This is a very inaccurate representation of what happened. The request by Turkey was to NATO, and in response 2 Patriot batteries were moved to Turkey. Request met. These two batteries were owned by the US, and wanting to backfill for them the US government made informal requests to all NATO members to temporarily provide some of their Patriot systems. These were not for Turkey, they were to be used either in Ukraine or the Middle East. Poland decided not to lend one of their 2 systems but specifically noted that it was not a formal request from NATO and therefore they did not feel obliged to agree. No refusal to meet NATO obligations.
Yes, without question it requires a response. But beyond waiting for a response, this essay refers to historical context that is completely irrelevant today. Yes, yes, we all know Europe & and others, Canada included could have & should have contributed more, I’m Canadian. But for Christ sake, live in the world of today. The US armed forces, inclusive of ICE serve at the whim of a group of white nationalistic etc. NATO currently exists without the US. It is being reformed, because the US is completely unpredictable & if you look at just one very simple fact, trump allowing Russia to sell oil & fund itself, says everything. But of course, there is so much more evidence of inconsistency, caring nothing for the US population, grifting as his regimes priority etc etc, who the hell would step in now & support the US in a completely insane war. This whole essay comes across as crying over your spilt milk that fell on the floor 70 years ago. Wake up pal, the world has completely changed, & it’s now by the day, orchestrated by a lunatic at the wheel. The rest of a somewhat moral world is adjusting as fast as possible, but there’s no reason to keep “you” up to date.
Yes, the world is changing, but the "lunatics" are in NATO, the EU, and (yes) Canada, having fallen prey to the Climate Delusion and letting China take over global manufacturing. President Trump and his outstanding Cabinet are forging a New (American) World Order, re-industrializing the United States and dominating world energy and military power. Decapitating Iran is not "insane," but essential to removing the principal obstacle to the union in the ME of the Arab States, Israel, and the United States (Abraham Accords and the Council of Peace). Here's a pretty good explanation of it all:
An helpful explanation . It still reveals the weakness warned of by Eisenhower in 1951 .
America would be excused under any normal circumstances if it saved itself $20 bn per annum , withdrew its 70 000 troops and told Europe it was on its own . Then we would all get to understand what REAL marxism was like .
America is the battered wife of NATO who keeps staying, expecting things to get better.
In Poland's defense: they won't allow Muslims into their country. No one in Poland is getting shot in the back or being thrown in front of a subway train by illegals.
America never wanted European countries to grow their militaries, but with America being a growing threat to NATO countries (considering annexing Canada and Greenland), these countries had already commited to increase their military spending. Now that America has shown it cannot protect its allies, as we see in the Gulf, European countries are reluctant to aid, let alone join, the ileagal US-Israeli war on Iran. As NATO militaries grow, USA bases in their countries will become counter productive, especially as NATO countries who purchased US military products can't use them without America's say so because of the US owned operating systems they are on. Therefore these NATO countries are just vassal states of America, so what's the point of NATO? European militaries are working towards greater interconnectivity without America. What's the saying: “to be an enemy of America is dangerous, but to be a friend of America is fatal”?
This is the moment the curtain drops. NATO isn’t dying—it’s being exposed. An alliance where members can refuse aid in a live missile crisis while enjoying full U.S. protection isn’t mutual defense. It’s dependency dressed up as strategy. For years, Washington footed the bill while Europe deferred the risk. Now the bill is due, and nobody wants to pay. Poland didn’t just say no to Turkey—it said no to the idea of shared sacrifice. And that changes everything. Because once allies start acting like customers, the guarantor starts thinking like a creditor. And creditors eventually collect—or they walk away.
Even in World War 2 there was no expectation that the Allies would hand over to each other whatever piece of equipment someone else asked for. Poland, specifically, is on the border of Europe’s only current hot war and it would clearly make no sense for them to hand over air defence assets.
Poland has two. They are the defense of eastern corridor
Other countries with battery systems: Germany, Netherland, Romania, Spain, Greece, Sweden, Ukraine
Take Romania and Ukraine off list: they are equally busy.
US sent new systems to Incirlik Air Base Turkey from Ramstein Air Base in Germany
BUT as reflected by the article: Turkish authorities stated Turkish airspace, land and territorial waters will not be used for operations against Iran.
