Has Donald Trump saved NATO and the West?

[Jersey2]

Trump Saved Nato

He pushed NATO countries to spend more on their defense while he was President.

He now looks like he could definitely win the 2024 election and Europe is scrambling to re-build their militaries and increase defense spending just when it is becoming clear that Russian is a threat to Western Europe.

Merkel was wrong… again and Germany was wrong… again. The US Left was wrong… again!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/donald-trump-has-saved-nato-and-the-west/ar-AA1nMd5z

Yes

No

Results

Updates

+1 y

Thoughts

Updates

+1 y

Last call

[Syntosi]

You sure you should celebrate NATO rearming? USA is a military super power, you grow and maintain your influence through exporting "security" and military aid. A weak NATO means that everyone was relying upon USA which also meant that USA could ask for basically anything in exchange.

If NATO outgrows USA then they do no longer need USAs military backing and will no longer give USA the same special treatment.

Lets face it, USA is perfectly capable of defending itself. It does not need NATO to be strong to be safe. There is nothing for USA to gain from NATO getting stronger that they did not already have and everything to lose. Putting aside how what you said is wrong and biased, even if it was true I would say that this was a massive miscalculation from USA that actively undermines its position.

[Jersey2]

NATO won’t put grow the US as the US is the bulk of the firepower. But we do need Europe to be stronger so they can defend themselves against Russia while the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and the Philippines deal with China. Plus Europe will buy US arms. We won’t defend them forever. They need to step up now and they will still need the US longterm.

What would be best if if the US, North America and Parts of Asia and South America (like Argentina recently) come together to keep peace in the world. To you its about power, to me its about peace.

[Jersey2]

Out grow*

[Jersey2]

Oh, and you aren't from the USA now are you. You don’t speak like an American Mr Level 1.

[Syntosi]

USA is strong enough to fight both Russia and China at the same time, and that is by design. For USA the NATO project was never about safety, it was about power. Also no, if NATO outgrows USA then they do not need to buy US weapons or rely on US bases in their nation. Furthermore, US allies like France has already come out and outright said that Europe can no longer rely on USA as a military ally. This is a bad development for USA as a super power.

If what you want is world peace then that is fine and all, just realize that it comes at the cost of USAs place as a super power. You can't really have both with the path you are thinking of.

[Jersey2]

France has never been supportive of the US in the past 50 years. France left Nato and then re-joined, that is an unreliable Allie.

We are better off letting Europe contemplate going in their own which they will NOT want to do… so they are left with actually paying a small amount more to keep what they have… that is not a large price to pay. But if they want to go without the US, I say F Europe anyway. I would have the US leave Nato if they do not pay their fair share. F them. We will never bleed for them again which is fine by me. They also could not hold off China and Russia, or terrorist s sent by Iran. Let them go on their own and we will make peace with Russia. We should go back to being isolationists if Europe and parts of Asia won’t become globalists. That works for me… just take care of our own safety and trade with the winners in Europe and Asia.

[Syntosi]

Not entirely sure what you think countries pays into NATO.. because they dont really. The 2% military contribution guidelines set out by NATO is in the national military budget. If Germany pays less than 2% it does not mean that USA has to pay more, it just means that the money that USA pays has greater value by comparison.

Also I am not so sure what the point of befriending Russia would be. They are not a great ally, considering they routinely screw over anyone who put any amount of trust in them such as the constant back-and-forth between China and Russia even if they are "friends". But more importantly, it is such a weak nation that they can't even overpower Ukraine in a conventional war on their border.

Furthermore as I have said previously, USA is a military superpower. Falling back to isolationism is the same as throwing away your own advantages and everything that makes USA what it is today. The disruptions would be so big that there would probably be riots in the streets and chaos in the economy.

[Jersey2]

The US needs strong alliance or no e at all. Germany cheating on what they spend leaves them with a weak and ineffective. The US is then left with the burden of defending a lot more land which is expensive. Why should the German government be allowed to have power then? Why should the German people be allowed their own country? That is not how the world works. If they want their own country let them defend it, if not let them die. It is not our business to defend all of Europe. You keep talking about US power growing from it. I don’t see Europe supporting us, Germany in particular. I see some lazy, greedy, cu nts who do not deserve their place in the world.

We need to leave Nato never to return. We will save a lot of money, save a lot of our soldiers, and be happy with trade and exploration of space. But when Europe faces the fact that we are leaving, and that can definitely happen, then they will shit their pants and see paying 1 or 2% more as cheap defense vs the prospect of going it alone which would be more expensive and frankly catastrophic. Europe is not and has not been our friend and not our Allie.

I don’t see Gen Z willing to defend Europe. My generations grandparents came from Europe and so we were entangled in their wars. There is no such bond with Gen Z. They won’t see the reason to defend people who won’t even spend money to defend themselves.

And stop telling me this is for the US that we spend money and potentially lives defending Europe. I see no such benefit, just bitches who want us to defend them.

[Syntosi]

Again you are saying things as if they make sense but never actually explaining why you think they do.

I mean honestly. USA is as safe as any nation could theoretically be in modern day. No amount of "strong alliances" would make USA any safer than it already is so tell me, what is actually the benefit in your eyes?

The fact that Germany is weak does not negatively effect USA, and in fact just gives USA the excuse to export its security to Germany in return for influence and monetary benefits. A weak Germany is a business opportunity for USA which is a security exporter.

Also, leaving NATO would be a terrible idea. NATO is a very strong alliance, to the point where it could completely shut down USA. Leaving NATO and therefore becoming a rival to NATO is just a recipe for being blocked off from the rest of the world. NATO countries can, and will use their influence to isolate USA and keep it away from making international trade and decisions on the international stage.

I also fail to see how leaving NATO will save USA money. USA will still spend just as much, if not more considering NATO now becomes a hostile force, on its military budget. I guess there won't be a need for aircraft carriers though since those are exclusively built for projecting power away from the American continent, and that will no longer be an option if USA leaves NATO and becomes isolationist.

