Posted on 12/09/2023 11:22:26 AM PST by Mariner
For 74 years, the NATO has been America’s most important military alliance. Presidents of both parties have seen NATO as a force multiplier enhancing the influence of the United States by uniting countries on both sides of the Atlantic in a vow to defend one another.
Donald Trump has made it clear that he sees NATO as a drain on U.S. resources by freeloaders. He has held that view for at least a quarter-century.
In his 2000 book, “The America We Deserve,” Trump wrote that “pulling back from Europe would save this country millions of dollars annually.” As president, he repeatedly threatened a U.S. withdrawal from the alliance.
Yet as he runs to regain the White House, Trump has said precious little about his intentions. His campaign website contains a single cryptic sentence: “We have to finish the process we began under my administration of fundamentally reevaluating NATO’s purpose and NATO’s mission.” He and his team refuse to elaborate.
That vague line has generated enormous uncertainty and anxiety among European allies and American supporters of the country’s traditional foreign policy role.
European ambassadors and think tank officials have been making pilgrimages to associates of Trump to inquire about his intentions. At least one ambassador, Finland’s Mikko Hautala, has reached out directly to Trump and sought to convince him of his country’s value to NATO as a new member, according to two people familiar with the conversations.
In interviews over the past several months, more than a half-dozen current and former European diplomats — speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution from Trump should he win — said alarm was rising on Embassy Row and among their home governments that Trump’s return could mean not just the abandonment of Ukraine but a broader U.S. retreat from the continent and a gutting of the Atlantic alliance.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
“Neither was created to defend against the country that no longer exists.”
Then what is Russia doing on the UN Security Council, with veto power? RUSSIA was not a member of the UN when it was created, and when the Security Council was formed. So, how did Russia get to segue onto the Security Council? It would have made far more sense for India to join the Security Council than Russia.
But, the argument has been that Russia was the SUCCESSOR nation to the USSR (i.e., it assumed the international status and recognition of the USSR), and thus deserved to be on the Security Council. In which case, NATO — if its sole purpose was to resist Soviet aggression and expansionism — would still serve to resist Russia, as the Soviet Union’s successor state.
The best answer to all of this is to get rid of the UN all together.
Anyway; just my $.02.
"Lock up your daughters; lock up your wives. Lock up your back doors, run for your lives!"
We SHOULD abandon this long-accomplished project that's now only a parasite on us when we have a legion of home-grown ones to contend with. And yes, to the detriment of New York City's escort services the UN needs to go as well.
Fear mongering drivel by America’s foremost enemy propaganda source
So now you “even” support the NYT.
Too many kooks to deal with.
America would be sunk if we withdrew from Europe.
Do we have people here writing from China and Russia?
It’s idiotic.
working for our enemies
Fixed it
NATO would like us unarmed.
“When the European Union was formed, instead of demanding that Europe provide for its own common defense, then forming a military, monetary, and trade alliance with the new EU to bury China and Russia, the response of the USA under Bush & luminaries such as John McCain was to view the newly emerging EU as a threat & to form a North American union as counterweight, which is what NAFA really is. That’s how you know that it’s really the commies pulling the strings….as Latinos flowed into the USA following the creation of NAFA & as Muslims flowed into Europe’s new open borders, being laundered through Turkey, which also happens to be the only EU country with a big army which easily may be turned against the disarmed & ideologically castrated EU…….to turn thre EU into an Islamic Republic…….with Russia and China riding to the rescue, perhaps.. NATO and the United Nations are the enemy of freedom and free markets.” —-just an opinion I found, online
I was surprised that it took 24 posts before some smart person stated the obvious.
There hasn't been a hot shooting war in Europe since then, but the Cold War did make some challenging times. Now Europe is faced with an invasion of foreigners that they invited in. The next round of war in Europe will be civil wars, internal struggles, if the natives decide to go back to Europe for Europeans. Otherwise, it will end up looking like the street scenes in "Blade Runner".
Just More of your empty slogans and meaningless catch-phrases.
““When the European Union was formed, instead of demanding that Europe provide for its own common defense, then forming a military, monetary, and trade alliance with the new EU to bury China and Russia, the response of the USA under Bush & luminaries such as John McCain was to view the newly emerging EU as a threat & to form a North American union as counterweight, which is what NAFA really is. That’s how you know that it’s really the commies pulling the strings….as Latinos flowed into the USA following the creation of NAFA & as Muslims flowed into Europe’s new open borders, being laundered through Turkey, which also happens to be the only EU country with a big army which easily may be turned against the disarmed & ideologically castrated EU…….to turn thre (sic) EU into an Islamic Republic...”
Turkey isn’t in the EU.
Yes, the US was the kinetic big stick of NATO; but without its NATO allies the US would have found itself pretty isolated, which was not an enviable position post-WWII. Besides military cooperation (force), the most important element of the alliance is INTEL cooperation. That has paid dividends over the decades.
BTW, when are you going to post the link, Frick?
Kick NATO, UN AND WHO OUT OF AMERICA, THEY ARE LEECHES.
“ Purpose of NATO was to keep Germany occupied and keep Russia at bay……but the Soviet Union fell and Germany was allowed to just reunify. The one who spoke the truth is Rumsfeld, but Cheney threw him under a bus. Old Europe hates us as imperialist Occupiers, but new Europe, such as Poland , and the Czechs love us—-ie people who actually understood that the commies were as bad as the Nazis. Patton was right, too. And getting into war with Japan only allowed commie revolution in China,—-Chinese commie being western educated. Pacific War killed many of our best men. Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor because it was a done deal that we would attack them from there…….and we had no business getting involved in the Pacific. Hitler was a big enough problem. We should have taken out Hitler, then Stalin…..going right into Russia. Getting involved with Japan……which really was no threat to United States safety……..was a mistake we still are paying for——and Hawaii is becoming a Leftist, pro-Chinese colony now—and its natives are wanting independence from the USA” ——an opinion I found online , I thought was interesting. Don’t get angry at me for posting it.
Well said !
If Europe with all their resources won’t do anything about the Russian “threat”, why should people in North America ?
NATO, as presently constructed, will soon be dead.
The fact that a US Presidential Candidate mentions the idea, and half (or more) of Americans believe it needs serious change/reform indicates it is a salient political idea that will NOT go way.
Its now just the vested deep-state interests trying to fight against a tidal wave.
Or in another analogy: the genie can’t be put back in the bottle.
Hasn’t been much shooting in Europe lately??
With Russia in an all out war right now, and having devastated its neighbors???
I guess this is now make believe land.
PP on that Churchill/Zelensky stuff you floated a year ago.
“Just think: There were TWO World Wars within twenty-one years; and none in almost eighty years.”
Yeah, you know what caused the first one? Tripwires. The heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary was killed by a Serbian so Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia. And then Serbia’s ally Russia declared war on Austria-Hungary. And then Austria-Hungary’s ally Germany declared war on Russia. And then Russia’s allies Britain and France declared war on Germany and Austria-Hungary.
And we had a worldwide conflagration because of a minor event between two countries.
I get the point of deterrence, but when everybody wants to be in NATO just so they can be protected by the United States, it’s time to exit. Some of us are tired of being involved in Europe’s problems.
I've long been wondering why we have so many thousands of ground troops stationed in Germany and elsewhere. If Russia and the USA actually declared war, guess what the result would be?
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.