President Macron: Trump Is Causing the ‘Brain Death’ of NATO

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,146
4,844
136
Straight from Emmanuel Macron's mouth and they are words that Dumb Donnie will ignore as he destroys the hard work of other people. Do you think that NATO will crumble while this idiot is in office? Russia and China must be jumping for joy over what their hard earned cash has bought them.

 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,971
13,488
136
Not surprising given you have had a russian sock puppet as pres for the US for 3 years now.


Add Brexit and all the other places where vlads head pop up.

If the west dont realize, and publicy addresses it as such, we are at war... I fear its the beginning of the end.

right now we are quietly fumbling our way out into that good night.

And it pisses me off
 
  • Like
Reactions: trenchfoot

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,581
50,768
136
Mutual defense treaties only work as long as all parties believe the other will actually come to their aid.

Would you trust America under Trump to come to your aid?
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,929
9,208
136
Mutual defense treaties only work as long as all parties believe the other will actually come to their aid.

Would you trust America under Trump to come to your aid?

Pepperidge Farm remembers what happened to the Kurds.
 

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,409
3,183
146
The killer part on this one is that Germany does refuse to make reasonable efforts to contribute to their own defence.

France and the UK, and some of the newer eastern members are pulling their weight.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,920
5,543
136
I'm sure all of the NATO members are concerned that the US will stop paying the bulk of the bills.
They want US protection, they want a standing army ready to jump into the fray, and they want it cheap. Maybe the US should allow the EU the honor of protecting the free world and use the money saved to help pay for universal health care. Or just dissolve NATO entirely. When the Russian tanks start rolling into the EU we could bid the removal job at that time.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,581
50,768
136
I'm sure all of the NATO members are concerned that the US will stop paying the bulk of the bills.
They want US protection, they want a standing army ready to jump into the fray, and they want it cheap. Maybe the US should allow the EU the honor of protecting the free world and use the money saved to help pay for universal health care. Or just dissolve NATO entirely. When the Russian tanks start rolling into the EU we could bid the removal job at that time.

Do you honestly think the US is in NATO out of the goodness of our hearts? I mean come on, how naive are you?

Also, the European defense forces as they exist currently would slaughter the Russians, even assuming that the Russian armed forces could sustain significant operations much outside of their borders for any meaningful period of time which is highly doubtful.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,920
5,543
136
Do you honestly think the US is in NATO out of the goodness of our hearts? I mean come on, how naive are you?

Also, the European defense forces as they exist currently would slaughter the Russians, even assuming that the Russian armed forces could sustain significant operations much outside of their borders for any meaningful period of time which is highly doubtful.
So why do we need NATO?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luna1968

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,258
13,555
146
I'm sure all of the NATO members are concerned that the US will stop paying the bulk of the bills.
They want US protection, they want a standing army ready to jump into the fray, and they want it cheap. Maybe the US should allow the EU the honor of protecting the free world and use the money saved to help pay for universal health care. Or just dissolve NATO entirely. When the Russian tanks start rolling into the EU we could bid the removal job at that time.
Do you complain this much about everything? Or just perceived global socioeconomic grievances?

NATO is a group effort with group rewards. Anyone telling you otherwise is shilling for Russia, literally the only organization on the planet with reason to want NATO to not be a thing.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,581
50,768
136
So why do we need NATO?

Because NATO helps us project power, defrays costs for operations, and adds a perception of legitimacy to US operations by making them multilateral. For example US bases in Germany are some of the most important force projection bases in the world for the US. Really though, did you think we just had a soft spot for Europe and decided to defend them for free or something? The reason why European countries pay less is a negotiation like anything else - we took less spending from them because what they provide for us is extremely valuable.

And again, the idea that Russia would or could invade western Europe is a ridiculous fantasy. It is pretty dangerous though that you were repeating the Trumpist idea of using the US military as a mercenary force.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,527
15,406
136
I'm sure all of the NATO members are concerned that the US will stop paying the bulk of the bills.
They want US protection, they want a standing army ready to jump into the fray, and they want it cheap. Maybe the US should allow the EU the honor of protecting the free world and use the money saved to help pay for universal health care. Or just dissolve NATO entirely. When the Russian tanks start rolling into the EU we could bid the removal job at that time.

What the fuck are you talking about? "Stop paying the bulk of the bills"?

