Posted on 07/27/2015 9:50:13 AM PDT by Navy Patriot
Suppose we had a war and Britain didn’t come? Which is sort of what happened in Syria when President Obama, on the advice of Samantha Power, United States Ambassador to the United Nations, declared that we must go in now, this afternoon. No time to discuss. Much as we had heard before in the maelstrom which is the Middle East. Surely, our allies, by which I think we mean Europe, the Atlantic Alliance or “the West,” led of course by our trusty sidekick, Britain, will fall in line. But overnight, the British Parliament voted to just say no.
And we thought we could always count on the Brits, ever since President Franklin Roosevelt sat quietly in conquest at Yalta, with Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill on either side in February 1945. The iconic photo would mark the ages.
Or not. Possibly it would only mark the WW II post-war period, which might be about finished by now, as the conquistador’s dominion classically runs roughly only 70 years.
Next year we celebrate, if that is the correct phrase, the 70th anniversary of the publication of the “long telegram,” an icon as famous as that storied photograph. It was a plan for the future with America at center, designed by the legendary policy advisor George Kennan, from which came the domination of western and world culture by American initiatives, American culture and the American dollar, from which came the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the wall of containment of the Soviet Union.
(Excerpt) Read more at observer.com ...
Get out of NATO? That is a long term goal of the Soviet Union and present day Russia. The UK might not support us in starting a war. But the UK will support us if a NATO member is attacked. That is the purpose of NATO in the first place.
This writer may be a Russkie plant.
The fact that we have trip-wire security guarantees with 28 nations, with such stalwarts as Albania, shows that NATO is simply security theater.
it also allows Europe to pretend it doesn’t need to spend any money on defense.
its a very dangerous arrangement.
NATO should have been wound-down in 1992, replacing it with bilateral agreements with Germany and England only.
Poll: Willingness to defend allies from attack low in some NATO states
Ask Poland and the Baltic states who are currently under the menace of Russian threats and invasion. NATO members are bound by treaty to fight. That is what protects them. The moment NATO falls to pieces, as Russia desires, there is nothing to stop them from sweeping across Europe.
Advocacy against NATO is Communist Propaganda and anti-American.
Couldn’t hurt.. Nato and the eruo look like sick pigs to me.
A while back Nigel Farage spoke about NATO funding and who paid for the bulk of it and it wasn’t pretty. He said the USA pays some 30% of the costs in money and material.
Then let Russia have Europe. I could really care less about it anymore.
They won’t get past Poland.
And then there’s Turkey who are busy working on restoring their own caliphate.
I thought he might be some kind of fierce Weekly Standard neo-con, but you may be right.
Or mebbe we’re both wrong. Here’s some of his stuff. http://thehill.com/search/site/Bernie%20Quigley
Then let Russia have Europe. I could really care less about it anymore.
How about Canada? All the issues are the same. The Russians will take exactly as much as we give them.
“If in 10 years, all American troops stationed in Europe for national defense purposes have not been returned to the United States, then this whole project will have failed,”
This rag has a had a bunch of pro Putin articles since he invaded Ukraine last year. They are almost assuredly getting some KGB cashola to print this garbage.
After Europe ( or maybe even before that in a nuclear strike, whether by Spetznaz with suitcase nukes moving into American soil, or an outright attack) is the United States. We do not live in isolation from the rest of the West, and are accounted by Russia and China as their primary enemy.
The only reason Russia is our enemy now is that NATO decided that Russia was still our enemy and acted accordingly.
Quite frankly between the multiculturalist anti-Christian secularizing bureaucrats in Brussels whose main concern seems to be the health of the European banking industry and a resurgence of the traditional Russian cooperation between the state and the Orthodox Church, I’m going to side with the latter.
At some point in the near future, the thing that will matter most is that America and Russia are both Christian nations. Unless Western Europe has a revival, they won’t be much help.
Getting out of the UN interests me more.
This is the part that resonates with me:
Ditch NATO.
Consider instead a new core commitment; a new starting place for the century and the millennium: The defense of America, the United Kingdom and the Anglosphere – Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the U.S. – for a reality-based, tradition-based perspective.
This is our first circle of defense. This is who we are. We should defend it and start to look outward from there
Do not do what you're opponent wants you to do. That's true in poker, in chess, and in international politics.
Having said that, NATO certainly needs reformed. America cannot, and should not, be doing all of the heavy lifting.
Let’s face it. NATO is the U.S. and a token amount of other nation’s members. I don’t know what NATO was doing in Libya but what a mess that turned out to be.
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.