[Jersey2]

We feel cheated by Europe and Germany. We feel played and taken advantage of by them. We don’t like it at all. And if war comes it will come from China, Russia and Iran at the same time. Europe must be able to deliver a serious military response to Russia while the USA is in Asia. This is just like WWII with the exception of being reverse where we will have 10% of our military in Europe and 90% in Asia which is the opposite of WWII.

Nato is not a strong alliance. It is weak, brain dead as the French said. They are useless allies as they cannot defend their territory. They did carry their weight in the Cold War but now they are lazy, cheap and weak which makes them useless. They’re shit.
We won’t die defending Germans who sit at home. I would rather see their cities on fire and us not there. We will save money by being isolationists as we will reduce our troop level ti a minimum, pull back completely from Europe and much of the world and sit under the nuclear umbrella where no one would dare strike as our only response would be nuclear because that is all we could do. Europe will have to build their own defenses including nuclear and all of that is very expensive but Russia would attack before they can do that.

[Jersey2]

Europe can go fuck itself.

[Syntosi]

Okey, that is kind of childish. National decision making is all business and no feelings. Saying things like "Europe can go fuck itself" or "We feel cheated" is the entirely wrong way to approach any of these questions. For whatever its worth, every countries position on any other country is "They can go fuck themselves". Not for any emotional reasons but rather because a nation is designed to only care about its own benefits.

Countries do not have "Friends" just like how they do not have "Enemies". Countries have interests and these interests decides on who they pretend to be friendly or hostile to this week. If the situation changes then the worst of enemies becomes the best of friends, or the other way around. Countries do not struggle with these moral and social questions, just in transactional exchanges of services and value.

Europe does not feel a debt of gratitude towards USA just as USA does not feel feel kinship towards Europe. The reason they keep being friends is simply because both sides thinks its the most profitable position to be in.

Again, USA does not need NATO to destroy both China and Russia at the same time. From USAs position NATO is simply there to spread American influence around the world. For that to work USA needs the world to be weak, so that they accept American assistance and security.

If NATO grows strong then they do not need American protection and NATO becomes functionally worthless for USA while at the same time it can't leave the alliance because if USA is not part of NATO then it becomes a rival and America would just have created its own worst enemy.

[Jersey2]

No. We won’t bleed and die for Europe. Period. This isn’t about some national benefit. Benefit for who? Business men who won’t be serving. Government officials who won’t be serving. Are you crazy? Have you lost your reasoning skills. This is about soldiers getting blown apart to protect people, not interests. Some may want the interests sure, but people won’t go to war for that.

Have you ever served? I have. I told my sons not to serve as things have changed. But I won’t send someone else’s so to die for money, power, benefits which is all you are saying it is. No. War is about being emotionally committed enough to kill and die. Fuck you too.

[spartan55]

So it's cool if none of these countries can defend themselves against Russia because the US can handle itself? Where did this stupid notion of the US not needing allies come from?

[Jersey2]

@spartan55 We don’t need fake allies, Nato is full of them. I do like Poland, Finland and of course the UK. We do not need them. Many feel as I do so get used to it, this isn’t a Trump only thing and isn’t going away unless Europe becomes much stronger.

[spartan55]

So who do you consider an 'authentic' ally? Any besides the three you mentioned?

[Jersey2]

@spartan55 This is tiring. Have a good day.

[spartan55]

Translation: you have a bag of nothing.

[Jersey2]

@spartan55 Because I won’t answer you? On an opinion? I don’t have to validate my opinion to you any further. Fuck Europe, they are not our friends or true allies. We will be better off without being in an alliance with weak countries. Let them face the world and pay a lot more to defend themselves , we will be fine and our interests will be different but also fine.

[Jersey2]

Today:

www.msn.com/.../ar-AA1nVEkG

[Syntosi]

@Jersey2
Wow, you are really lost in the sauce here. Speaking on the behalf of soldiers? No wonder you are so out of touch here, you are not even considering the whole of the country. At best you are just focusing on yourself and your small sliver of human experience.

To put it simply, if USA did as you believe then it would die as a nation. That is just how bad your take is, how poor your understanding of the true situation is, how lacking your understanding of USA and its place in the world is. You do not know anything and therefore your opinions are equally worthless.

[Jersey2]

So being like the vast majority of countries is a death sentence for the USA? Hardly. We were like that before and we are fine, just like most countries including those in Nato.

You keep using fear to try and make me think that staying in Nato is what is best. Best for who I wonder. You seem very invested in it. You quite obviously are playing an angle. We will do what we think is best for us.

[Syntosi]

Yes, actually that is completely right. USA is a super power currently. Your entire economy and society is built on being a super power. If USA loses its super power status then everything needs to be downgraded, something that is incredibly chaotic and disruptive. USA would become a shadow of what it used to be.

Before USA became a super power it was simply viewed as that one weird colony in the ass end of nowhere. USA is basically on its own continent alongside Mexico and Canada. Without super power status that is basically the entirety of the trade one can expect while the rest of the world re-orient and start trading between Europe and Asia with Africa butting in.

If you forgot your geography lessons let me remind you that there is a great big ocean between America and literally the rest of the world. Crossing that ocean is expensive and annoying and business won't do it unless its profitable. That means USA inherently has a trade and diplomatic disadvantage outside of the American continent. Currently this negative is negated by USA being a super power but that is not always going to be the case.

So while yes, USA could become isolationist but it would be an extremely painful transition and very possible that the country would split into different factions in a civil war sparked by the unrest. Even if USA avoids the civil war it would still mean that every aspect of society and the economy has to scale down so that it can be sustained without all the advantages given by being the "world police". Its also worth remembering that since USA is suffering from an unique level of isolation that normal countries do not have which means you would have to work harder to achieve the same results as for example Germany.

[Jersey2]

We’ll be fine.

[Syntosi]

Says the person who admits they dont know jack shit. You are like a toddler who believes they could take over the household. The world is nowhere near as simple or as straight forward as you pretend it is.

