Pulling out of NATO

[noonereal]

Why has the Trump Administration continued to discuss pulling the U.S. out of NATO, which would be a massive victory for Putin?
Nancy Pelosi

This would be the equivalent of us winning the cold war. Why is Trump talking about ending this alliance?

 

[Sweden]

This would be the equivalent of us winning the cold war. Why is Trump talking about ending this alliance?

In an attempt to make European members of NATO pay a fairer share the cost of common defence. It's an effort worth making.

I'm ashamed to say that Sweden cannot even bring itself to join NATO - neutrality is so morally superior, see - although it more and more openly relies on NATO to protect it. Not that it would contribute much; Swedish armed forces are pathetically and trained only for 'peace keeping'.

 

[noonereal]

In an attempt to make European members of NATO pay a fairer share the cost of common defence. It's an effort worth making.

I'm ashamed to say that Sweden cannot even bring itself to join NATO - neutrality is so morally superior, see - although it more and more openly relies on NATO to protect it. Not that it would contribute much; Swedish armed forces are pathetically and trained only for 'peace keeping'.

Honest, having seen Trump these last two years makes me understand he has no strategies, on anything. So I doubt when he says we should pull out of NATO he means anything more than we should pull out of NATO.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Appreciate this coming from someone who is most certainly not a Trump supporter... but NATO is becoming as useless as the UN has been realized to be useless.

In a way Pelosi has a point that at this moment if Trump pulled us out of NATO that Putin would have a win there, but what we are not talking about is NATO has become nothing more than a bureaucratic military spending machine.

What you have to understand is what NATO was designed for, at the time the overwhelming concern was a counter to USSR influences further west or south. Now that we have Putin and a somewhat different but similar enough Russia running around for global influence the game changed. NATO did not adapt near enough, and we are not talking about "protections" for nations that border Russia. This did not work out very well for the Ukraine with Crimea, and it is not working out very well for nations like Finland who persistently complain about Russian "passive aggression" of airspace, sea routes, what have you.

But ultimately we talk about funding for NATO which ends up based on member nation national income (to put it as best I can,) so we end up contributing almost 22% of NATO's budget. From that standpoint the question is what are we getting for that.

The other issue is the contributions to NATO is not very binding, the "contribution" ends up a guideline and other member nations often miss the mark to no real consequence. Now, in the 1950's no one had to worry about this as every member nation was into they hype and contributed. These days... meh.

NATO did what it was supposed to do at the time, now we need something slightly different to deal with Putin and Russia in a way NATO has failed to do so far.

 

[Mycroft]

This would be the equivalent of us winning the cold war. Why is Trump talking about ending this alliance?

When has Trump "continued to discuss pulling the U.S. out of NATO"? I haven't heard anything about this for over a year...since the summer of 2017.

Nancy is like my ex-wife: When she doesn't like me winning an argument, she would bring up stuff that happened two years ago.

 

[noonereal]

When has Trump "continued to discuss pulling the U.S. out of NATO"? I haven't heard anything about this for over a year...since the summer of 2017.

.

then you don't keep current

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html

 

[Mycroft]

then you don't keep current

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html

Oh...rumors.

Dismissed.

 

[CaughtInThe]

the major winner, if we pull out of NATO, is Putin/Russia.

 

[noonereal]

Oh...rumors.

Dismissed.

Oh, you need an escape, got it.

 

[Mycroft]

Oh, you need an escape, got it.

Not an escape. I never place any importance on rumors and I certainly don't let rumors support my positions.

I prefer facts. For example, instead of rumors that Trump has talked about stuff...give me quotes of him talking about stuff.

I don't think you can.

 

[noonereal]

Not an escape. I never place any importance on rumors and I certainly don't let rumors support my positions.

I prefer facts. For example, instead of rumors that Trump has talked about stuff...give me quotes of him talking about stuff.

I don't think you can.

The sand is an often used place to bury one's head.

Enjoy!

 

[Mycroft]

The sand is an often used place to bury one's head.

Enjoy!

So...you don't have any quotes. Okay.

Moving on...

