Close Topic Options

NATO & USA - Page 2

KN,

I think our threat to back has already pushed them into action. The latest funding report I saw actually saw that half a dozen countries have upped their funding since the November election. I guess they figured with Trump as President they better actually start to meet their quota too. Also, without us they all together don;t have the ability to stand up to Russia… not really. That means they might eventually fold to Russia, and that would be bad for us in a geopolitical sense. Lastly, it's always good to have to be able to call upon, and NATO makes them our allies by treaty. So I don't think NATO has outlived its usefulness yet, but that doesn't mean we always have to bear the brunt of the cost, and maybe with President Trump we won't be.

USA and NATO

Europe May Finally Rethink NATO Costs. By Ray McGovern. Let me ask those of you who believe Russia is planning to invade Europe to put down the New York Times for a minute or two. Source 7t.

NATO & USA History & Civil Business Politics

This is an excellent article. There is a lot in it that is spot on. There are a few places that skewed though. I will discuss just one of them in this response. Having been around back then and very interested in what was going on, I remember when Germany reunified. What NATO leaders, European leaders, and American leaders said is that NATO would not deploy forces in the former territory of East Germany. That one inch eastward statement meant into East German. Of course, this is me thinking back so I could be wrong. So, perhaps the fact that Gorbachev himself said that no guarantees were made relating to NATO's future expansion may display that the author has twisted some facts rather significantly.