[Jersey2]

@Syntosi. First off dipshit, when I was 33 I was running a Global Department from the headquarters of a Fortune 500 and had control over hundreds of millions of of dollars (5 years later it was billions). I am a self made man when it comes to the money that came from my career. Believe it or not and I don’t care but you are not me and very unlikely to be more successful… you are just well, you…. I don’t even work anymore, just living off of the interest and dividends and still put away six figures a year as I just don’t need it. You wouldn’t have even been in my staff. I’m done here dipshit.

[Syntosi]

Oof, its even worse than I feared. You are one of those "self made men" who does not even work for a living and simply subsist on money that gains more money.

I honestly did not think you could lower my opinion of you further but you somehow managed it. No wonder you dont have any idea of how the world works and yet have an inflated ego to think you have the solutions for it.

[Jersey2]

Lol. Who care what your opinion. I worked hard and more importantly smart, and that’s key. I added signigicant value and was compensated in a significant way. Many want that type of job so you have to be damn good not just to get it but to keep it. I also made time early to serve my country. You serve only yourself and hope to get a free ride by having others pick up your slack. Do you vote socialist or full on communist? Lol, no one from the government will help you if you get your way. Learn from history boy.

[Syntosi]

"Added significant value" my ass. A worker adds value, they produce something or provides a service. Management and whatnot are just there to facilitate this wealth generation. If I make a guess then you did not create jack shit. Likewise things like the stock market is just stupid and completely divorced from reality.

The idea that a celebrity endorsement can inflate the value of a product or a company is proof enough that much of the economy, most notably the part that you represent, is just made up nonsense and has no basis in reality. Dont fool yourself into thinking you are actually helping society or humanity here, you are simply a parasite that benefits from other peoples actual work.

But that is besides the point really. I am basing my arguments on reality and pragmatic solutions. You claim to have served the military? Why dont you read some of their manuals, like I have. They literally outlines what I have been saying. Want some experts opinion? Look towards economists or whatever, they all would throw a fit if you told them of your idea of isolationism.

You are ignorant and isolated from being corrected by your own bubble of wealthy privilege. I pity you since you honestly appear unable to learn.

[Jersey2]

Yes I created things. And some of what I created provided products directly to you or at the very least indirectly. You are grasping at straws… so mad but yet not able to see that people do contribute that are not on an assembly line or working cutting wheat (that’s a communist reference for you). What do you make? Big Macs?

[Syntosi]

Ill let you spin your wheel on that some more, after all its irrelevant to this conversation.

I will just remind you that you are still completely clueless on how nations and the economy functions. I almost want your ideas implemented just to see them fail if it would not bring the whole country down with your ignorance.

[Jersey2]

Ya know, I had a LOT pf people who told me I was wrong in things… some of them eventually worked for me as I became their boss… others, well life was not nearly as kind to them as they choose badly. I am used to a lot of people not thinking my ideas are good but yet they pan out better than what the nay sayers came up with… which is exactly why society compensated me well.

[Syntosi]

Yeah, I am aware that failure is often reinforced inside the business world and especially among the elite. I have seen all too many "geniuses" make the wrong decision and become rewarded for it. Putting you into that category is perfectly fine with me.

If you want examples then the two on the top of my head would be Donald Trump and Liz Truss. One being an incompetent businessman who failed himself all the way to the top and the other being Liz Truss who currently has the record for the shortest serving prime minister of the UK after her retarded economic policies.

Both of these people believe they got everything figured out, just like you, and both of them are rarely if ever punished for their failures, just like you. That is why I am saying you are incapable of learning, because you take your own success as a sign that you are correct rather than entertaining the possibility that your bad ideas are simply not being punished.

You are a toddler that needs someone to physically spank you to realize if and when you are wrong since you are physically unable to come to that conclusion on your own.

[Jersey2]

Trump Tower stands. Its there. He built that, along with many other buildings. That’s real. What have you built? And as I said, I created things, some completely, some as part of a whole and some i directly. Those can be shown to work, or in my case work extremely well. Again, what have you created except noise and hot air, lol.

Are you a “never was” kind of guy who believes he is right and the world is wrong? Do you think I care about the shit ramblings of you? No.

I am having a great day here and have plans for a great week. There will be no spankings, just fun, laughs, relaxation and doing whatever the hell I want.

[Jersey2]

And some indirectly*.

You know you could build a better spellcheck if you wanted to help out. What skills DO you gave?

[Jersey2]

See there it is again, “what skills do you have?”

[Syntosi]

Oh really? You want to defend Donald Trumps business career? The man who was identified as having the biggest business losses in the entirety of USA most years that I have tax records of. The man who managed his assets and businesses so poorly that some university concluded he would have made more money by investing his inheritance into index funds?

Lets be clear here. The only actual business success Trump has had is making suckers pay to use his name and to take bribes. Even Truth Social was just him taking credit for work other people were doing, and lets just point out how much of a meme stock that is. Truth Social has no future and no revenue potential and yet it is supposedly worth 6.3 billions? What a fucking joke the stock market is. In other words, every business idea he has ever had (to my knowledge) has been a recorded failure.

But sure, lets just go with your side of the argument for a moment. Luckily for me, we are not spoiled for choice since we have the entirety of recorded human history. Do come back to me once you find a super power (or hell ill even settle for a major power) who has followed your suggestion of isolationism and become successful.

If its such a smart choice then there should be a lot of cases to pick from, a majority even. Be they good leaders, great leaders or even hilarious stupid ones we have had them all before. Yet I think you will find that there is no one who has been stupid enough to do what you suggested, and if I am wrong and they actually went through with the lunacy then my prediction is that they quickly became a footnote in history.

For the record, I won't hold my breath for your response. I already know you got nothing.