No mention of the other base at Malatya
So we are sending resources to places that are not supporting us
The only thing that will make them take defense seriously is for them to have to protect their countries. And right now, Europe is allowing conquest by Muslims. We need to set a time line to take down these bases, to immediately leave NATO and set up new bases with real allies.
Real Allie’s? Like the ones who bled and died in your stupid wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
The main reason Europe hasn’t got loads of top tier military kit? That the US spent 50 years not wanting us to have it and discouraging it. You spent decades being pissed that the French have an independent nuclear arsenal!
And who are your ‘real allies’? Your crazy supreme leader has pissed off the whole of central and South America, Europe, Canada, the gulf states, Australia, NZ and Japan. The Chinese are your strategic adversary. So who’s left? Oh yeah - Russia. 🤣
Since the United States pays for most of NATO and supplies the arms and troops, while the EU NATO nations are spending 5% or less of their GDPs, the NATO countries of the EU, specifically the U.K., France, Spain, Germany and Italy have been increasing their social welfare and socialized healthcare programs at our expense. Also, we have tens of thousands of U.S. troops in those European countries that spend millions of dollars for housing, food, etc. The aforementioned NATO countries are using the money they need for defense on welfare for illegal aliens, for increasing and expanding socialized medicine in those countries, and basically thumbing their noses at the U.S. It is time to pull back our troops and close our bases in those countries and let them fend for themselves. Then we'll see if those countries can afford their welfare programs, especially for illegals. It's time to keep our money at home. As President Trump said just recently, "We don't need our allies to send warships to protect the Strait of Hormuz. We can do it ourselves, even though we don't import Iranian oil.
No help in the Strait of Hormuz and Spain literally evicted our air assets from NATO bases and it's airspace. It is my hope that president Trump is quietly building a US case against NATO and drops the hammer soon. This is embarrassing!
The UK has two carriers. The French one. The US - six. What is it you think Europe can do to reopen it that your navy can’t do?
Trick question! Trump knows no navy or air force can reopen it - he just wants someone to blame - for the fact he can’t win a war that every European country thinks he’s dumb as fuck to have started in the first place
Your comment is wrong on a number of issues. First, we have 11 aircraft carriers currently in service, and we're building the 5th iteration of the U.S.S. Enterprise nuclear powered aircraft carrier, that will be the biggest carrier ever built. Second, Trump can win the war in Iran if he had Congress backing him. Over 90% of Republicans support the war. Over 40% of Democrats do. It's not whether he can win the war in Iran, because he can. It's whether the liberal, left-wingnut Democrat Communists and their subservient propaganda media will allow him.
And, actually the European countries are the "dumb fucks". They have hollowed out their militaries to spend all of their money on welfare programs and socialized healthcare for illegal aliens. By having the U.S. support NATO with money, troops and equipment, the EU nations didn't have to. So, we're footing their welfare entitlements by allowing them to tax the shit out of their people to promote their failed welfare and socialized healthcare programs. Time to end the "gravy train" and let the EU/NATO defend themselves. The U.S. under the prior Left-wing Socialist regimes of Barack Insane Obama and Joe BiteMe, allowed the EU to drain our coffers. The EU/NATO had no problem with us paying the Ukrainians to fight the Russians while they sat back and said to the U.S. to support the Ukraine so they didn't have to. The EU/NATO is only one missile launch from Iran to be nuked out of existence.
Sorry - eleven carrier groups. But this strengthens my point rather than weakening it!
Your argument seems to be that the reason Trump needs European young people to die is that the US public elected a congress who won’t vote for the war your country started?
It’s not really a convincing argument.
Also your stats conveniently ignore the fact that the largest single group of US voters - independents - are opposed to the war by massive margins. Every poll shows that most Americans don’t support this war, as I’m sure you know perfectly well.
Maybe it is hard to take “dumb as fuck” as a serious argument. But none of the world, other than about 1/3 of one country, thinks Donald Trump is a serious person
While I don't trust polls conducted by far-left media outlets, your assertion that "none of the world thinks Trump is a serious person" is questionable, if not outright silly.
