Rolling Stone: Trump Plots to Pull Out of NATO (or undermine it)

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Donald Trump wanted to pull the United States out of NATO during his first term, but was repeatedly talked out of it by senior administration officials. For a possible second term in the White House, the 2024 Republican presidential frontrunner is already discussing how he could actually get it done, if his demands aren’t met by NATO. He and his policy-wonk allies are also gaming out how he could dramatically wind down American involvement to merely a “standby” position in NATO, in Trump’s own words.

When the former president has privately discussed the United States’ role in the transatlantic military alliance this year, Trump has made clear that he doesn’t want the upper ranks of a second administration to be staffed by “NATO lovers,” according to two sources who’ve heard him make such comments. The ex-president has made these kinds of jabs at the longstanding alliance during conversations related to the ongoing Russian war in Ukraine.

Trump, the sources say, has continued to express an openness to pulling the U.S. out of NATO altogether. However, Trump has suggested that this could be averted if the alliance — which Trump once famously called “obsolete” — gives in to his newest demands. This would include his desires for non-American members to further and steeply increase their defense spending, and for a reevaluation of the bedrock principle that an attack on one member is tantamount to an attack on all.

When he was in office, Trump would repeatedly scoff at this collective-defense clause of the North Atlantic Treaty, known as Article 5. One former senior administration official recalls to Rolling Stone a moment in the Oval Office in mid-2018 when the then-president started reading from a written list of smaller NATO countries, some of which he argued most Americans had never even heard of before.

Trump then vented that “starting World War III” over some of these countries’ sovereignty made absolutely no sense, and that he shouldn’t be forced to automatically commit American troops to any such crisis.

[...]

While Trump may find it more difficult to formally leave NATO if the legislation [which would require a 2/3 vote of the Senate to remove the US from NATO] becomes law, he would still be able to undermine the credibility of U.S. security guarantees to other member states.

“He still wants out,” says one Trump adviser, who notes it is unclear if he “actually would follow through” on doing so, given his track record as president. “But he wants a policy team around him nowadays that is much, much tougher on NATO than anything he’s done in the past,” this adviser adds. “That’s one difference.”

Rolling Stone

Italics mine.

[Jingizu]

Isolationism laid bare for all to see.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Honestly, I'd be fine with the US not having stationed troops in Europe and being reduced to a 'standby' role. But right now, and as part of a broader withdrawal from 'the West' so we can align ourselves with autocrats? No thanks.

[Jingizu]

Yes, and I would be happy if Western Europe had taken NATO seriously over the last thirty years so that there wouldn’t need to be more than a tripwire force from the U.S. present but sadly that wasn’t the case.

[Open Source Intelligence]

Yes, and I would be happy if Western Europe had taken NATO seriously over the last thirty years so that there wouldn’t need to be more than a tripwire force from the U.S. present but sadly that wasn’t the case.

I read yesterday this in the Ottawa Playbook from Politico.

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/ottawa-playbook/2023/10/23/from-rosedale-to-the-rock-00122950

THE SOUND OF SILENCE — The Canadian Armed Forces are struggling mightily to recruit, train and retain personnel. The pandemic worsened a pre-existing problem. It’s gotten so bad that the military doesn’t have enough people to offer most visiting dignitaries in Ottawa a gun salute.

A scaled-down list of ceremonial offerings was detailed in a tasking order circulated by Chief of the Defense Staff Gen. WAYNE EYRE in August.

“The CAF has been hampered by numerous deficiencies that have impacted the composition and readiness of the CAF, and which have been compounded by the global pandemic,” read the order, obtained by POLITICO.

He ordered ceremonial military honors to be scaled down to a “sustainable level” until 2025.

— There’s that R-word: The word of the moment in federal budgetary circles is restraint. Same goes for a resource-thin military forced to reckon with a lack of people.

The Department of National Defence has been trying to solve the problem for more than a year. A directive published by Eyre and Deputy Minister BILL MATTHEWS on Oct. 6, 2022 laid out the scope of the challenge — and the need to rebuild.

“These strains continue to imperil the force size available for operations and have resulted in a significant loss of experience and expertise within the CAF, creating a requirement to recover and rebuild (reconstitute) the organization,” read that directive.