Do you even know how NATO works?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitek

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,527
15,406
136
Because NATO helps us project power, defrays costs for operations, and adds a perception of legitimacy to US operations by making them multilateral. For example US bases in Germany are some of the most important force projection bases in the world for the US. Really though, did you think we just had a soft spot for Europe and decided to defend them for free or something? The reason why European countries pay less is a negotiation like anything else - we took less spending from them because what they provide for us is extremely valuable.

And again, the idea that Russia would or could invade western Europe is a ridiculous fantasy. It is pretty dangerous though that you were repeating the Trumpist idea of using the US military as a mercenary force.

His whole post was trump talking points.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Because NATO helps us project power, defrays costs for operations, and adds a perception of legitimacy to US operations by making them multilateral. For example US bases in Germany are some of the most important force projection bases in the world for the US. Really though, did you think we just had a soft spot for Europe and decided to defend them for free or something? The reason why European countries pay less is a negotiation like anything else - we took less spending from them because what they provide for us is extremely valuable.

And again, the idea that Russia would or could invade western Europe is a ridiculous fantasy. It is pretty dangerous though that you were repeating the Trumpist idea of using the US military as a mercenary force.

It always seemed to me that the long-standing agreement to host strong US military bases within Germany is quite at odds with the typical conservative complaint that Germany isn't paying "their fair share" into NATO.
 

crashtech

Lifer
Jan 4, 2013
10,575
2,145
146
Very interesting how the tables have turned, the Left used to be known as the peacenik party, but you'd never know it today!

The argument that one is a Putin sock puppet for merely questioning the utility of NATO in today's world is ad hom and unpersuasive. Even the more militaristic might consider that there are Asian nations that need our help far more than the EU does. A Pacific treaty organization would make more sense now, but I suppose it's easier to talk tough about former Cold War foe that has little real ability to challenge us instead of taking on China, the real new superpower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luna1968

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,258
13,555
146
Very interesting how the tables have turned, the Left used to be known as the peacenik party, but you'd never know it today!

The argument that one is a Putin sock puppet for merely questioning the utility of NATO in today's world is ad hom and unpersuasive. Even the more militaristic might consider that there are Asian nations that need our help far more than the EU does. A Pacific treaty organization would make more sense now, but I suppose it's easier to talk tough about former Cold War foe that has little real ability to challenge us instead of taking on China, the real new superpower.
They're both threats for different reasons. I don't disagree with you that a more robust and comprehensive PAC treaty is probably warranted, but it's hard to police the whole world at the same time.

Your dismissal of Russia concerns me, however, and makes me question your motives.
 

crashtech

Lifer
Jan 4, 2013
10,575
2,145
146
They're both threats for different reasons. I don't disagree with you that a more robust and comprehensive PAC treaty is probably warranted, but it's hard to police the whole world at the same time.

Your dismissal of Russia concerns me, however, and makes me question your motives.
Oh, then if you want to be consistent, be sure to question fskimospy's motive's as well, since we seem to be in general agreement about Russia's military capabilities:
...the European defense forces as they exist currently would slaughter the Russians, even assuming that the Russian armed forces could sustain significant operations much outside of their borders for any meaningful period of time which is highly doubtful.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
Mutual defense treaties only work as long as all parties believe the other will actually come to their aid.

Would you trust America under Trump to come to your aid?

No, not at all, but Macron should not have said this. Other Euro leaders including Merkel backed away. Macron has to know that Trump might not be around much longer.
 

crashtech

Lifer
Jan 4, 2013
10,575
2,145
146
Also I would say that Russia is mainly a cyber-threat to the US at this time, so to the extent that NATO can address that, that part of NATO should be supported. But traditionally, NATO existed to prepare for a land war in Europe, an obsolete scenario.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,581
50,768
136
Oh, then if you want to be consistent, be sure to question fskimospy's motive's as well, since we seem to be in general agreement about Russia's military capabilities:

To be clear Russia has proved to pretty good at certain types of asymmetric warfare like they used in Crimea and to a lesser extent Georgia. The idea that they are a threat to Western Europe in a stand up fight/invasion though is nonsense. First, Western Europe has nukes. Second, Russia lacks the capabilities for sustained large scale operations outside its immediate border areas.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,581
50,768
136
No, not at all, but Macron should not have said this. Other Euro leaders including Merkel backed away. Macron has to know that Trump might not be around much longer.

Yes but from their perspective does that necessarily matter? Say a Democrat wins in 2020, what's to say Trump Jr. or whoever doesn't win in 2024? I feel like it has been revealed that US promises can no longer be relied on and I'm not sure how we restore that credibility in the short to medium term.