In a little over a year, Trump changed the entire dynamic of international trade with tariffs, ending decades of abuse tolerated by his predecessors.
In that same year, Trump has taken three thorns in America's side, one dating back 67 years, and has all but eliminated them. Cuba, Iran, and Venezuela have been bad actors for decades. They have been responsible for incalculable costs and the deaths of thousands of Americans. And yet, all three were tolerated by Trump's predecessors. The outcome in Iran remains to be seen but Maduro is history, and the writing is on the wall for Cuba.
Americans don't care much what foreigners think of Trump. We care how foreign governments interact with our government. Trump has ended the abuse of our country by leeching countries, terrorist regimes, and narco states. They don't have to view him as a serious person, but if they continue their mischief at the expense of the American people, they'll find out just how serious he is.
It’s a fair point! I think there’s an important distinction to make.
Across Europe (the place I know best) everybody thinks Trump has the power to do things that inflict serious consequences - and leaders and policy makers fear his capricious randomness. But nobody believes he is playing 5D chess any more. Apart from a few die-hard fans (maybe 5% of people in Europe?) everybody thinks he’s a random, slightly crazy and dangerous old man with probably dementia - ie not a serious person.
It’s curious you don’t believe polls when, in the US, all your polling for Presidential elections has been correct with the margin of error the pollsters themselves expect (roughly +\- 2%).
At this point, let Germany defend Europe, or take it over completely like in 1940. They allowed the Muslim invasion into their country and did nothing about it. Hopefully, they can clean house if the time ever comes.
So you’ve changed your minds. And since you changed your minds we’ve massively increased our defence spending.
Europe could spend 20% of GDP on defence and still not want to join this pointless war whose goals seem to be nothing more than opening a waterway that was open in **checks notes** February.
NATO served a purpose when first organized; America was the biggest, strongest, wealthiest nation in the world having defeated both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, and the USSR was the second biggest and strongest nation, albeit economically much further behind. However, it had its eye on expanding its hegemony as far west in Europe as America would allow. No European nation escaped WW II with anything like a viable army and stable economy, so if Stalin was to be opposed, it had to be by the USA. Truman and Eisenhower both recognized this, ergo, NATO. Although in theory a mutual defense pact, it was in reality an America-defends-Western-Europe pact. America rebuilt Europe with the Marshall Plan, and the Europeans got very comfortable having America guarantee the continuing sovereignty of its constituent nations against the Soviet threat. Times change. The USSR fell apart and the threat to Europe faded substantially. But there were then too many interests that had vested in a continued NATO, both in Europe and America. It was not really until Trump dropped the turd into the NATO punchbowl that it became apparent that the fiction of NATO was exposed for what it was.. At the same time, the American economy, although still the strongest in the world, was being assailed from China from one side and its soi disant "allies" in Europe from the other. Again, it was businessman Trump who spoke up and pointed this out, but while still agreeing to keep Europe under an American shield, demanded that those protected nations contribute to their own defense. I am of the opinion that America can and should reduce the size of its European shield, but not (yet) withdraw forces from the continent. I, like Trump am a proponent of "America First," but I am not an isolationist, nor is Trump because the world had become too small for that to be a viable option. We no longer can shield completely between two oceans; nuclear tipped missiles make that impossible. Appropriate engagement with other nations with whom we can make common cause is still a good idea. And in regard to Poland's rebuff of the request for missile defense to Turkey, I maintain that Turkey, under Erdogan, has no business even being in NATO; Erdogan has made it clear that he is not a friend to America. He fancies himself the caliph of the resurrected Ottoman Empire and its ascendant islamism. Christian America should have nothing to do with him, nor the nation he leads as long as he and others of his islamic ilk remain in power. Thus, I support Poland's decisison, regardless of any "treaty obligation" it had on paper.
There's a fair bit of sense to this comment, actually. Turkey may be a paid-up member, but THEY are the poster boys for restricted access to NATO assets. How many conflicts in the past 30 years alone have there been occasions when the US was denied the ability to fly routes through Turkish airspace on their way to accomplish a mission? Or denied the use of Turkish-sited airfields from which to fly their missions? It's more than once; I know that. A quick query online indicates about 4-6 documented occasions of "outright refusals for operational overflights of airfield use" (Incirlik). These took place during the Iraqi wars, actions in Syria, and others.