[Jersey2]

What a great day this is. I am enjoying the hell out of it… just got back from some boating, gorgeous out there and the working stiff won’t be in the water until the weekend. I love that I just walkup and my boat is ready and then I walk off and the boat gets cleaned and fueled… I don’t do anything but tip the guys. That’s how I roll anymore with restaurants, boating, concerts, sporting events, plays, hotels, airline travel, major attractions, even to the stores… go on the weekdays as its empty and enjoy better pricing and quality service :D

We will be at a new restaurant in a bit but we will go before dinner time as it will be a late lunch and the stiffs will come since it’s Friday… so we will get there just before they leave work. I used to be a stiff but now I just enjoy.

Trump has lot’s of money. Enough to run a Boeing 757. Enough to have a penthouse on his own building, enough to run Mar-A-Lago. He is powerful enough to have Europe spend billions they did not want to spend. He entertains world leader still. He is one of the richest men in the world and everyone knows who he is, even in small villages of poor countries. He was in movies, had a top rated TV series… he is unstoppable it would seem. And you are a nobody whose opinions matter to no one. I’ll bet you hate Elon Musk too. :D What an amazing man! He is the Edison of our time.

China is isolationist and it’s working for them. They need little from others and can either buy into what they need or simply take it. So what do you say, you who have done nothing in the world, you who has a ridiculous inflated self view and importance, you who thinks he who has accomplished little is right in everything… no, you are bitter and frustrated… and I love it. :D

[Syntosi]

Trump essentially inherited his wealth and that inherited wealth did the rest. At no point was Trump asked to actually do anything productive, and accordingly he has mostly been a professional failure.

I also like how you continuously prove my point. What has Donald Trump ever actually contributed to society? A building constructed by other people? So basically his contribution culminates with him rubber stamping some legal documents prepared by someone else, handing off money that his dad earned and slapping his name on the front. Truly an immaculate example of the "Self made" American man. I mean seriously, can the man even drive? I have also seen him LITERALLY FUCKING STRUGGLING TO READ.

You looking up to him is not a compliment, the man is a national embarrassment.

Also sure, lets talk about China. The country that is currently oppressing their entire population and suffering from possibly the largest economic disaster in human history while the government is slowly losing control of everything. I can see how it would serve as a role model for you.

[Jersey2]

Hmmmm, you are wrong on Trump and even without that you conveniently left out the value of Truth Social because you don’t believe in it. Like I said, no one cares because you haven’t done anything big.

www.politifact.com/.../

China… you said to give me one and I did. Switzerland, how’s that as well. There are others.

But I was wrong… the restaurant was packed with a live band playing. We went to Plan B and it was amazing so it worked out. I set aside 4 figures each month for restaurants and we always tend to exceed it but its fun.

[Syntosi]

No, I literally mentioned Truth Social earlier and why its such a scam. I also would not be so quick to claim it as a victory since it contributes nothing to society and Trump did not make it. You would have known this if you could be bothered to read, but I guess such things are beneath you.

China is not really following your example but if you want to equate your beliefs with a national collapse then be my guest. You are just making my point for me.

Switzerland is also not isolationist, it is neutral. It still participates on the world stage and does not say "fuck the world" because if they did that then they would not exist today.

[Jersey2]

You seem to have communist sympathies or is it socialist? You also never told me which country you are from because it is not the USA. Nato members are not pulling their weight. Like you they think they can do that because the USA needs to stay in but things have changed… a lot of American voters think otherwise. The free ride is over and there are other paths we can take. Europe will now spend a lot more on defense because they couldn't help themselves from taking advantage of their allie… that is if… if Russia allows them to do it while the USA pulls out. I don’t think the Russians will miss that opportunity. Certain rules will apply though, such as hands off of the UK as they were one of the few who helped us.

[Syntosi]

Ah! There it is! The absolutely inevitable accusation of being a communist or a communist sympathizer! Some days I do wonder why you people completely lack unique personalities, then I remember its because you just do and think what you are told.

Also wtf does "pulling their weight" even mean in relations to NATO? You do realize that NATO is a treaty right? It is not a communal project that members donate or work on, its the combined military strength of its members. No country, including USA, has to send troops or resources over to other nations because they are neglecting their own military.

The reason USA keeps doing it anyways is because the generals, politicians and diplomats wants to, for the benefit of the country. But I digress. Nothing forces USA to contribute to the others defense, that is not how NATO works. The only real thing that USA has to do is defend them if they are attacked and only if they are attacked.

Lastly.. Russia? Are you kidding me? Russia will do what with what army? Russia is a beaten dog right now, they can't do anything.

[Jersey2]

Still dodging the questions I see.

Pulling their weight refers to countries such as Germany who is weak, pathetically weak and not worthy of the title Allie. They are a liability. The offer more territory for the US to have to defend because they cannot field a single combat ready division. Worthless.

Not all politicians etc want to continue to support Nato. Many voters do not… which also means many politicians do not as well. This scares you and you want them to continue to support Nato… for your benefit, not mine or my neighbors. But you won't share why. Why is that? Does saying the truth scare you?

[Syntosi]

Ah yes, Germany, with all its surrounding non-NATO enemies.. Like Switzerland.. and Austria.. and lets not forget the major expansionist super power of Switzerland and Austria... Who are we supposed to defend Germany from again? Also, why? NATO does not force anyone to defend anyone else like that.

You just dont understand how anything functions now do you?

[Jersey2]

We don’t have to defend them as you say… so we won’t and need to pull out given their stance.

[Syntosi]

Also that brings into question, should every other NATO country also start putting military bases in USA and send their military over? I dont know about you but I think a few Americans would feel pretty insecure having hundreds of thousands of foreign military personnel digging into American soil. Especially if they are from countries like Turkey.

But I mean, if you say that is what NATO is then there is no way around it right? Lets open up our borders so all the NATO militaries can "do their part". No more free-riding, make USA a coast to coast coalition military base for no good reason.

[Jersey2]

So what is it that you would have us do? Status Quo? Have Europe disarm and the USA is the only military? Pay Europe for the pleasure of defending them with our blood? What is it you would do and more importantly why, the real reason not BS.