In the aftermath of the Russia-Ukraine War, there's going to be a serious reckoning in NATO when it comes to procurement and replacement of equipment, throw on top of it recruiting of new personnel to replace everyone retiring. Organizationally the Europeans need to figure out what they're doing. If it's through NATO (American leadership) or through EU (not American leadership, so largely French), I don't care, just pick one and go
with it. I'm all for American Presidents telling our allies to live up to their treaty commitments toward ensuring American defense, just as we live up to our treaty commitments toward ensuring European and Canadian defense. In NATO there's us, France, Turkey, Poland, Sweden, and the UK. There's a lot of other countries. In late 2021, they held a huge NATO joint naval exercise and the Belgians were kicked out of it because the crew of their frigate Leopold I was deemed undertrained.

[Jingizu]

Ouch.    Has it occurred to the Canadian Liberals that protecting Canada’s vast, increasingly geopolitically important, northern reaches might be a good idea? Or are they just going to let those nefarious Americans sail through their waters unchallenged? Much less what the Russians might get up to?

[MasterJedi]

Russian puppet will try and hurt America. Nobody should be surprised.

[Open Source Intelligence]

Ouch.    Has it occurred to the Canadian Liberals that protecting Canada’s vast, increasingly geopolitically important, northern reaches might be a good idea? Or are they just going to let those nefarious Americans sail through their waters unchallenged? Much less what the Russians might get up to?

The Canadians have one base in their Arctic reaches at Alert in far northern Nunavut. It's largely just signals intelligence. If the Russians wanted to land in Arctic Canada or operate in the territorial waters off it, there's nothing to stop them other than ice and the Americans.

You saw it when an American airplane shot down the suspected Chinese spy balloon on Canadian soil. They had a CAF base near Edmonton with Canadian fighter jets they could've sortied. I think the official excuse was the American aircraft could react quicker coming out of Alaska.

[Jingizu]

Ouch.    Has it occurred to the Canadian Liberals that protecting Canada’s vast, increasingly geopolitically important, northern reaches might be a good idea? Or are they just going to let those nefarious Americans sail through their waters unchallenged? Much less what the Russians might get up to?

The Canadians have one base in their Arctic reaches at Alert in far northern Nunavut. It's largely just signals intelligence.

You saw it when an American airplane shot down the suspected Chinese spy balloon on Canadian soil. Canada's defense is calling the U.S.

Again, ouch. 

You’d think that Canadian National Pride would have resulted in some changes by now.

[Open Source Intelligence]

Ouch.    Has it occurred to the Canadian Liberals that protecting Canada’s vast, increasingly geopolitically important, northern reaches might be a good idea? Or are they just going to let those nefarious Americans sail through their waters unchallenged? Much less what the Russians might get up to?

The Canadians have one base in their Arctic reaches at Alert in far northern Nunavut. It's largely just signals intelligence.

You saw it when an American airplane shot down the suspected Chinese spy balloon on Canadian soil. Canada's defense is calling the U.S.

Again, ouch.  

You’d think that Canadian National Pride would have resulted in some changes by now.

They don't care. Trudeau already stated they cannot live up to NATO commitments. Which, fine, but you lose the right to have your word taken seriously on foreign affairs. It's easier for Trudeau to just rely on the Americans instead of Canada living up to their word and spending more money. But it puts them in a pickle when they negotiate with the Americans or other countries on issues of global importance when the inevitable "what are you bringing to the table?" is asked. China and India during Trudeau's reign as Prime Minister have very publicly treated Canada as completely unimportant irrelevant in global affairs, and this is a G7 member. It would never get stated publicly, but all signals are Biden does not think much of the Canadians either. His administration formally asked Trudeau during his convoy crisis if he needed American help to take care of Canada's problem on the Ambassador Bridge, which...wow. "Hi Justin, yeah, since you're completely incapable of solving this problem, do you want to acknowledge your country's loss of sovereignty and have us take care of it?"