Poland has been railroaded, due to its proximital closeness with countries that wanted NATO involvement. Trying to stand alone on its own principles would have been suicide. This actually was a brave act on Poland's part and I sincerely hope this brings NATO down! Poland has held its national purity by maintaining its borders against the Muslim invasion, doing what the USA did not to protect her people. When this is all said and done, Poland will always fight for freedom and choose USA without the burden of NATO.
For years Canada and the European members of NATO treated their treaty commitments not as obligations but as merely aspirational. Now those chickens are coming home to roost, and they all plan to play catch up by squeezing taxpayers even harder and then treating DEI initiatives in the armed forces as defence spending. As exemplified by the now palsied Royal Navy, with more admirals than ships, NATO is more talk than walk. Plus, sadly, Europe has basically already surrendered to its real enemy - militant Islamofascism.
Once the Soviet Union disintegrated, and the Warsaw Pact nations were freed from their Soviet shackles, NATO became obsolete—except as a way for Western European nations to avoid military expenses and indulge in left-wing fantasies like the Climate Delusion and Open Borders. Once President Trump withdraws our troops, we'll save a lot of money.
This is a very inaccurate representation of what happened. The request by Turkey was to NATO, and in response 2 Patriot batteries were moved to Turkey. Request met. These two batteries were owned by the US, and wanting to backfill for them the US government made informal requests to all NATO members to temporarily provide some of their Patriot systems. These were not for Turkey, they were to be used either in Ukraine or the Middle East. Poland decided not to lend one of their 2 systems but specifically noted that it was not a formal request from NATO and therefore they did not feel obliged to agree. No refusal to meet NATO obligations.
This deserves a response from Mr Muse.
Yes, without question it requires a response. But beyond waiting for a response, this essay refers to historical context that is completely irrelevant today. Yes, yes, we all know Europe & and others, Canada included could have & should have contributed more, I’m Canadian. But for Christ sake, live in the world of today. The US armed forces, inclusive of ICE serve at the whim of a group of white nationalistic etc. NATO currently exists without the US. It is being reformed, because the US is completely unpredictable & if you look at just one very simple fact, trump allowing Russia to sell oil & fund itself, says everything. But of course, there is so much more evidence of inconsistency, caring nothing for the US population, grifting as his regimes priority etc etc, who the hell would step in now & support the US in a completely insane war. This whole essay comes across as crying over your spilt milk that fell on the floor 70 years ago. Wake up pal, the world has completely changed, & it’s now by the day, orchestrated by a lunatic at the wheel. The rest of a somewhat moral world is adjusting as fast as possible, but there’s no reason to keep “you” up to date.
Yes, the world is changing, but the "lunatics" are in NATO, the EU, and (yes) Canada, having fallen prey to the Climate Delusion and letting China take over global manufacturing. President Trump and his outstanding Cabinet are forging a New (American) World Order, re-industrializing the United States and dominating world energy and military power. Decapitating Iran is not "insane," but essential to removing the principal obstacle to the union in the ME of the Arab States, Israel, and the United States (Abraham Accords and the Council of Peace). Here's a pretty good explanation of it all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvs_VsRbwsU&t=767s
He won’t, because Muse is full of shit
An helpful explanation . It still reveals the weakness warned of by Eisenhower in 1951 .
America would be excused under any normal circumstances if it saved itself $20 bn per annum , withdrew its 70 000 troops and told Europe it was on its own . Then we would all get to understand what REAL marxism was like .
What are you talking about? “ Then we would all get to understand what REAL marxism was like.” That’s a ridiculous statement.
Re: “.Then we would all get to understand what REAL marxism was like.”
How ya figure?
Now that sounds more like what happened. Poland loves president Trump. Them and Hungry are the only ones who listen to Trump’s recommendations
thank you for being one of the saner. voices
America is the battered wife of NATO who keeps staying, expecting things to get better.