[Syntosi]

Then what DO YOU think NATO is? What is USA paying for as part of NATO? Nowhere in NATO does it say that USA has to defend Europe "with our blood", that is a decision USA took independently from NATO.

You appear to forget that countries can do that, make their own decisions. Just because USA is part of NATO does not mean that every military or diplomatic decision it ever makes is because NATO ordered it do. That is stupid.

[Jersey2]

It’s a defense pack where each should have a quality standing army or in some cases extreme strategic significance such as Iceland. Nato members are not strong but rater weak. Its better for the USA to leave them be. So, we will if they cannot change rapidly.

[Jersey2]

3% hmmmmm

www.thetimes.co.uk/.../b43b03bb-2684-492c-8eda-00c52c11118a

[Syntosi]

Complete and utter nonsense. Cynically speaking NATO is just to protect American interests. America used to do this with defense pacts such as how it was guaranteeing the independence of South America previously. NATO is just a more formal establishment of these same protections of interest.

But that is besides the point. What is USA paying for as part of NATO?

[Jersey2]

We can shrink our military and save money while enjoying the same level of safety. If we do that though, Europe’s safety is reduced. So that is what we are paying for, Europe’s safety. That is why people want to leave Nato here.

[Syntosi]

Now you are not being consistent here, Mr. "Fuck Europe". First you said that USA is paying because NATO is not pulling their weight and now you are admitting that USA does not HAVE to pay or even defend Europe. Are you perhaps admitting that your initial claims that USA has to pay to protect Europe was a lie all along? Because.. it was..

Also I still fail to see who USA is supposed to protect Europe from. Europe, as in the EU and NATO members does not have a credible enemy and no, Russia does not count because Russia is a pushover.

[Jersey2]

We were a good partner, when Europe failed themselves by not providing proper armies the US picked up the slack… and Europe liked that so they spent less and less leaving it to us to figure out. Well, Fuck Europe is exactly where we are now. Russia is nuclear armed and is or will soon be allied with China. European men anymore are like women, expecting someone else to defend them. The US will be fine either way.

[Syntosi]

Hahaha. No, that is not how diplomacy works. Countries are never just "good partners". Each and every country in NATO will not blink an eye to betray any other country in NATO, this is also true for USA. Countries does not have morals nor do they have friends. That is not how the world works.

You think Russia and China is friends? Laughable. China literally annexed Russian territory last year. They also completely screwed Russia over with trade deals after the Ukraine invasion. They are not "friends", they are enemies with a common enemy. China wants Russia to grow weaker and weaker so that they can take over more and more control from them.

But that is besides the point really. Your lack of understanding of geopolitics is not why we are here right now. No, you are a hypocrite. Does USA have to spend money to defend Europe according to NATO? If not, why bother leaving it? Why bitch and whine when Europe does not spend "enough" money for their own defense? It has literally nothing to do with you after all, only USA is in charge of USAs defense if you remember.

[Jersey2]

Well I guess I am more honorable than many running countries. If I sign a defense treaty like Nato, I will honor Article 5. Anyway, if it’s basically useless for defense as you indicate then we should just leave anyway as those who want to help for their own motivations will help regardless of a treaty.

China will work with Russia by your logic if they can get some of Europe themselves.

[Syntosi]

Well duh. You are a human. Countries are not in fact humans.

Lets put it another way that you, Mr "Business man" might understand. I am certain you are familiar with the fiduciary responsibility that a corporation has to their shareholders and how a capitalist corporation only considers profit motives rather than silly human things such as morality or relationships.

Nations works exactly like that, except instead of profit motives they are concerned with their own "national interests". If something is within a nations national interest then they will always do that thing. For example, China will work with Russia if and only if its in Chinas national interest. That means they will also backstab Russia the moment it becomes in their national interest, even if they cooperate at the same time.

And no, China does not have a national interest in a war or conquest of Europe. In fact, China is very weak in military power projection. In other words, their military can't go very far from their home territory. As such China would be fairly helpless to assist Russia against Europe even if they wanted to, its simply too far away.

Lastly we finally roll back to USA. Why would USA protect Europe? You are refusing to acknowledge motives here. Ill let you try one more time to try understand the national interest that USA might have in Europe and by extension, why leaving NATO and Europe would be detrimental for US national interests.

[Jersey2]

I have heard what you are saying but you dismiss major pieces of the puzzle. The human aspect. Countries are not run by AI. Soldiers are not AI. A Nato that won’t come to aid when Article 5 is enacted useless and meaningless. Soldiers will not fight and die for other people just because of benefits that they will never and riches that they will never personally see. People fight and die for concepts such as freedom. If Germans won’t protect their own freedom’s then neither will Americans. You would see a Viet Nam style youth revolt far bigger than in the past. Even today many Russian youth are dodging the draft. Ukrainians have stepped up though and did the impossible but not for the reasons you state, they were just defending their family, neighbors and things they love.

But I get your points. However major pieces of the puzzle are missing. Our interests lay in protecting our people, freedom and country. And if Europe won’t help in protecting themselves, then fuck Europe.

[Syntosi]

No I am not missing pieces of the puzzle. The institution of government intentionally remove the "humanity" in the process of governance. The closest thing you ever get to a human conscience would be politicians and you and me both probably can agree that those people hardly qualify as "human" in the first place. After that the diplomats and civil servants can practically be considered as machines for the state. Their personal beliefs and opinions do not matter and does not influence their work and by extension the actions of the government.

[Jersey2]

People and their beliefs make up the government which would otherwise just be empty buildings. And a small group of people who call themselves the government cannot do anything without the support of the people who actually have to do the fighting and the sacrifice. At least in a free state, not a communist state.

[Syntosi]

There is a very good reason why neither the Democrats nor the Republicans feels like they need to switch out the vast majority of civil servants or diplomats. They do what they are ordered to do, not what their personal beliefs are. Diplomats especially. If a country ever needs someone to sign the death warrant of the human species, they can always count on their diplomat.

