Posted on 03/31/2026 9:07:58 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The American relationship with NATO has never been more strained. Despite decades upon decades of propping up Europe's defense while its leaders spend all their money on welfare programs and mass migration, the United States is now having to fight over something as mundane as transiting the airspace of its alleged "allies."
According to President Donald Trump, France denied the use of its airspace to American cargo planes transporting munitions to Israel as part of Operation Epic Fury.
🚨Trump: “The Country of France wouldn’t let planes headed to Israel, loaded up with military supplies, fly over French territory. France has been VERY UNHELPFUL with respect to the “Butcher of Iran,” who has been successfully eliminated! The U.S.A. will REMEMBER!!! President DJT.
pic.twitter.com/dWSEhPuenp— Raylan Givens (@JewishWarrior13) March 31, 2026
France, the United Kingdom, and Germany have been asked to do very little in support of this mission. For the most part, the request has simply been for them not to get in the way. This constitutes getting in the way, and it's a betrayal that should not go unchecked.
Keep in mind, it was the French who gave the Islamist extremists refuge during Iran's 1979 revolution. They then flew the Ayatollah into the country to take power. Aside from the regime itself, no one else is more responsible for the nearly half a century of death, destruction, and oppression in Iran than France. For them to now snub their noses at the United States, which has committed trillions of dollars over the years to make sure Russia doesn't run roughshod over Europe, is inexplicable.
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting NATO requires its European members to join the conflict in full force. But I am suggesting they shouldn't act like spoiled brats, closing their airspace and fretting over the use of their bases for a bombing campaign against an Islamic terrorist regime. If we can't count on them for something that costs them essentially nothing, we won't be able to count on them when the stakes are higher.
In response to this idiocy, Israel has rightfully cut off all security sales to France, which relies on other nations for much of its military technology.
Israel has halted selling defense products to France as a result of France taking a hostile attitude toward Israel, three senior Israeli sources confirmed to The Jerusalem Post.
✍️ @Jeremybob1 @Amichaistein1 https://t.co/DxDM6f9DTG— The Jerusalem Post (@Jerusalem_Post) March 31, 2026
Likewise, Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke out directly against NATO on Monday, suggesting that a reassessment of the American relationship with it would be carried out.
See: Rubio Delivers a Blunt Message to NATO
🚨 SECRETARY RUBIO: If NATO is just about us defending Europe if they’re attacked, but them denying us basing rights when we need them, then that’s not a very good arrangement.
That’s a hard one to stay engaged in and say this is good for the United States. pic.twitter.com/C3IsTXQYnW— Department of State (@StateDept) March 30, 2026
There is no point in being in such a one-sided alliance. America pays for the lion's share of NATO's defense spending, all while European nations refuse to reciprocate in any real way. We don't need France's support if Mexico decides to invade Texas, but France needs us if Russia marches through Ukraine and into the rest of Eastern Europe.
Further underscoring that was this message from Trump on Tuesday morning, telling the United Kingdom, "The USA won’t be there for you anymore."
Trump: “Just TAKE IT. You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore”
pic.twitter.com/z45dmSiEKK— Dhruv Mishra (@DhruvMishra1607) March 31, 2026
Denying the use of airspace and refusing to secure international waters are the straws that broke the camel's back. The United States may not be able to formally leave NATO (due to a law passed during the Biden era), but as long as a Republican is in the White House, and one is for the next three years, these European ingrates should buckle up. The free ride is over, and America is done being spat upon while funding their welfare states.
|
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. |
It is time for the US military to ignore the Europeans and use the bases any way we want. If they have a problem with it, then try to shoot us down and face dire, dire consequences.
No, but we’ll leave if NATO ends.
I remember in 1986 when we sent F-111‘s from England to bomb Libya. The frogs wouldn’t let them over, fly their territory, so they had the flight all the way around Spain and Portugal, and all the way across the Mediterranean. Tragically, the pilots were so tired from the long trip by the time they finally got to Libya that they mistakenly dropped some laser guided bombs on the French embassy compound. That was a terrible shame. It would be an even bigger shame if something similar happened today.
NATO is a cold war dinosaur that should have been terminated years ago.
LOL! I LOVE our President!
It wasn’t too early for them to surrender. It’s never too early.
Just fly over their country ...let them send up fighters...
Actually, it might be better to let them publicly tell us that we cannot let us fly over their countries....the enemy would look for us elsewhere...then we DO fly over their countries and strike from the place where we are not supposed to be. That way, the enemy cannot claim the flyover country is aiding us, and doesn’t attack them. Gotta’ be devious in these days of “public” wars...
“A US exit will definitely get their attention.”