In Poland's defense: they won't allow Muslims into their country. No one in Poland is getting shot in the back or being thrown in front of a subway train by illegals.
bot alert
America never wanted European countries to grow their militaries, but with America being a growing threat to NATO countries (considering annexing Canada and Greenland), these countries had already commited to increase their military spending. Now that America has shown it cannot protect its allies, as we see in the Gulf, European countries are reluctant to aid, let alone join, the ileagal US-Israeli war on Iran. As NATO militaries grow, USA bases in their countries will become counter productive, especially as NATO countries who purchased US military products can't use them without America's say so because of the US owned operating systems they are on. Therefore these NATO countries are just vassal states of America, so what's the point of NATO? European militaries are working towards greater interconnectivity without America. What's the saying: “to be an enemy of America is dangerous, but to be a friend of America is fatal”?
Something to think about.
America started the war, it’s the gaslighting husband claiming he’s the abused one.
NATO is a defensive alliance. Members are under no obligation to join in on members offensive wars
True and we are not obligated to belong and pay $3.5 billion a year into it.
We are unless Congress votes to leave NATO. Which it won’t
We will see.
This is the moment the curtain drops. NATO isn’t dying—it’s being exposed. An alliance where members can refuse aid in a live missile crisis while enjoying full U.S. protection isn’t mutual defense. It’s dependency dressed up as strategy. For years, Washington footed the bill while Europe deferred the risk. Now the bill is due, and nobody wants to pay. Poland didn’t just say no to Turkey—it said no to the idea of shared sacrifice. And that changes everything. Because once allies start acting like customers, the guarantor starts thinking like a creditor. And creditors eventually collect—or they walk away.
Even in World War 2 there was no expectation that the Allies would hand over to each other whatever piece of equipment someone else asked for. Poland, specifically, is on the border of Europe’s only current hot war and it would clearly make no sense for them to hand over air defence assets.
Poland has two. They are the defense of eastern corridor
Other countries with battery systems: Germany, Netherland, Romania, Spain, Greece, Sweden, Ukraine
Take Romania and Ukraine off list: they are equally busy.
US sent new systems to Incirlik Air Base Turkey from Ramstein Air Base in Germany
BUT as reflected by the article: Turkish authorities stated Turkish airspace, land and territorial waters will not be used for operations against Iran.
No mention of the other base at Malatya
So we are sending resources to places that are not supporting us
The only thing that will make them take defense seriously is for them to have to protect their countries. And right now, Europe is allowing conquest by Muslims. We need to set a time line to take down these bases, to immediately leave NATO and set up new bases with real allies.
And so now, they suddenly see that having their own defense is a good idea. Only they are so deep into social spending that they can't get out of it.
You're not going to have to worry about it as you will be living under Muslim rule.
Real Allie’s? Like the ones who bled and died in your stupid wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
The main reason Europe hasn’t got loads of top tier military kit? That the US spent 50 years not wanting us to have it and discouraging it. You spent decades being pissed that the French have an independent nuclear arsenal!
And who are your ‘real allies’? Your crazy supreme leader has pissed off the whole of central and South America, Europe, Canada, the gulf states, Australia, NZ and Japan. The Chinese are your strategic adversary. So who’s left? Oh yeah - Russia. 🤣
Since the United States pays for most of NATO and supplies the arms and troops, while the EU NATO nations are spending 5% or less of their GDPs, the NATO countries of the EU, specifically the U.K., France, Spain, Germany and Italy have been increasing their social welfare and socialized healthcare programs at our expense. Also, we have tens of thousands of U.S. troops in those European countries that spend millions of dollars for housing, food, etc. The aforementioned NATO countries are using the money they need for defense on welfare for illegal aliens, for increasing and expanding socialized medicine in those countries, and basically thumbing their noses at the U.S. It is time to pull back our troops and close our bases in those countries and let them fend for themselves. Then we'll see if those countries can afford their welfare programs, especially for illegals. It's time to keep our money at home. As President Trump said just recently, "We don't need our allies to send warships to protect the Strait of Hormuz. We can do it ourselves, even though we don't import Iranian oil.
No help in the Strait of Hormuz and Spain literally evicted our air assets from NATO bases and it's airspace. It is my hope that president Trump is quietly building a US case against NATO and drops the hammer soon. This is embarrassing!
The UK has two carriers. The French one. The US - six. What is it you think Europe can do to reopen it that your navy can’t do?
