Posted on 06/10/2011 2:27:05 AM PDT by markomalley
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates says America's military alliance with Europe, which has been the cornerstone of U.S. security policy for six decades, faces a "dim, if not dismal" future.
In a blunt valedictory address Friday in Brussels, Gates questioned NATO's viability, saying its members' penny-pinching and lack of political will could hasten the end of U.S. support. NATO was formed in 1949 as a U.S.-led bulwark against Soviet aggression, but in the post-Cold War era it has struggled to find a purpose.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
NATO should have been disbanded when the Soviet Union broke up.
I think most folks on FR would rather disband the UN and keep NATO.
IMHO...
UN - let’s get out.
NATO - was great as long as we had most influence. As of zero taking office, that appears to not be the case any more.
To wit, europeans were bent on attacking libya and we chimed in as second banana in support role. first time that I remember that happening. If we are not “driving” it becomes a “foreign entanglement”, an obligation, instead of proactively maintaining security worldwide like we did pre-nobama.
the UN is the Hub and Heart of Communism
We have no reason to be tied to Nato any longer.
I’m not a big fan of NATO or of Gates. I think they both should go.
get rid of both...nato is a redundant, useless organization....the un is just plain evil
We need a strong alliance of countries willing to fight the global jihad.
NATO could be invaluable as the core of that alliance, but the NATO countries need to start by winning the internal battle against Islamification which they are not winning now.
I'm sure FReepers want to disband the U.N. but I'm not sure they want to keep NATo anymore. AS Europe becomes more and more increasingly unable to defend itself the NATO alliance becomes more of a trap for the U.S. The E.U. was formed specifically to compete with the U.S. Let them compete with us on a level playing field, one in which they have to defend themselves.
Let’s remember that one of the reasons we still have NATO bases in Europe and other locations around the world is to make the logistical needs of the U.S. military easier. We pre-position a lot of equipment and troops in these locations to make the projection of U.S. POWER easier.
If we need to get involved militarily in the future, regardless of where, it’s far more difficult if we have to start the engagement and troop movement solely from the U.S.
“The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense,” he said.
Without naming names, he blasted allies who are “willing and eager for American taxpayers to assume the growing security burden left by reductions in European defense budgets.”
Basically the U.S. has to pay for NATO. Time to dissolve NATO and let Europe deal with their own problems.
“The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense,” he said.
Without naming names, he blasted allies who are “willing and eager for American taxpayers to assume the growing security burden left by reductions in European defense budgets.”
Basically the U.S. has to pay for NATO. Time to dissolve NATO and let Europe deal with their own problems.
“The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense,” he said.
Without naming names, he blasted allies who are “willing and eager for American taxpayers to assume the growing security burden left by reductions in European defense budgets.”
Basically the U.S. has to pay for NATO. Time to dissolve NATO and let Europe deal with their own problems.
“The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense,” he said.
Without naming names, he blasted allies who are “willing and eager for American taxpayers to assume the growing security burden left by reductions in European defense budgets.”
Basically the U.S. has to pay for NATO. Time to dissolve NATO and let Europe deal with their own problems.
I agree. The old alliances have just become like doddering old women arguing about the color of the office drapes.
A new alliance of nations willing to define, confront, and attack the threat posed by militant islam is now in order.
It will be a small alliance at first (US, UK, Australia, a few others), but will grow as other nations wake up to the threat. The wake up calls will most likely be events that involve a few thousand dead civilians.
And we don't need symbolic partners in this alliance. We need nations willing to commit troops and treasure to the effort.
I think former Soviet satellite countries will still welcome a US presence even without NATO. The New Europe is very hospitable to the US.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.