How the world has changed the last 4 years where leaders of first world countries officially gave up on more interconnected economic activity getting rid of the world divide and would democratize other countries ("friendshoring" as formerly Justin Trudeau's protege/natural successor now completely lost Chrystia Freeland put it), there's going to be winners and losers. Unless countries such as Canada and Germany as the most obvious European example have a serious reckoning on their place in geopolitical affairs, they're going to wind up losers on the global stage. And yeah, that will bite economically.

[Jingizu]

Ouch.    Has it occurred to the Canadian Liberals that protecting Canada’s vast, increasingly geopolitically important, northern reaches might be a good idea? Or are they just going to let those nefarious Americans sail through their waters unchallenged? Much less what the Russians might get up to?

The Canadians have one base in their Arctic reaches at Alert in far northern Nunavut. It's largely just signals intelligence.

You saw it when an American airplane shot down the suspected Chinese spy balloon on Canadian soil. Canada's defense is calling the U.S.

Again, ouch.  

You’d think that Canadian National Pride would have resulted in some changes by now.

They don't care. Trudeau already stated they cannot live up to NATO commitments. Which, fine, but you lose the right to have your word taken seriously on foreign affairs. It's easier for Trudeau to just rely on the Americans instead of Canada living up to their word and spending more money. But it puts them in a pickle when they negotiate with the Americans or other countries on issues of global importance when the inevitable "what are you bringing to the table?" is asked. China and India during Trudeau's reign as Prime Minister have very publicly treated Canada as completely unimportant irrelevant in global affairs, and this is a G7 member. It would never get stated publicly, but all signals are Biden does not think much of the Canadians either. His administration formally asked Trudeau during his convoy crisis if he needed American help to take care of Canada's problem on the Ambassador Bridge, which...wow.

How the world has changed the last 4 years where leaders of first world countries officially gave up on more interconnected economic activity getting rid of the world divide and would democratize other countries, there's going to be winners and losers. Unless countries such as Canada and Germany as the most obvious European example have a serious reckoning on their place in geopolitical affairs, they're going to be losers.

I forgot Turkey in my earlier post. They're a real military inside NATO.

I am not at all surprised at Belgium’s failure that you mentioned: they’re kinda known for that.

I…agree with you on this. What do the other Canadian political parties say on this subject?

You’d think Fidel Castro’s illegitimate Canadian son would know the value of a strong military 

[Landslide Lyndon]

It might be a bit too little, too late for Donnie's boss since Ukraine turned his military into mincemeat.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Honestly, I'd be fine with the US not having stationed troops in Europe and being reduced to a 'standby' role. But right now, and as part of a broader withdrawal from 'the West' so we can align ourselves with autocrats? No thanks.

The reason we have troops stationed in Europe is to deter other countries from starting another world war. If we pull back and go full isolationist, you're going to have more Russias/Chinas/etc invading other countries. Of course, Trump would gladly hand Russia whatever they want and let China take Taiwan.

[Open Source Intelligence]

It might be a bit too little, too late for Donnie's boss since Ukraine turned his military into mincemeat.

If the Russian military was mincemeat, the Ukrainians would control more of their internationally recognized territory than they do. The map if you look at it now in October 2023 pretty much matches the map of May 2022. So all we're doing is waiting for a stalemate to be declared to match what it has looked like the last 18 months. The Russians and Ukrainians have each made little in the way of advance and at this point the net result of the war is the Russians pushed east a bit from Luhansk and Donetsk, north a bit from Crimea up to the Dnieper, and have removed Ukraine from having any coastline on the Sea of Azov.

Going back to NATO, an acronym that stands for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, what should probably occur is the treaty should be revised in parts to acknowledge reality and modernize it for the now. For example, Canada are not going to meet 2% spending on its military, but countries such as Canada that make that choice should see their explicit influence on the organization lessen in other areas to compensate.

[Landslide Lyndon]

It might be a bit too little, too late for Donnie's boss since Ukraine turned his military into mincemeat.

If the Russian military was mincemeat, the Ukrainians would control more of their internationally recognized territory than they do. The map if you look at it now in October 2023 pretty much matches the map of May 2022. So all we're doing is waiting for a stalemate to be declared to match what it has looked like the last 18 months. The Russians and Ukrainians have each made little in the way of advance and at this point the net result of the war is the Russians pushed east a bit from Luhansk and Donetsk, north a bit from Crimea up to the Dnieper, and have removed Ukraine from having any coastline on the Sea of Azov.