What about the comment above regarding a law passed during the Biden (piss be upon him) era that says we “can’t leave”. Does that mean we can’t close our bases and take our assets home, or does it just mean that we can’t officially resign our membership?
Trump needs NATO way more than France does.
The idea that France “needs” NATO ignores both its history and its capabilities. Under Charles de Gaulle, France made a deliberate choice to step away from NATO’s integrated command precisely to preserve strategic autonomy—and it worked. France maintained its sovereignty, developed an independent nuclear deterrent, and still remained a major global power. That wasn’t isolation; it was controlled cooperation on French terms.
When Nicolas Sarkozy brought France fully back into NATO’s command structure in 2009, it marked a political shift—not a strategic necessity. Reintegration arguably reduced France’s independent voice by aligning it more closely with U.S.-led priorities, rather than strengthening its global influence.
The reality is that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization structurally reflects American leadership and interests. The United States dominates NATO militarily, financially, and strategically. That imbalance naturally shapes decision-making. It’s not unreasonable to question whether France—an independent nuclear power and the number two arms exporters of the planet—needs to subordinate aspects of its defense posture to an alliance where it is not the primary decision-maker.
France already possesses what most countries in NATO rely on the alliance for: a credible nuclear deterrent, advanced military technology, and a strong defense industry. Combined with its leadership in civilian nuclear energy, France has a level of strategic independence that few nations can match. NATO does not create that strength—it simply overlays it with many constraints.
A more autonomous European defense framework—one not anchored to Washington—could allow countries like France to pursue security policies better tailored to regional realities rather than global power competition.
Concerns about U.S. reliability are not theoretical. Statements from Trump have openly questioned NATO commitments, highlighting a fundamental vulnerability: Europe’s security architecture depends heavily on American political will, which can shift with elections. That very clear uncertainty strengthens the case for strategic independence, not deeper reliance.
The idea that NATO is purely about collective defense MASSIVELY overlooks its economic and geopolitical dimensions. The alliance reinforces U.S. influence over European defense markets, standards, and procurement decisions—to the absolute advantage of American industry. From that perspective, it’s reasonable to see NATO as serving U.S. interests in ways that don’t always align with France’s.
Political movements in France, including those led by Marine Le Pen, reflect a growing skepticism toward this imbalance. The argument isn’t about abandoning cooperation—it’s about redefining it so that France retains full control over its military, foreign policy, and strategic direction.
In that light, questioning NATO isn’t radical—it’s consistent with a long-standing French tradition of independence. The real issue isn’t whether alliances matter, but whether France benefits more from leading its own path or following one largely shaped elsewhere...
Trump will never leave NATO (for business reasons which are good for America), France might though - France has not much to gain with NATO.
At this point the Russians running roughshod over Europe would be a rescue mission.
Europeans would be better off with any entity other than the Muslim invaders in charge.
Yup. Trump should tell Bessent to terminate all wire transfers to NATO… permanently.
I just sent a note to Trump re pulling out of NATO.
14% of the Russia population is Muslim.
8% of France’s population Is muslim.
Russia’s closest ally is IRAN (yes it is muslim).
Then Russia invades parts of Europe (Ukraine) with armed Chechen muslim invaders and armed North Korean Communist invaders.
Yes, Russia DOES that.
Putin himself inaugurated Europe’s LARGEST Mosque - right in the center of Moscow!
Therefore, Russia is the one fighting Christianity right now.
These are Moscow’s streets (crazy footage) :
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HLlgbaF0G48
Russia is a failed nation thanks to Allah.
Face facts Frenchie. France is a nation of backstabbing cowards. The reason why we didn’t give you stinking French a heads up is cause you’re not trustworthy. You snakes will stab anyone in the back and then when things get hot, you run the other way. Hang your head and shame.
France today owes the United States $1,655,000,000 for obligations incurred by France after the end of WW2. The present value of the entire French-American settlement, at the rate of interest carried in France’s existing obligations is $1,681,000,000.
France can claim that it has strategic autonomy all it wants.
It seems that this is an easy thing for France to do, especially because it’s on someone else’s nickel. Fine France, pay us what you owe us, then go home and get your shine box.
In WWII, France had a Vichy government that assailed British warships. As a former surrender monkey to the Axis powers, France can’t be trusted.
In WWII, France had a Vichy government that assailed British warships. As a former surrender monkey to the Axis powers, France can’t be trusted.
Similarly both Spain and Italy would not let us use the bases we have there for anything.
OK. Message understood.
Pull all bases out of both countries. There is utterly no point in us having bases and troops in these countries if we are not going to be allowed to use them when we need them. They seem to think we should have bases in their country to provide for their defense and to pump money into their economies - and that we should get nothing in return.
That doesn’t work for us. Time to end this.
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.
