Why? Why must my sons and daughters sacrifice their lives to protect the wealth of foreign oligarchs? I don’t recall “our greatest ally” sending any troops to patrol America’s southern border. I haven’t heard of Israel sending any disaster relief to the mountains of North Carolina. And we don’t even have an alliance with Ukraine. The only security guarantee we ever made to Ukraine was that we wouldn’t nuke them if they gave up their nuclear weapons (read the document, it’s short). That’s it. We owe Ukraine nothing.
9 Likes
If we don 't defend the concept of national sovereignty, sooner or later the repercussions will be devastating for us as well. We are not a totally insular, island nation without economic and security interests beyond our borders. International instability has serious repercussions on our economy and way of life.
A waste of taxper funds supporting Black Rock companies manufacturing weapons of war, ALLEGEDLY.
Aren’t American taxpayers paying for other country’s membership in NATO? WHY?
5 Likes
This “good vs. bad” narrative is ridiculous, especially when the U.S. has invaded and violated the sovereignty of other nations for decades. We talk about defending territorial integrity and sovereignty, yet we had no problem invading Iraq or intervening in Libya. So let’s not act like we’re always the moral authority here.
3 Likes
I’m not a big fan of there being a “higher” government that supersedes / works with the federal government that we (the people) both don’t even elect representatives for and could possibly have to answer to representatives from other nations based on the hierarchy of that system (whether its functionality changes or not). It’s both a massive government scope issue that doesn’t do anything to serve Americans and evidently an excuse for eastern nations to label us boogeymen for not staying out of their own (historical) affairs (in other words, a national security risk).
We don’t need to feed the monster any more than it already has been; it needs to be put down like the rabid animal it is.
Use it as a bargaining chip to end the Ukraine war. With the US removal from NATO insist Russia and Ukraine join NATO together to try and prevent a future war. NATO’s foundation was to prevent wars and the only reason to exist today is to prevent Russian aggression but ironically an argument could be made that the only reason Russia was aggressive is because of NATO expansion and the West (mainly the US) making an enemy out of Russia rather than a friend.
Either way If the US leaves NATO and Russia & Ukraine joins, the original goal of NATO will be achieved and the weapon manufacturers of the US will be happy too as Russia and Ukraine will have to switch to NATO standard and US tax payers won’t have to pay 3.3 billion a year and will help in balancing the budget
Also bringing Russia closer to the West as a friend will weaken the ties and financial support to Iran which is a genuine threat and will also help split China & Russia’s relationship apart which will be beneficial in the long run for global peace.
Its a Win, Win, Win , Win
3 Likes
I couldn’t agree more.
1 Like
Sounds nice, but I think this is impossible. Even if Trump managed to do this, it would likely completely stop after his presidency at some point. Biden’s presidency is proof. Our relationship with NATO went from actually getting them to pay their fair share to licking their boot again.
1 Like
I have to say the last NATO summit (I have never watched one til this year) I was really shocked how many countries were missing when certain people were speaking… This is supposed to be a peace organization yet there isn’t enough respect to sit through everyones speech. I would like it should be mandatory tbh. The point is to come together as a world and community and discuss.
I don’t know if it’s doing its job anymore and might need a reform. And if not I think the US needs to leave.
These are all nice things you’re saying, but Ukraine is not even on our continent. It’s in Europe and the countries that are actually surrounding it seem to have no interest in actually getting involved and preventing Russian expansion. Instead, they expect the United States to foot the bill and send troops. Why, exactly, do we need to be the world’s police to countries that often seem to want the worst for us? Who will complain about us getting involved in wars but simultaneously expect both it and our money?
Moreover, this is a war NATO caused. Russia has complained for years that NATO has expanded eastward, allowing in countries who were once part of the USSR. They also claim NATO has gone back on the Warsaw pact and the agreement made in 1997. NATO, on the other hand, claims this is not true (what does seem to be true is that the issue is actually quite complicated and NATO acts like it is not). Whether NATO went back on an agreement or not, what IS clear is that NATO has blatantly promised Ukraine that they can enter NATO. How exactly is this anything but an attempt to upset Putin? This is something that would have only ever been seen as going back on previously formed agreements. And if NATO really cared for us to come together as a world perhaps they would allow NATO’s purpose to truly evolve beyond its founding and stop treating Russia like its the USSR. Should Putin fully be trusted? Of course not, but that does not mean you should disallow Russia from having a voice and trying to get along.
2 Likes
=“pmanfredi, post:21, topic:262”]
If we start allowing countries to violate the territories of sovereign nations with impunity, what we have left of world peace could easily unravel.”
US is taking part in Israeli aggression as both bomb any country they choose to while Israel expands outside its borders using a polite term SETTLEMENTS!
You mention NATO has CIVILIZED countries, these same are aggressively using mighty military force to invade & OCCUPY anywhere they please!! Get rid of NATO for peace on earth!
3 Likes
I absolutely agree with this. NATO had a purpose when the Soviet Union still existed as it was originally founded to prevent expansion of the USSR. However, the USSR no longer exists and Russia is a drastically different country from then. Moreover, we pour a ridiculous amount of money into that alliance that would be better served dealing with our own debt.
More importantly, NATO is far more corrupt. It was never meant to expand eastward. Now, however, NATO pretends they have not broken any of the agreements made with Russia and acts like Russia is in the wrong for being upset. Meanwhile, anyone who knows a bit of history would know that it would be obvious that they would be growing increasingly upset and that doing something like offering Ukraine a place in the alliance was only ever asking for war.
I completely agree that if the United States was no longer part of NATO that perhaps this behavior might diminish. We pay the most amount of money and other countries often seem to expect us to be at the forefront of defense. Perhaps if they were forced to foot their own bills and defend their own countries they would not make such foolish actions, especially considering Russia is not exactly defenseless.
2 Likes
NATO and the UN
2 Likes
Can someone please explain the steel-man argument for staying in NATO?
2 Likes
I agree as soon as Putin is out of office and if they have a fair and free election, then Russia should be allowed to join NATO. But not before then.
NATO is a binding contract to send our children to fight in someone else’s war. I would like to state that that decision should be made on a case-by-case basis, not on membership in a multinational agreement. Thusly I vote for leaving NATO.
4 Likes
NATO should have been dissolved at the same time that the Warsaw Pact dissolved. The USA needs to disentangle itself from overseas foreign alliances and heed the admonition that George Washington gave at his farewell address. The USA needs to concentrate on its own domestic issues and not try to act like it owns the world. The USA does have security interests in the Western Hemisphere and the Pacific as far as Guam.
2 Likes
Kennedy is a typical liberal who apparently never considers potential (yet perfectly predictable) unintended consequences of the policies he champions.
NATO is the de facto military arm of those who want global government. It’s an abomination, and it should be well understood by now that any such organization will take on a life and mind of its own. There is NO WAY to ensure NATO will ever be intent on peace. It has been a provocateur since the USSR fell and its mission was accomplished.
Globalism is evil. Time to end it.
1 Like
Do you like the idea of a global government, with a global military, that is empowered to overrule domestic constitutions and laws at the whim of unelected bureaucrats? AND it’s got a military to enforce its decrees!
NATO is the military arm of the globalist movement. I implore you to consider the worst case scenario of further enabling and expanding such a beast.
3 Likes
This perfectly captures the essence of post-USSR NATO.
1 Like