Submitted by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,
I am “not isolationist, but I am ‘America First,'” Donald Trump told The New York times last weekend. “I like the expression.”
Of NATO, where the U.S. underwrites three-fourths of the cost of defending Europe, Trump calls this arrangement “unfair, economically, to us,” and adds, “We will not be ripped off anymore.”
Beltway media may be transfixed with Twitter wars over wives and alleged infidelities. But the ideas Trump aired should ignite a national debate over U.S. overseas commitments — especially NATO.
For the Donald’s ideas are not lacking for authoritative support.
The first NATO supreme commander, Gen. Eisenhower, said in February 1951 of the alliance: “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.”
As JFK biographer Richard Reeves relates, President Eisenhower, a decade later, admonished the president-elect on NATO.
“Eisenhower told his successor it was time to start bringing the troops home from Europe. ‘America is carrying far more than her share of free world defense,’ he said. It was time for other nations of NATO to take on more of the costs of their own defense.”
No Cold War president followed Ike’s counsel.
But when the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Empire, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, and the breakup of the Soviet Union into 15 nations, a new debate erupted.
The conservative coalition that had united in the Cold War fractured. Some of us argued that when the Russian troops went home from Europe, the American troops should come home from Europe.
Time for a populous prosperous Europe to start defending itself.
Instead, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush began handing out NATO memberships, i.e., war guarantees, to all ex-Warsaw Pact nations and even Baltic republics that had been part of the Soviet Union.
In a historically provocative act, the U.S. moved its “red line” for war with Russia from the Elbe River in Germany to the Estonian-Russian border, a few miles from St. Petersburg.
We declared to the world that should Russia seek to restore its hegemony over any part of its old empire in Europe, she would be at war with the United States.
No Cold War president ever considered issuing a war guarantee of this magnitude, putting our homeland at risk of nuclear war, to defend Latvia and Estonia.
Recall. Ike did not intervene to save the Hungarian freedom fighters in 1956. Lyndon Johnson did not lift a hand to save the Czechs, when Warsaw Pact armies crushed “Prague Spring” in 1968. Reagan refused to intervene when Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski, on Moscow’s orders, smashed Solidarity in 1981.
These presidents put America first. All would have rejoiced in the liberation of Eastern Europe. But none would have committed us to war with a nuclear-armed nation like Russia to guarantee it.
Yet, here was George W. Bush declaring that any Russian move against Latvia or Estonia meant war with the United States. John McCain wanted to extend U.S. war guarantees to Georgia and Ukraine.
This was madness born of hubris. And among those who warned against moving NATO onto Russia’s front porch was America’s greatest geostrategist, the author of containment, George Kennan:
“Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the post-Cold War era. Such a decision may be expected to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.”
Kennan was proven right. By refusing to treat Russia as we treated other nations that repudiated Leninism, we created the Russia we feared, a rearming nation bristling with resentment.
The Russian people, having extended a hand in friendship and seen it slapped away, cheered the ouster of the accommodating Boris Yeltsin and the arrival of an autocratic strong man who would make Russia respected again. We ourselves prepared the path for Vladimir Putin.
While Trump is focusing on how America is bearing too much of the cost of defending Europe, it is the risks we are taking that are paramount, risks no Cold War president ever dared to take.
Why should America fight Russia over who rules in the Baltic States or Romania and Bulgaria? When did the sovereignty of these nations become interests so vital we would risk a military clash with Moscow that could escalate into nuclear war? Why are we still committed to fight for scores of nations on five continents?
Trump is challenging the mindset of a foreign policy elite whose thinking is frozen in a world that disappeared around 1991.
He is suggesting a new foreign policy where the United States is committed to war only when are attacked or U.S. vital interests are imperiled. And when we agree to defend other nations, they will bear a full share of the cost of their own defense. The era of the free rider is over.
Trump’s phrase, “America First!” has a nice ring to it.
