members is to aid each other when any one of the members is attacked. Iran did not attack America. America attacked Iran. This does not trigger their NATO commitment."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) insisted "the American voters are opposed to Trump's war on Iran and to his idea of leaving NATO. Iran's decades of terror sponsorship have been mere pin pricks that can't be used to justify the catastrophe that Trump's war has become. Despite Trump's boasting, Iran is not decimated. This week Iran shot down two US pilots. To avoid losing this unnecessary war, a more prudent strategy would be to endure these continued pricks than to escalate the war or end the bonds that bind us to our European allies. Muslim assaults on other nations have a long history. Traditionally, the response has been to pay a bit of ransom to avert more costly wars. I see no good reason to divert from this traditional strategy. My wisdom will be validated when voters elect more Democrats this Fall and bring an end to Trump's tyranny."
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer defended his resistance to Trump's request for assistance, saying "Iran posed no existential danger to America. There was no need for him to attack them. NATO was formed to protect Europe from the Russians. Previous American presidents recognized that and spent trillions for that purpose. Most recently, President Biden spent $180 billion to help Ukraine fend off Russian attacks. Anyway, Trump says he has 'obliterated' the Iranians. He did it all without our help. So, I don't know why he's complaining."
Trump reminded these critics that "Iran has been funding terrorists that have attacked Iran's perceived enemies since 1979. Iran is a serious threat to every non-Muslim on the planet. In our negotiations with their leaders they boasted that they currently have enough enriched uranium to build a dozen nuclear warheads and also have the ballistic missiles to deliver them. I interpreted this as a clear threat that should be taken seriously and decided to destroy their military capability before they killed millions of innocent people."
"Yes you did, thank you very much," Starmer replied. "Clearly, America doesn't need our help. Besides, as you previously pointed out to me, we are too weak to defend ourselves. This is largely America's fault. While you were building up your armed forces we were spending the funds that would've been needed if we hadn't had the NATO alliance on social welfare benefits for our people. We have no money left for national defense. America is morally culpable for enabling our dependence on your military. The question is whether you are voluntarily going to fulfill your obligation to us or whether we're going to have to get the World Court to compel you to do so."
In related news, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian warned that "our country faces a total economic collapse if a ceasefire is not achieved within the new few weeks." In response, Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Chief Commander Ahmad Vahidi vowed that "our fight must go on until the Great Satan has surrendered or we have all been martyred in the struggle for Islam's world domination. We will never yield to the unbelievers."
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
ping
The 2023 law passed by Congress makes it difficult for the US to completely withdraw from NATO. Now, let’s use married couple whose wife commits adultery but wants to stay married. Husband wants to divorce. The family court judge is about to give her with alimony, house, etc., basically rewarding her actions. So husband withdraws the divorce petition. They are still married but he lives in a different house, almost no communication except necessary, pay minimum requirements but nothing more.
Trump can simply do something similar to it. Still im NATO. Pay the fee. Come to the meeting but don’t commit to anything. If there’s conflict, the US can still offer assistance but minimal. No troops, aircraft, warship, misile, etc. Just intelligence.
Announce that the US will not send any troops or any weapons but help with other ways. If Congress insists to help more, any body bag will be on them.
NATO cannot do anything.
"Clearly, America doesn't need our help. Besides, as you previously pointed out to me, we are too weak to defend ourselves." / Fake quote
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.