Trick question! Trump knows no navy or air force can reopen it - he just wants someone to blame - for the fact he can’t win a war that every European country thinks he’s dumb as fuck to have started in the first place
First paragraph, thanks for reinforcing the pont.
Second paragraph, it's hard to take "dumb as fuck" as a serious argument.
Your comment is wrong on a number of issues. First, we have 11 aircraft carriers currently in service, and we're building the 5th iteration of the U.S.S. Enterprise nuclear powered aircraft carrier, that will be the biggest carrier ever built. Second, Trump can win the war in Iran if he had Congress backing him. Over 90% of Republicans support the war. Over 40% of Democrats do. It's not whether he can win the war in Iran, because he can. It's whether the liberal, left-wingnut Democrat Communists and their subservient propaganda media will allow him.
And, actually the European countries are the "dumb fucks". They have hollowed out their militaries to spend all of their money on welfare programs and socialized healthcare for illegal aliens. By having the U.S. support NATO with money, troops and equipment, the EU nations didn't have to. So, we're footing their welfare entitlements by allowing them to tax the shit out of their people to promote their failed welfare and socialized healthcare programs. Time to end the "gravy train" and let the EU/NATO defend themselves. The U.S. under the prior Left-wing Socialist regimes of Barack Insane Obama and Joe BiteMe, allowed the EU to drain our coffers. The EU/NATO had no problem with us paying the Ukrainians to fight the Russians while they sat back and said to the U.S. to support the Ukraine so they didn't have to. The EU/NATO is only one missile launch from Iran to be nuked out of existence.
Sorry - eleven carrier groups. But this strengthens my point rather than weakening it!
Your argument seems to be that the reason Trump needs European young people to die is that the US public elected a congress who won’t vote for the war your country started?
It’s not really a convincing argument.
Also your stats conveniently ignore the fact that the largest single group of US voters - independents - are opposed to the war by massive margins. Every poll shows that most Americans don’t support this war, as I’m sure you know perfectly well.
Maybe it is hard to take “dumb as fuck” as a serious argument. But none of the world, other than about 1/3 of one country, thinks Donald Trump is a serious person
While I don't trust polls conducted by far-left media outlets, your assertion that "none of the world thinks Trump is a serious person" is questionable, if not outright silly.
In a little over a year, Trump changed the entire dynamic of international trade with tariffs, ending decades of abuse tolerated by his predecessors.
In that same year, Trump has taken three thorns in America's side, one dating back 67 years, and has all but eliminated them. Cuba, Iran, and Venezuela have been bad actors for decades. They have been responsible for incalculable costs and the deaths of thousands of Americans. And yet, all three were tolerated by Trump's predecessors. The outcome in Iran remains to be seen but Maduro is history, and the writing is on the wall for Cuba.
Americans don't care much what foreigners think of Trump. We care how foreign governments interact with our government. Trump has ended the abuse of our country by leeching countries, terrorist regimes, and narco states. They don't have to view him as a serious person, but if they continue their mischief at the expense of the American people, they'll find out just how serious he is.
It’s a fair point! I think there’s an important distinction to make.
Across Europe (the place I know best) everybody thinks Trump has the power to do things that inflict serious consequences - and leaders and policy makers fear his capricious randomness. But nobody believes he is playing 5D chess any more. Apart from a few die-hard fans (maybe 5% of people in Europe?) everybody thinks he’s a random, slightly crazy and dangerous old man with probably dementia - ie not a serious person.
It’s curious you don’t believe polls when, in the US, all your polling for Presidential elections has been correct with the margin of error the pollsters themselves expect (roughly +\- 2%).
For 70 years your country has been discouraging Germany from spending lots of money on weapons. Can’t think why.
At this point, let Germany defend Europe, or take it over completely like in 1940. They allowed the Muslim invasion into their country and did nothing about it. Hopefully, they can clean house if the time ever comes.
So you’ve changed your minds. And since you changed your minds we’ve massively increased our defence spending.
Europe could spend 20% of GDP on defence and still not want to join this pointless war whose goals seem to be nothing more than opening a waterway that was open in **checks notes** February.