So no, the people in the government will not inject any meaningful amount of human morality or emotions into national decisions. It really shows that you have never actually sat down and talked to a senior diplomat before.

[Jersey2]

The future played out in a simulation by Nato:

www.msn.com/.../ar-BB1mfgWt

All due to European greed.

[Syntosi]

European greed? That story literally lays out a scenario where Europe grows stronger though by establishing their own military alliance that is only concerned over European matters rather than American ones.

You do realize that they were looking from the perspective of USA in this simulation right? In that, it would only really be USA that becomes the loser as NATO reforms around the EU with their international interests and forces being projected as a new rival to USA.

[Jersey2]

“ As the game continued, the US complains that some NATO members are failing to meet the alliance's goal of 2 percent of each nation's GDP on defense (the real-life Trump recently urged 3 percent). The complaints are valid: by the end of the game in 2027, many members still hadn't reached the 2 percent goal.”.

Greed

Result: NATO collapses.

[Syntosi]

First of all, this is highly speculative and I would argue not at all likely since NATO is a political tool rather than being for actual defense so the low national military spending of various members are irrelevant.

But I think you missed the part where they hypothesized that NATO would only collapse because it would be replaced by something else like a militarized EU. In other words, a military defensive alliance of some kind involving these nations would still exist, it would just not contain USA anymore because they have become a liability to the rest of the members.

In effect nothing would have changed for countries in for example Europe while at the same time USA would be the only major loser by having its sphere of influence destroyed and more cut off from international affairs as well as opportunities.

[Jersey2]

Without the US, Nato has no punch. No real power. Europeans, some Europeans, are extremely cheap and want the USA tompay for their defense. But now many here have understood that Europe is completely taking advantage of us and justify it by saying shit like well the US gets a lot out of it… we will decide if we are getting something out of it and we can put our money and efforts elsewhere and do just as well… no matter what dribble you say… it is you who are the child who whines and begs for something. I learned from this conversation that even if we stay in Nato the Europeans will NOT aid us in any meaningful way if we are in a serious war… as you have said, it’s optional and I do believe that Europe will not help. Now more than even I think Nato is bad for us.

[Syntosi]

Without USA NATO still has the biggest army, population, economy and production output and is backed by multiple countries with nuclear weapons. The equation does not change for them except arguably less need to get involved in wars inside the middle east since that is specifically an American fascination and the only place NATO has actually had to step in previously.

Also no. USA will not put money in a different place by leaving NATO. Perhaps you have forgotten that the 2% talked about in reference to NATO is domestic military spending. It is building up your own army. USA is not building up its army currently to protect NATO allies, its building it up to protect itself. USA has as a military doctrine designed its forces to be able to fight on two fronts, against the 2nd and 3rd largest armies in the world at the same time.

That means that USA, by its own design, needs to have not just the biggest army in the world but the biggest army twice over more or less. Granted, "biggest" in this regard is not really about numbers, we have graduated away from such silly oversimplification long ago but rather about capabilities. But that is just so that you won't just jump to "But China has a lot of people!".

Anyways, USA won't cut a single dollar away from the military budget if it leaves NATO. In fact, it probably has to increase the amount to pay for further super carrier strike groups to replace the access it used to have in their NATO allies.

In my humble opinion, if USA loses NATO then it can no longer afford to be a super power, in that it can no longer project its military power across the world. It is simply too expensive to do it independently through carrier strike groups. That means USA loses the ability to tell countries what to do, such as saying "No" to Iran getting nukes or whatever. USA would become stuck to its continent while the rest of the world sorts out who will become the next super power.

[Jersey2]

We can and will do whatever we want… and I see no real need for a bunch of useless so-called allies who really can’t defend themselves… Germany has no viable combat ready divisions… NONE… and a pacifist population. France won’t really work with the other nations and will have no problem surrendering or cutting a deal as they have done in the past. Canada can’t and won’t help. The UK will align with the US along with perhaps Poland.

You greatly underestimate the US. We don’t need the current states of Europe. We can indeed make peace with the winners. We also don’t need to be a super power but I don’t see that changing as radically as you.

You still haven’t said which country you are from… I am sure it will be telling.

[Syntosi]

Again, USA is a military super power. "Weak allies" is its customers. You are literally killing your own business model here. I also do not feel that USA is under any real threat which is sort of the point. It was never about being under threat, it was about leveraging military power to uplift the country.

At the end of the day you simply do not understand USA or why it is great. You also do not understand the threat of for example the EU undermining American hegemony by for example creating an EU army (which France is pushing VERY HEAVILY which is ironic since you appear to think they are against military cooperation).

I dont know which planet you are from, but its certainly not Earth because nothing you say or believe makes any real world sense.

[Jersey2]

We will have a different but not less successful business model than selling some arms to the EU. They don’t really want to buy anyway as they bitch about spending money on defense. We can still export excellent arms but yet use less ourselves.

You still see this as a business. I saw this as bringing decades of peace to Europe and now perhaps the world if Europe would work on a global basis to protect democracies around the world but I now realize that is a laughable idea as Europe is far to self centered. They just couldn’t and wouldn’t. It’s a good idea and would bring peace to most of the world but Europe just doesn't have the character to do so which is also why you cannot understand my point of view. We are great because we are great, not due to some military formula.

And yes, I am from the third rock from the sun. And I have been successful in my life so I am not reliant on your observations to know that… I hope with all of your pontificating.

[Jersey2]

Oh, and France… yeah… France longs for the day when it was a true power in the world. Even 100 years ago France was far more respected globally and even the diplomates spoke French as their common language but no more. They want power which they see as needing to harness Europes military but the French just bark with no real bite and would never project power. It would be a toothless Europe and all would know and some would definitely test them and prove the point. Nato os a cheaper option but Euro trash still think they can get it for free. We won’t align with crippled militaries as they are a liability.

[Syntosi]

I dont know how many times I have to say this but USA is not "selling some arms" to the EU. It is selling security, it is selling safety, it is selling protection and in return USA demands to be "first among equals" and to get special privileges. No other country can behave as USA does, can get the unfair deals USA does, can demand the things USA does and if you get your will through then USA also won't be able to get these things anymore.

