Why the NATO alliance is not as likely to dissolve as Trump makes it seem
(www.theguardian.com)
from MicroWave@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 12 Apr 10:05
https://lemmy.world/post/45502870
from MicroWave@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 12 Apr 10:05
https://lemmy.world/post/45502870
Trump has upped the stridency and threatening nature of his complaints, but the US and Europe need each other
#world
threaded - newest
NATO is likely to muddle on until we have a genuine article five situation, and then we’ll see where we are. I’m not putting any money on it.
It’s meant as a defensive alliance, they have no business getting involved in donnie’s mess, so his tantrums and threats to leave are just typical noise.
NATO for all intents and purposes is just an extension of the US military. If the US left NATO is might still exist on paper but it wouldn’t at all be anything resembling NATO since its inception.
NATO is not a “defensive pact”. It’s always been an extension of US imperialism and a means to keep European countries as vassals in the capitalists wests goal of stopping the spread of Socialism.
Well yeah. Trump’s bullshit doesn’t even remotely resemble anything that could oblige others to join in, and the others sure as fuck don’t want to.
The US is not indispensable to Europe. Europe was able to stop the Mongols. Europe is like a wife who stays with her abusive husband because she’s afraid she can’t survive without him.
Oh good, so if the Russians invade on horses, you guys got it. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure that if the Russians decided to invade, you guys could hold your own, but calling back to when the mongols invaded is not the flex you think it is.
The Mongols were excellent fighters. They were able to shoot while riding and employed excellent tactics.
Better get rid of Rutte than. He’ll sink the ship for his ‘Daddy’.
Er, only one country has ever invoked article 5 and when it did, NATO came to their aid.