Baloney
Why would a country choose to shoulder 100% of its own defense, rather than contribute its fair percentage to NATO?
let’s see, you pay MORE for defense and lose the commitment of America to defend you.
Not real likely.
Oh. A Game. Well that settles it then.
Last time Trump did something I have watched every single American president even including Ronaldus Magnus try and fail to achieve. He actually got the Yurps to spend more on Defense and start getting serious about providing for their own Defense instead of just relying on Uncle Sugar to pay for everything for them. Seems to me more Trump is just what NATO needs.
The world is in-proportionally reliant on the USA.
Period.
The world’s Prison Bitch.
The USA.
We The People are not quite united in this thing.
To see the outcome as credible requires that one believe that NATO members would refuse to spend enough on their defense to satisfy Trump — but then join together and spend much more after US withdrawal to defend themselves. Both propositions are unlikely.
Wellll now — they’d better disband NATO right away so DJT can’t collapse it.
“A wargame simulated a 2nd Trump presidency. It concluded NATO would collapse.”
well, MY wargame shows a simulated 2nd Trump presidency would make NATO extremely powerful because ALL NATO countries would be forced to meet 100% of their financial obligations going back 10 years ...
These Euroweenie nations need to pay or of forget it. They’ve relied on us to pick up their slack for far too long.
Why don’t we just ‘end game’ what happens if Trump wins?
- Clearly, WWIII will begin
- Trump becomes a Nazi dictator and commits genocide
- ...Trans people first
- Climate change will hit women and children the hardest
- All opponents will be executed
- Border enforcement kills the hopes of everyone on the planet
- Trump continues with his ‘mean tweets’
- Leftists commit suicide en-masse.
ok...the last one...
Only NATO?
Wow I would have expected them to say the entire Universe would implode?
or... they could simply pay their fair share!
As opposed to the USA collapsing if the Biden gets back in
And the bad news is what?
But the game showed how Trump — the presumptive Republican presidential nominee who said on the campaign trail that he'd encourage Russia to "do whatever the hell they want" with NATO allies who spend too little on their militaries — could undermine NATO simply by doing as little as possible to support the alliance.
Under NATO Article 5, each individual NATO member independently finds what it deems necessary to do, and it need not be military. The NATO Euroweenies can incite a war, and the United States can come to their aid as it did with Ukraine, or just wish them good luck. There is no boots on the ground obligation, nor any military obligation whatever. When Article 5 was created, the Euroweenies wanted, and the United States refused to give, such a guarantee.
NATO on what must be done pursuant to Article 5:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm
Collective Defence and Article 5
NATO
Last updated 04 Jul 2023 11:47
[Excerpt]
A cornerstone of the AllianceArticle 5
In 1949, the primary aim of the North Atlantic Treaty – NATO’s founding treaty – was to create a pact of mutual assistance to counter the risk that the Soviet Union would seek to extend its control of Eastern Europe to other parts of the continent.
Every participating country agreed that this form of solidarity was at the heart of the Treaty, effectively making Article 5 on collective defence a key component of the Alliance.
Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.
Article 5
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
This article is complemented by Article 6, which stipulates:
Article 61
“For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
- on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
- on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.”
The principle of providing assistance
With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.
This assistance is taken forward in concert with other Allies. It is not necessarily military and depends on the material resources of each country. It is therefore left to the judgment of each individual member country to determine how it will contribute. Each country will consult with the other members, bearing in mind that the ultimate aim is to “to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area”.
At the drafting of Article 5 in the late 1940s, there was consensus on the principle of mutual assistance, but fundamental disagreement on the modalities of implementing this commitment. The European participants wanted to ensure that the United States would automatically come to their assistance should one of the signatories come under attack; the United States did not want to make such a pledge and obtained that this be reflected in the wording of Article 5.
Garbage in, garbage out. His "givens" are imaginary. Let me guess.... Finley is gay or trans and his elevator doesn't go all the way to the top.
Finley Trimble sounds just as much like a fake name as Eric Ciaremella or whatever Vindman’s pal’s name was.
Translation : "Finley Grimble" designed a board game for British nerds.
Translation : "Finley Grimble" designed a board game for British nerds.
‘Finley Grimble’, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ...............
“Technically the US is barred from leaving NATO...”
Well f you. barred like Bidementia is Constitutionally prohibited from paying student loans