Don't get me started on soccer!
Posted on 05/16/2022 10:39:41 AM PDT by JonPreston
While claiming to “preserve peace,” NATO has a history of bombing civilians and committing war crimes.
The three smartest words that Donald Trump uttered during his presidential campaign are “NATO is obsolete.” His adversary, Hillary Clinton, retorted that NATO was “the strongest military alliance in the history of the world.” Now that Trump has been in power, the White House parrots the same worn line that NATO is “the most successful Alliance in history, guaranteeing the security, prosperity, and freedom of its members.” But Trump was right the first time around: Rather than being a strong alliance with a clear purpose, this 70-year-old organization that met in London on December 4 is a stale military holdover from the Cold War days that should have gracefully retired many years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at citizentruth.org ...
I’m not trying to pick a fight here. Do you even know who/what she is?
AFA “globalist entanglements”, you know nothing about me. If you did, you would not have engaged in that smear.
“NATO was slowly unraveling before February. Putin has reinvigorated NATO, and united Ukrainians. Pretty good.”
Meanwhile, NATO countries are going around sanctions to buy Russian gas, and generally marching to Russia’s drummer.
This is not a sign of a reinvigorated NATO. This is a sign of Europe yet again showing up for dinner at a fancy restaurant knowing that someone else is footing the bill (US). As soon as we stop paying the tab, NATO will fall apart.
The real question is not “Is NATO obsolete” it’s “Will NATO exist as anything militarily significant in a few years”.
I think that Putin has broken NATO. How else can the refusal to follow sanctions on the part of Europe be taken?
NATO has been obsolete since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
I agree with that.
Engaged? Smear? Lighten up. Time grows short.
This, sir, is a gem.
I will say this:
Not excusing what Putin has done, but it quite possibly didn’t have to be. Trump came into office hoping to win Russia over as a partner against Iran, against China, against the jihadis. I think Putin saw this, and there was some cooperation below the table.
But the constant Russia!! investigations, the constant accusations that he was a Russian agent made it impossible for Trump to do what he had hoped to do, and in fact drove Russia ever more firmly into its alliances with the bad actors.
Then of course you have the debacle in Afghanistan, which (I believe) signaled to Putin that now was the time to right what he sees as a historic wrong, that Biden and NATO would not interfere. Again, had Trump been in office, there would likely have been no debacle, Trump would have been much more clear where he stood on Ukraine, and NATO would have looked much less threatening with Trump at the head of it (as long as you stay inside your borders...)
Miscalculation on Putin’s part, and malevolent incompetence, and incompetent malevolence on the DNC/RNC establishment’s part.
With Finland and Sweden wanting in, it looks like NATO is to be a chunk of the NWO along with the UN, WHO and WEF.
NATO was heading for obsolescence.
Then Russia invaded Ukraine and threatened to annihilate the UK, Finland and Poland with Nukes.
Much worse!
But the Ukraine isn't a NATO member.
Good points all. They are (slowly) working their way around to enforcing sanctions, but you notice they waited until summer to (supposedly) cut off gas purchases. They only just last week closed the pipeline through Ukraine!!!
Amazing.
I have no issue with us being in NATO, I just want those European countries to PAY US for the security we provide!
Otherwise.. yeah.. your on your own!
Not only is NATO obsolete, but so is Germany. And bicycles.Did you not see me rub Finland and Sweden in your face?
I suppose you must play the delusional imbecile when posting an article from - Medea Benjamin (born Susan Benjamin; September 10, 1952) is an American political activist who was the co-founder of Code Pink.
But I'm just wondering, how does that work for you?
Yeah, the gall they have to expect US military protection without lifting a finger or paying a bill. Trump is the only president to demand fairness and he was impeached for it.
Repeating Hillary Clinton’s lie about Trump’s position on NATO is still a lie.
Trump’s #1 position was that our so-called allies needed to spend 2 percent of GDP on NATO, or else we’d reconsider how much we’re spend to protect them.
The Hillary Clinton lie is dissected below:
https://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/whats-trumps-position-on-nato/
It turns out that Germany only committed to 2% on a one-time basis when Russia invaded Ukraine. While that was good, that’s not good enough.
Now with Finland and Sweden in the alliance, with Ukraine having a special relationship, and with the Russian military revealed to mostly be fake, we could maybe rethink the 2% commitment.
I’d say 2% for the U.S., U.K. and France as they are permanent members of the UN Security Council; 2% for front-line countries, and 1.5% for other countries (e.g., Germany). (That would still be 0.5% more than they were spending.)
With our MASSIVE strength, there’s no purpose in feeding Putin’s paranoia. We’re not interesting in conquering Russia, and even if they surrendered to us, we’d reject them. If Russia wants to surrender to somebody, try Armenia.
Don't get me started on soccer!
According to pro-United Nations globalists.
The date doeant matter. What pat od North Atlantic do people not understand?
“Europeans can’t stand Trump (a recent poll found he is trusted by only 4 percent of Europeans!) and their leaders can’t rely on him.”
From the article. Ok now they got their wish. Hoped they liked being left high and dry in Afghanistan.
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.