It would make USA into a "normal" country, something that I am sure you could not even imagine because you have gotten too used to the privilege you have lived in. The way of life you have gotten used to will disappear overnight, because it can't be sustained without the privilege afforded by being an international super power.

Look at UK today. Look at how they are struggling to come to terms with the fact that they are no longer the British Empire, that they can no longer do whatever they want and expect the world to hand it to them on a silver platter. That would become you, if you got your way. Of course, the UK is still there, it is still able to be successful in its own ways, but for someone living in the lap of privilege under the British Empire such a "normal" existence would be utterly intolerable and unacceptable.

Likewise France used to be a super power, however they got over their phase of being "temporarily embarrassed billionaires" and accepted that they are no longer the super power they used to be after getting destroyed by Germany twice over in the world wars, unlike the UK which were allowed to maintain their illusions of grandeur.

[Syntosi]

There are countless civilizations that has been at the top and they have all thought themselves to be superior. Hilariously they also, just like you, point to previous world powers and laugh at their current weakness and delusions without realizing that they are just seeing their own future.

You call USA great, and in a way it is but that is only because people are tirelessly maintaining this position, this status quo. Even if you do not believe me and my predictions you are still asking to change USAs current position and you are failing to account for how this will change the country or even what is even up for change in the first place. USA does not have to be "great". It does not have to be a super power. USA was, and can become a 3rd world country once again if you make the wrong choices.

USA is currently the worlds super power because of the current established systems. Changing that gives no guarantees that it will stay like that. It is sad that you can't even accept this basic fact.

[Jersey2]

In my previous comments I acknowledge things will change and we will become like other nations. I am not selling our blood to protect you though. It’s funny to me that money has been a key theme in my life and yet I see the world so differently than you. But I think that is because I was a soldier and ypu were not and that I am an American and you won’t even utter your country as you know it will show why you feel the way you do.

The US was a powerhouse before WWII. Hollywood was creating global entertainment and will do so. The US created industrial products on a huge scale and will now continue to create technology on a huge scale.

Russia nor China will rise to global dominance in our lifetime so it will be a 2 or perhaps 3 man show going forward. China will attack many Asian nations but Europe, like you, couldn’t give a shit about people being murdered. Europe will have to take a serious look at their own security and build an expensive defense IF Russia allows them that opportunity which it won’t, it will strike before Europe can arm itself. But even if Europe did arm itself, many are now pacifists so they won’t really fight.

Europeans want a free ride, they want someone else to defend them, they are no longer partners as they do the least that is required and they are no longer allies as when the time comes they will walk away… we know this now. And idiots like Biden can make all of the promises he wants to dozens of nations but we won’t be fooled again by politicians. We won’t die so their friends can get rich. We don’t accept your deal… anymore. Things are changing. We don’t want to defend a Europe who is lazy, greedy, demanding and who wouldn’t lift a finger to help other nations like in Asia. Now Europe is in a quandary aren’t they.

[Syntosi]

This would be funny if it was not so sad. Your entire worldview is so childish. Maybe you really did go to the military, dont care, but your petty feelings are all that you can think about rather than elevating your viewpoint to a national level. You keep going on about how USA will not "sell our blood" or whatever when that is such an antithetical point of view for literally every nation that has ever existed or ever will exist. The whole point of the military is that they are a national resource to be used and abused, but here you are drinking the coolaid and thinking that the country actually cares about you on an individual level.

They got you good with that indoctrination. I am sure you were a good grunt for them.

But lets grow up a little bit shall we? Nations are not run on feelings, or I should say successful nations are not run on feelings. There is always a cold hard logic behind every decision, one grounded in national interests and numbers. Numbers such as human lives. Numbers such as yours truly and yourself, just mentioning it since we talked earlier about "selling blood" or whatever.

If you understand geopolitics then you can follow what every country does as they make their decisions. There is no great mystery here, 90% of the time nations follow very straightforward logic. 1+1=2. The only time things truly takes a curve-ball is when nations operate on information that you do not have access to. Things like classified information and whatnot.

Why do I say all this? Because you clearly dont get it. I have a passing understanding on the decision making of nations and I can predict them to some degree. You on the other hand is making fantasy claims and simply deciding on what the results would be as if you were an author writing a book. You simply do not have that power and you lack the understanding to make the prediction.

You are wrong here and you will always be wrong.

[Jersey2]

The people will not fight for Europe or politicians who promise but don’t risk themselves. Countries are driven by people, individuals, and will not die for you or politicians. Europe is screwed due to their own foolishness. As I said they are in a quandary. Europeans completely suck at global politics which is why they have so many wars and have no real power globally.

[Syntosi]

Once again you said something childish. First of all, it is the people that makes countries weak, they are generally speaking the first link in the chain to break. The Vietnam war is a good example of how weak the peoples resolve is and how easily it can be exploited.

The Vietnam war was more or less the first modern war covered by independent media by letting them film and show the people the horrors of war. The Vietnam war was not really that different or worse compared to many other wars fought previously but by informing, or rather influencing the population you drastically reduced how much the people of USA was willing to endure and therefore pushed USA to lose the war prematurely.

Say what you want about politicians but they are generally not the ones who lose wars, the people are. The extent that the military has to tip-toe around not upsetting its own population these days is ridiculous and all because you people are just too damn squeamish and looking to become upset over something. But I digress.

The 2nd thing that you said that was childish is that Europe is bad at global politics and that is why they have so many wars. That is laughably wrong and its no use throwing rocks inside a glass house when USA has only been at peace for a total of 17 years since Independence. USA is currently the biggest warmonger on the planet for whatever that matters with your logic.

Once again you have shown how bad your understanding of the world is, meanwhile I can predict future event with scarily good accuracy such as how USA will abandon the middle east and instead move to counter China in Asia and bring Africa under the USA sphere of influence. Why? Because its in USAs interest to do so obviously.