Hope he has some good bodyguards...
I agree, there are some very powerful forces he's gone up against.
If nothing else, his campaign has been worth it to cast more light onto this bullshit......
Fuck NATO!!! (sounds like a good name for a porn vid) hahaha
And I hope he tells the U.N. to fuck off too!!! Cut all funding from America to the U.N. Kick every scumbag out of the country. Revoke all UNESCO and any other bull-shit, treasonous agreements to hand our land over to those scumbags. Revoke all diplomatic immunities. Vacate that fucking building and "Pull It" like WT Building #7!!!
The U.N. is one of the sickest things on the planet.
Both Bushes said the same thing when they were running. KINDER, GENTLER FOREIGN POLICY. Then they gave us never ending wars >> https://goo.gl/15VRor
Trumps statements are true, but don't go far enough. Since the Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore, there is no reason for NATO to exist, or especially for us to be a part of it. We gain nothing except the promises to go to nuclear war with Russia, even over a shitshow country like turkey, who shot down a fucking Russia plane.
It would also be interesting to see what happens to the welfare states of Western Europe if they were forced to pay for all this shit, or the US left all together.
is he planning to remove our beloved, essential reserve currency status?
or is playing to idiots like ron paul who know nothing of the reserve currency.
I hope so!
I've been an advocate of dismantling NATO and the UN for YEARS now. They have both outlived their usefulness.
NATO is essentially a handout to the MIC companies. No other foreign country is going to buy F35 ( except maybe canada, the canadian population has proved to be gullible enough). So the US has to have overseas bases to park the latest from lockheed, raytheon , boeing etc.
These overseas bases also have the advantaage of employing young adult males abroad instead of being jobless at home fomenting trouble for DC.
NATO - The Imaginary Friends Club
Time for the U.S. to stop acting like a fucking 8-year-old emotionally-disturbed child.
But...but...but Europe must be defended right on the Russian border.
Would be a good idea, the Europeans pay all of that and do it their way.
They were doing just that approx 70 years ago when the US butted its big bloody nose into their affiars to begin with.
Pull out of Europe and let the cards fall where they may - Americans need to focus on America as it is already fucked almost beyond repair - and not the outer world.
"I've been an advocate of dismantling NATO and the UN for YEARS now. They have both outlived their usefulness."
wrong approach leading to nowhere
and isn't that hilarious? lots of people propose this kind of things, and are often not aware that they are futile
you can take your country out of a club of countries. the UK is going to have a referendum about exiting the EU
but you can't go and expect that others dismantle something you don't like anymore
Irrelevant. Without the US Nato would fall apart within a handful of years. For that matter, so would the UN.
Ron Paul knows plenty about the reserve currency status. He indelibly knows it is intertwined with our competition with and our allies' reliance on Saudi oil, which generates investment banks and the military-industrial complex enormous profits at the expense of international wage peasants.
Trumps goal is to dismantle Jewish power.
This is why they hate him so much, they know it.
And why he says
Make America Great Again
Yes.
N. orth
A. erican
T. errorist
O. rganization
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and South East Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) were evil twins that were hatched at the end of WW2 on the pretext of containing Russian and Chinese expansionism.
Does anyone remember SEATO? It vanished into thin air when it no longer served the purposes of the NWO warmongers. Maybe they knew better than to antagonize the Chicoms, or maybe they cut them in on the opium trade. Whatever. Who got SEATO's allocated money?
Anyway, since DC never got the memo, the USSR is long since gone. So the NATO welfare queens needed another enemy to keep the welfare checks coming.
Q. What is the first rule of advertising?
A. Create the need.
So Ghaddafi was the enemy du jour, and NATO dutifully turned the entire nation of Libya into a violent wasteland of carnage and destruction.
What part of "North Atlantic" did they not understand?
Now they're looking for another enemy and who did they pick? Putin.
Go ahead, guys. Go for it. Go ahead and kick a bear. What could go wrong?
