Is it time for the US to re-evaluate our commitment to NATO?

[CountDeMoney]

And what exactly are you defending us from?

You're more than welcome to deal with Russia by yourself.  That would be fun to watch.

[Zoupa]

Russia is not a military threat to the EU.

[The Brain]

Russia is not a military threat to the EU.

lol

[Norgy]

As long as there is a Russia, there will be a need for our commitment to NATO.  Even if it's a NATO-lite, with just us and the Brits.

can i come..

[CountDeMoney]

As long as there is a Russia, there will be a need for our commitment to NATO.  Even if it's a NATO-lite, with just us and the Brits.

can i come..

You can be in charge of the Iormlund Security Assistance Force.

[garbon]

Without a frequent reminder that we are supposed to be friends little complaints will turn into long term resentments and unlike South Americans, Europeans CAN actually do something about it.

[Neil]

Without a frequent reminder that we are supposed to be friends little complaints will turn into long term resentments and unlike South Americans, Europeans CAN actually do something about it.

Indeed.  What is Europe going to do?  Be poor at the US?

[Monoriu]

Seems like it is kinda tough for the likes of Greece, Ireland, and Portugal to buy munitions 

[Ed Anger]

Seems like it is kinda tough for the likes of Greece, Ireland, and Portugal to buy munitions 

Ireland has no real airforce or even a member of NATO. the Irish have the neutrality bug.

[Ed Anger]

The English have a meowjager:

[Neil]

Seems like it is kinda tough for the likes of Greece, Ireland, and Portugal to buy munitions 

Ireland has no real airforce or even a member of NATO. the Irish have the neutrality bug.

Given that their only export until the EU built them up was terrorism, they really didn't have anything to offer anyone anyways.

[grumbler]

He is just another flavor of freedom-fries politician.

What planet are you from?  Robert Gates is about as far from a "freedom fries politician" as one can get.

Even if NATO serves no purpose as a military organization it is still useful as a political alliance. Europe is a potential superpower, unlike, let's say South America. I say people think in absolutes. Without a frequent reminder that we are supposed to be friends little complaints will turn into long term resentments and unlike South Americans, Europeans CAN actually do something about it.

Argument by assertion.  What utility has NATO had in political terms in the last 20 years?  The argument that South America is not a potential superpower is also mere assertion.  If they could unify they would be more populous than Europe by a 2050 and have far more natural resources than Europe.*

And he is not admitting that Europe helps US achieve things it cares about more than money. Bases in Europe protect them from a nonexistant threat, but support current US deployments. If the missile defense system is ever fully deployed it seems to do a lot more to protect American mainland than Europe.

None if this would have anything to do with NATO even if true.  The US could retain bases it wants or needs in Europe on a bilateral basis, as it does throughout the world.

If Congress decides to withdraw from NATO the wise thing to do is let it end with a whimper. Even powerless and without US support NATO is still useful.

This makes no sense.  Why would the "wise thing" be to "let it end with a whimper" when "NATO is still useful" even without the US?


*Yes, this discussion of "potential superpowers" is irrelevant and childish, but it is also fun.

[CountDeMoney]

The English have a meowjager:

Mother. Fucking. Awesome.

[Ed Anger]

Mother. Fucking. Awesome.

Larry the cat orders more Airstrikes in Libya

[Iormlund]

And what exactly are you defending us from?

You're more than welcome to deal with Russia by yourself.  That would be fun to watch.

I very much doubt Russia could get anywhere near the Pyrenees. And certainly never beyond those. Our only vulnerable enclaves are in Africa, and those are specifically excluded from NATO.