Ok comrade Ivan.

[Open Source Intelligence]

Honestly, I'd be fine with the US not having stationed troops in Europe and being reduced to a 'standby' role. But right now, and as part of a broader withdrawal from 'the West' so we can align ourselves with autocrats? No thanks.

The reason we have troops stationed in Europe is to deter other countries from starting another world war. If we pull back and go full isolationist, you're going to have more Russias/Chinas/etc invading other countries. Of course, Trump would gladly hand Russia whatever they want and let China take Taiwan.

2008-Russia/Georgia conflict, lasted about a week, Angela Merkel said Georgia started it going against the U.S. on the matter, but net result of war was Russia took control of South Ossetia and Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast, Bush was President, not Trump, and we did nothing
2012-President Obama says in a debate to Mitt Romney "you mentioned Russia there, the 1980s called and want their foreign policy back"
2014-Russia/Ukraine, Ukrainians in a popular revolution get rid of the previous Russia-friendly leader, Von Rompuy like a dumbass boasts "Ukraine has a European future", Russia respond by going in and taking control of Crimea without firing a single shot, tit-for-tat conflict develops in Ukraine's far east and Luhansk and Donetsk fall under Russian control with the skirmish lingering for years, Obama was President, not Trump, and we did nothing

2022 I think Putin miscalculated and thought Biden would be as weak as Obama was, and was probably aided in that miscalculation by how the Fall of Kabul went down (Barack Obama's foreign policy is completely dead in Joe Biden's Democratic Party). Bush in his case couldn't do anything in the aftermath of Iraq that would be politically acceptable for Georgia - he could hardly deploy troops or anything - and Saakashvili was not getting portrayed as a complete saint in everything.

[Open Source Intelligence]

It might be a bit too little, too late for Donnie's boss since Ukraine turned his military into mincemeat.

If the Russian military was mincemeat, the Ukrainians would control more of their internationally recognized territory than they do. The map if you look at it now in October 2023 pretty much matches the map of May 2022. So all we're doing is waiting for a stalemate to be declared to match what it has looked like the last 18 months. The Russians and Ukrainians have each made little in the way of advance and at this point the net result of the war is the Russians pushed east a bit from Luhansk and Donetsk, north a bit from Crimea up to the Dnieper, and have removed Ukraine from having any coastline on the Sea of Azov.

Ok comrade Ivan.

If my name is Ivan, I am a Communist, or I am a Russian, I ask you to please share to everyone in the thread the information you possess that shows that to all be true. I do believe in open source intelligence in all arenas "Landslide Lyndon, Greek Independent".

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Honestly, I'd be fine with the US not having stationed troops in Europe and being reduced to a 'standby' role. But right now, and as part of a broader withdrawal from 'the West' so we can align ourselves with autocrats? No thanks.

The reason we have troops stationed in Europe is to deter other countries from starting another world war. If we pull back and go full isolationist, you're going to have more Russias/Chinas/etc invading other countries. Of course, Trump would gladly hand Russia whatever they want and let China take Taiwan.

I'm aware for the stated reason they're there. In the long run, I don't think it's something that should be a permanent situation. And I personally hope European 'nationalists' will do that for us by taking charge of their own defense someday.

[Open Source Intelligence]

Honestly, I'd be fine with the US not having stationed troops in Europe and being reduced to a 'standby' role. But right now, and as part of a broader withdrawal from 'the West' so we can align ourselves with autocrats? No thanks.

The reason we have troops stationed in Europe is to deter other countries from starting another world war. If we pull back and go full isolationist, you're going to have more Russias/Chinas/etc invading other countries. Of course, Trump would gladly hand Russia whatever they want and let China take Taiwan.

I'm aware for the stated reason they're there. In the long run, I don't think it's something that should be a permanent situation. And I personally hope European 'nationalists' will do that for us by taking charge of their own defense someday.

The German bases have been there long enough that they are perceived by the locals as "permanent".