[Jersey2]

People are not just going to fight and die for someone else such as politicians or Europeans. And they won’t for other people’s money and power either. Yes, the US has been in a lot of wars and we don't want it anymore. The peace Europe enjoyed was supplied by the US but we tire of that as well.

The middle east is a continuous mess for hundreds and even thousands of years. The importance of that region will decline with fossil fuel usage. Africa has been cultivated by China for years now but yes the US is growing ties with countries such as Kenya which was in the news today. Argentina is also being brought into the fold, closer than the past to help offset China in South America. But Europe is not helping and they aren’t a player so they should at the least not get any of the positive outcomes but Germany will be there with there greedy hand out as usual.

[Jersey2]

Their* greedy hand.

[Syntosi]

Ah yes, the country that has been in almost constant wars since its founding suddenly supposedly does not want to continue for no explicit reason and no actual change in either society or politics. Yeah, I am going to have to call bullshit on that one.

Americans might SAY they do not want another war, warmongers often do, but there will always be justifications for the next one.. and the next.. and the next.. Like how 9/11 and "Weapons of mass destruction" became the excuse for invading Afghanistan which objectively had nothing to do with it in the first place.

And yes, I know how you think that 9/11 really brought together the best of USA as everyone put aside their differences and worked together, but you got to realize that what you were working together towards was just another aggressive American war in a long line of American aggression. Maybe you do not enjoy looking into the mirror I put in front of your face but that is not my problem.

As for the peace in Europe? That is thanks to the EU. I am not entirely sure you understand this but the EU was a peace program, in that it was designed to make it VERY difficult to wage another war inside Europe by making each nation so economically and socially intertwined that they could not really function without this cooperation anymore. Force them to cooperate and you force them to be at peace with each other. This is not USAs doing.

I also fail to understand why Europe would be helping USA with China. Europe does not have any beef with China because they are on different sides of the earth so USA will develop their relationships with countries like Japan and Australia when it comes to dealing with China since they are the nations that share USAs interests in Asia.

Like honestly, explain this to me, why would Europe even be involved with USAs power play against China? It does not make any sense and I think it perfectly demonstrates how you dont understand how the world works.

[Anonymous]

NATO was a freeloading organization with only a few member-states bothering to meet even the 2% requirement. It was so bad that European NATO, a set of countries 3 times the number of people as Russia and an economy 10 times larger, and yet they still can't defend themselves without U. S. military aid.

European NATO should be able to wipe the floor with Russia

[northerngal]

You know I have to admit NATO has had to begin to Trump proof its self. It has realized that a Trump presidency has made the USA an unreliable allies. NATO will have to protect itself from all threats and sadly that may include the USA depending on the election.

[Jersey2]

Well that is because they allowed their military to atrophy and become feeble. Germany cannot even field a combat ready Division or even a Brigade for that matter… so says the head of the German Army.

What has really happened is that many in the US now know that Europe is an undependable Allie. And even if they joined the battle they wouldn’t have much to bring in the way of true firepower. They are weak pacifists who want the US to pay for their defense while they buy gas and oil from Russia and openly contradict the US when it said Russia would attack Ukraine in 3 days. They were wrong on all counts including letting their military become weaker than a Boy Scout organization.

[strateguy632]

that is VERY backward, poor nato? nato didn't spend on itself until trump pressure.
but anti trump ALWAYS dodge giving credit.

[northerngal]

@strateguy632 Nope gonna give Trump that one... his terrible foreign policy leadership and support for Putin and other Strongmen have motivated NATO to move away from the USA. Way to go Donald. You rock.

[Jersey2]

The only thing that got Europe to spend money to defend themselves is the prospect of Trump coming back. Now their governments are screaming about a potential invasion by Russia so they must quickly prepare. I think the truth is that Russia is a threat and has been for a long time but Nato is weak without the US and the real threat is Europe having to defend itself in the weakened state that it is due to their own greed and laziness.

[ApplePie409]

America is on its own

[Jersey2]

Yes, until they need us or our money.

[ApplePie409]

Joey will gladly give them our money.

[Jersey2]

He already has… he just gave NATO $100 Billion so they could spend on Ukraine as Trump might not be supportive. I would bet this was a German idea… cheap fucks.

[ApplePie409]

Idiots voted for him

[ApplePie409]

Thanks for the MHO.

[Jersey2]

No problem

[exitseven]

Trump made the NATO deadbeats pay the appropriate percentage of their GDP towards defense. He did so because he was sick of seeing the US get taken advantage of. His America First policy saved the country millions. He cared more sbout taxpayers getting screwed than he did the defense of Europe. Having NATO rebuild their military is a side benefit.

[strateguy632]

if not for trump pressure, germany couldn't send 200 tanks to ukraine... as they did n wanted for weaken russia THERE instead of in Lithuania poland n germany!

trump was right.

now he is right again maybe leave nato, so let ingrates french fight russia themselves.

[spartan55]

The same Donald Trump who has stated multiple times he wants to withdraw the US from NATO, or dissolve it altogether?
But now he's 'saved' it... riiiight👌

[OtterMan68]

Putin has by scaring Finland and Sweden into joining

[Anonymous]

Hell no, if Trump wanted to save the west, he wouldn't try to save NATO which is has transformed into a arm of the military industrial complex who promotes war for profits.

[RavVid]

Mr Putin suggested it, not Trump

[Jersey2]

Suggested what? That they all pay what they should? Nato has been having that conversation themselves for years including 2014 when they set the 2% goal.

[RavVid]

:) Putin suggested by being military aggressive. A mild attempt at ironic humor. There is no doubt Europe has been negligent in it's security.

Defense is a long term project but often not funded like that and instead more on a budget by budget basis. In my own country a conservative gov't implemented a sinking fund of 2% GDP. If there wasn't an immediate plan to buy X hardware, 2% GDP would still be set aside. The next woke Prime Minister just plundered the sinking fund for social get-re-elected spending.

The chickens come home to roost eventually.