 

[Fenton]

This would be the equivalent of us winning the cold war. Why is Trump talking about ending this alliance?

Our NATO allies have been taking advantage of the USs Super power status and massive defense budget for decades

We spent trillions of dollars on defense over the years to defend not only ourselves but also our NATO Alliies but for some reason they can't even meet their agreed upon 2% of GDP defense spending targets

We fund their defense while they spend their money experimenting with Socialism and it needs to stop.

In 2016 Obama asked our NATO allies to pay their fair share. Finally, Obama and I agree on something. People didn't rage and cry over it either

 

[Fishking]

This would be the equivalent of us winning the cold war. Why is Trump talking about ending this alliance?

The real winner for the U.S. pulling out of NATO would be the U.S. We could stop spending hundreds of billions defending other nations, who don't want to bother defending themselves, and we could focus on modernizing our force, or just spending less overall.

 

[code1211]

This would be the equivalent of us winning the cold war. Why is Trump talking about ending this alliance?

Is he talking about ending the alliance?

What you posted indicates that Pelosi is talking about him talking about it.

NOT that he is talking about it.

 

[noonereal]

Moving on...

a euphemism for running away... I understand.

 

[noonereal]

Our NATO allies have been taking advantage of the USs Super power status and massive defense budget for decades

We spent trillions of dollars on defense over the years to defend not only ourselves but also our NATO Alliies

We do this to defend ourselves, period.

Grow up.

 

[noonereal]

The real winner for the U.S. pulling out of NATO would be the U.S. We could stop spending hundreds of billions defending other nations, who don't want to bother defending themselves, and we could focus on modernizing our force, or just spending less overall.

This is a very ignorant interpretation.

 

[noonereal]

Is he talking about ending the alliance?

What you posted indicates that Pelosi is talking about him talking about it.

NOT that he is talking about it.

He has often mused to his advors that he thinks pulling out wise.

He is like the poster above who can't see the forest through the trees.

He has no understanding of the implications. Very shallow in thought and education.

 

[Jezcoe]

Pulling out of NATO would be the US willingly giving up it’s global hegemony. Global Force projection would massively more expensive than it already is.

If one wants to argue that the US doesn’t need/want global hegemony anymore, that is fine, but one needs to envision what the next century looks like without it.

 

[Mycroft]

He has often mused to his advors that he thinks pulling out wise.

He is like the poster above who can't see the forest through the trees.

He has no understanding of the implications. Very shallow in thought and education.

There you go again...believing rumors and spreading them around. Just like Nancy.

 

[Fishking]

This is a very ignorant interpretation.

It's not an interpretation. It's reality. At best, NATO has only been a buffer for the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. a literal battle ground and quick strike platform for an all-out conventional war. So they are the ones that have all their **** blown up and their people killed, and not ours.

There's no threat of an all out conventional war, Russia just doesn't have the power to project like they used to and European countries have nukes. We are just wasting our money and actually propping up their economies doing it, buy having all those assets, resources, and personnel over their buying their material support and our personnel spending our money in their countries. This is a literal direct transfer of money out of our economy into theirs, and we definitely need to put more into our own economy.

 

[Fenton]

We do this to defend ourselves, period.

Grow up.

The Truman Doctrine dictated American post war foreign policy objectives right up until the fall of the Soviet Union. Read a friken history book

 

[noonereal]

It's not an interpretation. It's reality. At best, NATO has only been a buffer for the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. a literal battle ground and quick strike platform for an all-out conventional war. So they are the ones that have all their **** blown up and their people killed, and not ours.

There's no threat of an all out conventional war, Russia just doesn't have the power to project like they used to and European countries have nukes. We are just wasting our money and actually propping up their economies doing it, buy having all those assets, resources, and personnel over their buying their material support and our personnel spending our money in their countries. This is a literal direct transfer of money out of our economy into theirs, and we definitely need to put more into our own economy.

 

[noonereal]

The Truman Doctrine dictated American post war foreign policy objectives right up until the fall of the Soviet Union. Read a friken history book

mind blowing how folks can twist anything into perceived greed for self