As far as "European nationalists", le sigh. It's clearly the Macron dream that occurs. Problem is Eastern Europe still don't trust Western and Central Europe as much as they do the Americans when the gloves get dropped. The argument of the late '00s and throughout the '10s is the East wanted greater anti-Russian defense commitment and the West led by Germany thought they were delusional and still in a Cold War mindset. The East have been proven right. The West right now are still trying to rationalize how their world has changed, and one thing about the East being proven right is the European nationalists would argue Danish and Belgian troops should be stationed in Poland for example, or at the very least helping fund that. Not sure people in the West are there yet. France are, but any coordinated European procurement strategy that buys European the French defense industry would be a large winner which in part explains the Macron dream. The East meanwhile being more pro-American than pro-European is simply reflecting reality as far as military capability. Libya was a purely European conflict with no American interest, instead it was French and Italian, and they had to call Obama to take care of it for them. So a conflict the size of Libya, which compared to Russia-Ukraine was tiny, was beyond the Europeans about a decade ago.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Honestly, I'd be fine with the US not having stationed troops in Europe and being reduced to a 'standby' role. But right now, and as part of a broader withdrawal from 'the West' so we can align ourselves with autocrats? No thanks.

The reason we have troops stationed in Europe is to deter other countries from starting another world war. If we pull back and go full isolationist, you're going to have more Russias/Chinas/etc invading other countries. Of course, Trump would gladly hand Russia whatever they want and let China take Taiwan.

I'm aware for the stated reason they're there. In the long run, I don't think it's something that should be a permanent situation.

The German bases have been there long enough that they are perceived as "permanent".

Yeah, which is something I very much so bemoan. It shouldn't be the expected way of things and to respond a little further to AHDuke the opposite of 'Troops in foreign countries' isn't isolationism.

[Jingizu]

Honestly, I'd be fine with the US not having stationed troops in Europe and being reduced to a 'standby' role. But right now, and as part of a broader withdrawal from 'the West' so we can align ourselves with autocrats? No thanks.

The reason we have troops stationed in Europe is to deter other countries from starting another world war. If we pull back and go full isolationist, you're going to have more Russias/Chinas/etc invading other countries. Of course, Trump would gladly hand Russia whatever they want and let China take Taiwan.

I'm aware for the stated reason they're there. In the long run, I don't think it's something that should be a permanent situation. And I personally hope European 'nationalists' will do that for us by taking charge of their own defense someday.

The German bases have been there long enough that they are perceived by the locals as "permanent".

As far as "European nationalists", le sigh. It's clearly the Macron dream that occurs. Problem is Eastern Europe still don't trust Western and Central Europe as much as they do the Americans when the gloves get dropped. The argument of the late '00s and throughout the '10s is the East wanted greater anti-Russian defense commitment and the West led by Germany thought they were delusional and still in a Cold War mindset. The East have been proven right. The West right now are still trying to rationalize how their world has changed, and one thing about the East being proven right is the European nationalists would argue Danish and Belgian troops should be stationed in Poland for example, or at the very least helping fund that. Not sure people in the West are there yet. France are, but any coordinated European procurement strategy that buys European the French defense industry would be a large winner which in part explains the Macron dream. The East meanwhile being more pro-American than pro-European is simply reflecting reality as far as military capability. Libya was a purely European conflict with no American interest, instead it was French and Italian, and they had to call Obama to take care of it for them. So a conflict the size of Libya, which compared to Russia-Ukraine was tiny, was beyond the Europeans about a decade ago.

Yes, it’s simply amazing just how epically Germany has f’d things up, isn’t it?

[Inmate Trump]

Donald Trump, agent of Russia, and enemy to America.

The Republican Party, cucks of the highest level desiring nothing more than to suck at Trump’s teet.

Republican voters…morons and a$$holes.

[Progressive Pessimist]

One thing I'll hand to Trump: he is great at pulling out. That's why the Stormy Daniels scandal didn't get messier.

[TPIG]

Trump's scoffing at the collective-defense clause is deeply troubling, but I still maintain that there's nothing wrong with using leverage to ensure that NATO member-states spend more on defense; that quite literally strengthens NATO.

[Ferguson97]

A person's stance on NATO is one of the most reliable litmus tests to see if they're worth listening to whatsoever, whether they're on the left or the right.

Trump does not pass the test.