Why NATO?

"Abandoning NATO allies could effectively end the security umbrella that has long guarded friends in Europe, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East"

The NATO allies have pledged to spend 2% of their GDP on their defense. Only 11 comply. Why should any of them? Uncle Sam has them covered. As president, Donald Trump complained. As the Republican nominee-un-waiting, he still complains.

In Conway, South Carolina, he told another one of those overpacked rallies, ““One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’

“I said, ‘You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent?’ No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.”

There is really nothing new in his statement. Matt Margolis wrote, “This wasn't a warning to NATO allies that he’s going to let Russia do ‘whatever the hell they want.’ It was a story about how he got NATO nations to pay their commitments while he was president.”

To distract attention from the devastating admission that Biden is mentally unfit to be president, the pearl-clutching media accused President Trump, once again, of being Putin’s puppet, even as Biden and all of Washington have for two years run through any hoop Zelensky holds up.

The argument is that we must defend the democracy of a nation that banned opposition parties, shuttered churches and suspended an election. Perhaps the CIA was too busy working on our 2024 election to bother rigging another Ukrainian election like it did in 2014 under Obama.

Well, its defenders say, Ukraine is at war and cannot afford an election like the United States does. Yes, prosecuting the opposition and imprisoning his supporters takes a lot of time and money. Facial recognition is tedious work which is why the FBI reserves it for political opponents of the regime instead of actual criminals who loot stores.

I find solace in knowing our government is not killing people like Putin does. The media rightly demonizes Putin but gives Chairman Xi — a far worse dictator who enslaved a million Muslims — a pass. Hmm. Maybe pork producer Smithfield Foods isn’t the only company he’s bought.

But I am dragging myself off the topic which is NATO. Media hysteria was predictable.

BBC said, “NATO chief says Donald Trump comments ‘undermine all of our security.’

If only there were something the nations could do — like beefing up their own militaries.

New York Times said, “Favoring Foes Over Friends, Trump Threatens to Upend International Order.”

Given the expense in blood and money to the heavily indebted USA, the world order could use a reshuffling.

Politico said, “‘Enough to make Reagan ill’: Trump's NATO remarks under fire.”

When lefties have no argument on foreign policy, they drag Reagan out — you know, the man they said wanted to start World War 3.

Republicans meanwhile know Reagan would be proud of Trump.

We formed NATO in 1949 to protect a bombed out Western Europe from invasion by the Soviet Union. That mission ended 42 years later when the USSR swept itself into the dustbin of history. However, the military industrial complex kept it alive under President Bush the First and expanded it under President Clinton the First (?) as he did not want to look weak.

The problem with NATO is it allies us with a bunch of countries that turned communist light (socialist) anyway and are too cowardly and stupid to stop an invasion by Muslim hordes who want to turn Europe into a mosque.

I know: we are fine ones to talk about refusing to defend ourselves from an invasion.

But we are overextended. Consider this post by Bangladesh News 24, an online news agency blocked by Bangladesh and India. It tweeted:

Donald Trump said over the weekend that, while president, he told NATO allies that he would “encourage” Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to countries that had not paid the money he claimed they owed to the military alliance.

Trump’s statement, made at a campaign rally in South Carolina, seemed to cast NATO as more of a protection racket than an alliance. It stunned many in Europe, where nations have been developing military capabilities in case U.S. support proves unreliable.

Trump has long called for the U.S. to leave NATO and questioned American support for foreign allies. National security veterans of both parties said that such thinking misunderstands the value of the alliances for the U.S.

Never before has an American president — even a former one aspiring to reclaim the White House — suggested that he would incite an enemy to attack American allies. If Trump’s statement is to be believed, his potential re-election this year may fundamentally alter the world order.

𝗣𝗼𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀: Abandoning NATO allies could effectively end the security umbrella that has long guarded friends in Europe, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East; it could also negate the value of mutual security agreements with countries like Japan, the Philippines, Thailand, Argentina, Australia and Panama.

Excuse me but why are we protecting sovereign governments on five continents? The threat of world domination by the Soviet Union ended 33 years ago. Its replacement is the threat of world domination by George Soros, Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum.

Indeed, instead of protecting us from the latter, our military under Obama and Biden appear to be providing the muscle for the WEF. Bear in mind that these Bozos are the same people who gave us economic domination by Red China by admitting it into the World Trade Organization.

I am not calling for isolationism but for a scaling back on our commitments. Just who are willing to send our sons and daughters to fight in protecting Argentina? Jimmy Carter gave the Panama Canal away nearly 50 years ago. Let Panama fend for itself.

Leaving NATO is a political impossibility given 75 years of pro-NATO propaganda, but scaling our participation back is doable. We cannot afford to be Europe’s military force. The reality is we are a nation whose debt is $34 trillion dollars and set to add another $20 trillion in debt over the next decade just to give us the appearance of a robust economy.

The way we rein the spending in is by starting with defense expenditures. A reduction in force is overdue. The military’s embrace of the racism and misandry in DEI now labels every white male as a white supremacist and pretends white supremacy is the nation’s biggest threat. As a white male, why should I support those who would tie a noose around my neck and drag me to the nearest tree?

And as an American, why would I want to defend so many other countries — especially when they refuse to defend themselves?

Make America Great Again and then we can defend the entire world if we so desire.