And just what do we get out of these welfare queens? It seems that we pay them welfare checks to act all big and bad and then attack defenseless nations to show how tough they are.
Let them try that with the Russians, Chicoms, or Iranians just once. That would be the end of the NATO scam once and for all.
Furthermore, why are American taxpayers flipping the bill for the honor and privilege of defending European nations who don't have the guts to defend themselves? They can't even defend their own women and children from stunted street thugs, so why do they need big fancy weapons? What is there to defend? It's over.
If they want to be protected by American military men they need to pay up.
It is not for the American taxpayers to protect European weenies.
Vassals are supposed to be defended by their liege lord.
They already pay for it via the petro dollar scam.
I'm sure Trump already knows all this, so he playing the political game.
TPTB's game.
If he doesn't he's a dumb schmuck not fit to be dog catcher.
BRAVO Winston.....
You're the only 1 close to the 'true answer' concerning 'who is paying, footing the bill' for the am. MIC.
The fact is, the US$ Reserve Currency Standard with it's NON-gold backed FRN-Federal Reserve Notes since 1971 is, a Global Tax-royalty to the USofA & its citizen.
Americans have been freeloading on the rest of the World since Richard Nixon started the 'funny money' printing.
It's a 100% BS-arguement european Nato members are/never pay their fair share.
More likely the US & citizens are big economic winners with this '$usd currency de facto wealth transfer'.
There was a CENTO too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Pact
SEATO and CENTO were dissolved while USSR was alive and Communism was a threat to these countries.
Now please justify the existence of NATO after USSR's death.
"Now please justify the existence of NATO after USSR's death."
I can't think of one that would have a moral base to it.
NATO's life after USSR's death was that of a Mafia don, running profitable criminal activities and using any means neccessary to keep junior partners in line. NATO (US) did benefit from the addition of Eastern European countries as they prove to be much more anti Russian than Western Europe. This is why Eastern Europe was added to EU and NATO, to weaken Western Europe in dealings with the US. Noodleman really meant to say fuck Western EU.
NATO survived as the MIC needed a market to sell to. The narrative of the big bad Russians needed to be pushed hard for Western Europe to buy in. NATO was needed to put pressure on them all. NATO was used and still is to stifle independant action. Without NATO, the Europeans might as well buy Russian military equipment as it is certainly cheaper, and appears to be quite robust, or they could make their own. Either would be cheaper than F-35's. Without NATO, the whole petrodollar thingy would likely start to unravel. CETO fell apart after the Iranian revolution. Eventually NATO expanded to fill the void and spread the poison to Afghanistan.
Bubbles
Fuck NATO indeed! Let's bill them retroactive to 1991! Problem solved (Laugh Track Deafening, gun fire, bombs in the background)
Lesson in socialism: Europe didn't have to spend hardly anything on defense the last 60 years since we supplied it all for them. They still ran their economies into the shitter twice as fast as we did.
If socialists were in charge of the beach they'd run it out of sand in 3 years and protest the ocean didn't supply them enough.
In return for US defense dollars, Europe accepted American hegemony of global political institutions, US leadership in the new world order, and the supremacy and seignorage of the US Dollar. Its a pretty good deal for the US empire builders
That just says European economies are not based on arms sales! You any idea what percentage of your GDP is down to Security?? Get a clue...
Lesson in Capitalism: On the Beach 1% get a big sand dune each and the r99% a few grains. In Socialism everyone gets there own little sand castle and they are all the same size.
...yeah and that size is forever shrinking. Brain dead communists never learn, because they don't posses critical thinking - it's a skill they never learned to develope in the first place.
1. Trumps just inspected plane will crash (CIA). All aboard die. Pilot will have 3 names in news. (like Lee Harvey Oswald)
2. New vehicle he gets driven in inexplicably goes to top speed and careens out of control, crashes, killing everyone (NSA). Dead driver will have 3 names in news.