NATO served a purpose when first organized; America was the biggest, strongest, wealthiest nation in the world having defeated both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, and the USSR was the second biggest and strongest nation, albeit economically much further behind. However, it had its eye on expanding its hegemony as far west in Europe as America would allow. No European nation escaped WW II with anything like a viable army and stable economy, so if Stalin was to be opposed, it had to be by the USA. Truman and Eisenhower both recognized this, ergo, NATO. Although in theory a mutual defense pact, it was in reality an America-defends-Western-Europe pact. America rebuilt Europe with the Marshall Plan, and the Europeans got very comfortable having America guarantee the continuing sovereignty of its constituent nations against the Soviet threat. Times change. The USSR fell apart and the threat to Europe faded substantially. But there were then too many interests that had vested in a continued NATO, both in Europe and America. It was not really until Trump dropped the turd into the NATO punchbowl that it became apparent that the fiction of NATO was exposed for what it was.. At the same time, the American economy, although still the strongest in the world, was being assailed from China from one side and its soi disant "allies" in Europe from the other. Again, it was businessman Trump who spoke up and pointed this out, but while still agreeing to keep Europe under an American shield, demanded that those protected nations contribute to their own defense. I am of the opinion that America can and should reduce the size of its European shield, but not (yet) withdraw forces from the continent. I, like Trump am a proponent of "America First," but I am not an isolationist, nor is Trump because the world had become too small for that to be a viable option. We no longer can shield completely between two oceans; nuclear tipped missiles make that impossible. Appropriate engagement with other nations with whom we can make common cause is still a good idea. And in regard to Poland's rebuff of the request for missile defense to Turkey, I maintain that Turkey, under Erdogan, has no business even being in NATO; Erdogan has made it clear that he is not a friend to America. He fancies himself the caliph of the resurrected Ottoman Empire and its ascendant islamism. Christian America should have nothing to do with him, nor the nation he leads as long as he and others of his islamic ilk remain in power. Thus, I support Poland's decisison, regardless of any "treaty obligation" it had on paper.
There's a fair bit of sense to this comment, actually. Turkey may be a paid-up member, but THEY are the poster boys for restricted access to NATO assets. How many conflicts in the past 30 years alone have there been occasions when the US was denied the ability to fly routes through Turkish airspace on their way to accomplish a mission? Or denied the use of Turkish-sited airfields from which to fly their missions? It's more than once; I know that. A quick query online indicates about 4-6 documented occasions of "outright refusals for operational overflights of airfield use" (Incirlik). These took place during the Iraqi wars, actions in Syria, and others.
Poland has been railroaded, due to its proximital closeness with countries that wanted NATO involvement. Trying to stand alone on its own principles would have been suicide. This actually was a brave act on Poland's part and I sincerely hope this brings NATO down! Poland has held its national purity by maintaining its borders against the Muslim invasion, doing what the USA did not to protect her people. When this is all said and done, Poland will always fight for freedom and choose USA without the burden of NATO.
Time is UP! Adios blood suckers! We will cheer for your success in repelling Putin and his Russian army.
Europe would find it much easier to beat Russia than you are finding it to beat Iran 🤣
I’d love to see you smug europeon caliphates prove that
Literally already happening.
HAHAHA
ok
NATO can't get out of it's own way. And it's proved, once again, to be a post-WWII anachronism.
Excellent essay, thank you.
About time to disengage
For years Canada and the European members of NATO treated their treaty commitments not as obligations but as merely aspirational. Now those chickens are coming home to roost, and they all plan to play catch up by squeezing taxpayers even harder and then treating DEI initiatives in the armed forces as defence spending. As exemplified by the now palsied Royal Navy, with more admirals than ships, NATO is more talk than walk. Plus, sadly, Europe has basically already surrendered to its real enemy - militant Islamofascism.
Once the Soviet Union disintegrated, and the Warsaw Pact nations were freed from their Soviet shackles, NATO became obsolete—except as a way for Western European nations to avoid military expenses and indulge in left-wing fantasies like the Climate Delusion and Open Borders. Once President Trump withdraws our troops, we'll save a lot of money.
"I Like Ike" has never been more appropriate.
Because NATO is a DEFENSIVE alliance.
not since Yugoslavia, it is not
You should understand why Yugoslavia happened. Let me clue you in, UN mandate.