3. Lone gunman kills murders shoots assinates Trump (Oligarchy). Dead lone gunman will have 3 names in news.
4. Trump dies in sleep (The Establishment).
I wonder if Trump realizes he's going to have to kill the opposition in order to survive himself.
Game of Thrones Americano style Bitchez.
Saying "nay" to NATO in Europe and elsewhere is an impossible dream. The entire US MILITARY/Armaments factories along with D.C. neo-cons like Wolfowitz, McCain, General Breedlove and the slew of others would never tolerate Trump's idea.
NATO ---owned lock, stock and barrel by the US Establishment is in Europe to help keep European nations as vassal states of the US. Of course, the US financial hegemony is the other half.
It would be more feasible (in about 100 years) when Europe gets tired of their imprisonment before Trump's views would ever become a reality.
Kudos, anyway, for Trump!
Surely Trump is not so stupid to believe that we are being "had" by the Europeans in regards to the collective NATO defense budget?
Surely he understands NATO is merely a captive audience for arms sales ex USA?
Surely he understands that by paying "more than our share" we are utilizing it to push a fucked up agenda abroad with the complicity of those who are "not paying their share"?
Come on Donald......get with the program.
Too complex for the average voter. Trump is making a smart play for stupid people. Smart people realize we're vastly outnumbered and outgunned, so sometimes a little subterfuge is necessary.
In a manner of speaking he's right. Other countries don't pay their fair share of the expenses. However, the size and scope of what exists now is orders of magnitude TOO BIG. So everyone else shouldn't pay more, th eUS should scale back and spend WAY less.
That is what will get someone killed. Scaling back at all and therefore costing any private predatory military supplier / contractor money..
Fair share? Funny hiow the other countries always seem to get a disproportionately lower return in threir country's arms sales...
It's American corporates who always benefit from the deal. Trump knows it but maybe he's just had enough of slaughter in his and the electorates names....
NATO should have been disbanded when USSR was toppled. It's that simple. It's a fucking MIC jobs program now. Let Europe sink or swim on it's own.
Abslutely!
The reason it is still there is called ... the USA.
Europe is gonna sink with or without NATO. Europe has opened the floodgates thanks to ZOG's in Europe - another Mossad/CIA plan. Fuck America, Fuck Israel and leave the rest of us the Fuck alone...
I've been asking for 30 years what we get out of NATO.
Syrin: "I've been asking for 30 years what we get out of NATO."
That's easy, fake friends and pissed off countries.
Great idea for a greeting card:
All The Best!
From
Your Fake Fucking Friends
Afghanistan was a NATO operation. Wait, Is. Still happening. Continues.
The spicium must flow.
as well as the heroin...oh...same thing
Hey, the Russians walked away from the Warsaw Pact, and never went back. But the US? Must have empire, must have empire...
Right on. As for Europe, whose cultures and societies have been around for centuries, somehow I think they would be doing themselves a favor in removing themselves from NATO. But that "ain't gonna happen" as long as the US maintains its financial/military hegemony all around the world.
I can't wait to see the debates...Trump is to the left of Clinton on NATO & foreign policy. He is also to her left on trade.
You're mistaken. He's (a) Right and (b) To the Right.
Like all good Landlords, you eventually and inevitably RAISE THE RENT. And like any fee-based business, you RAISE THE FEES. And you charge "Whatever the Market will bear".
Enough if this Leftist/Socialist forms of SUBSIDIZED COSTS!
US taxpayers have NO legal or moral obligation to subsidize or pay for the EU taxpayers -- NONE!
We are broke. Make THEM pay for THEIR own Defense.
p.s. If you still disagree, then you can put your money where your mouth is:
I need to expand my Guns & Ammo collection, because there are some dubious and unsavory looking people across town, who are buying G&A, and I can't allow them to have more than I have. Otherwise I just won't feel safe or sleep well at night.