• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

2026 US-Denmark Tensions/End of NATO

And if they do they'll still have over 30,000 stationed there...

Rumors are Trump wants to pull them all out by 2027.

I really want to see how the American plan to run operations in the middle east without bases in European.

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face
 
Rumors are Trump wants to pull them all out by 2027.

I really want to see how the American plan to run operations in the middle east without bases in European.

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face
just when you think that administration couldn't get any stupider . . .

😖
 
just when you think that administration couldn't get any stupider . . .

😖
Trump is exceeding Putin’s wildest dreams. If nothing else, Vlad is to be congratulated for his canny investment in people. What did it cost? A few bank loans to prop up a failing American real estate developer? A few hookers performing in a Moscow hotel room? Payback time, Donnie.
 
The counter-point.


And the view from the originator in 1951.

"General Dwight D. Eisenhower—who later became president—expressed concern about a permanent US military presence in Europe. As the first Supreme Allied Commander of NATO (1951–52), he said, “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 [NATO] will have failed.”"

We are well past 1961.

....

Trump may have made a bad decision. But if Europe expects America to rescue it from the consequences of its bad decisions then it needs to tolerate America's bad decisions. Any agreement requires both parties to get their hands dirty, accept the rough with the smooth, in good times and in bad, for better or worse, in sickness and in health. Both parties agree to share risk jointly.

And this is America we are talking about here. Not just Donald Trump. He is just giving a P.T. Barnum voice to that which American Presidents, politicians and diplomats have been mumbling in private since 1951.

...


"in 1965 when Pearson made a speech at Temple University, proposing a "Pause for Peace." Later, at Camp David, an infuriated Johnson grabbed the Nobel Peace-Prize winning Prime Minister by the lapels and screamed: "Don't you come into my house and piss on my rug!""

Much more diplomatic than Trump, I'm sure. Especially as it was a Democrat President holding the lapels.
 
The counter-point.


And the view from the originator in 1951.

"General Dwight D. Eisenhower—who later became president—expressed concern about a permanent US military presence in Europe. As the first Supreme Allied Commander of NATO (1951–52), he said, “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 [NATO] will have failed.”"

We are well past 1961.

....

Trump may have made a bad decision. But if Europe expects America to rescue it from the consequences of its bad decisions then it needs to tolerate America's bad decisions. Any agreement requires both parties to get their hands dirty, accept the rough with the smooth, in good times and in bad, for better or worse, in sickness and in health. Both parties agree to share risk jointly.

And this is America we are talking about here. Not just Donald Trump. He is just giving a P.T. Barnum voice to that which American Presidents, politicians and diplomats have been mumbling in private since 1951.

...


"in 1965 when Pearson made a speech at Temple University, proposing a "Pause for Peace." Later, at Camp David, an infuriated Johnson grabbed the Nobel Peace-Prize winning Prime Minister by the lapels and screamed: "Don't you come into my house and piss on my rug!""

Much more diplomatic than Trump, I'm sure. Especially as it was a Democrat President holding the lapels.

Some Canadians have an unhealthy admiration of Europe. Just like some to for the USA.

Canada seems to have been continuously in search of someone to be incharge of it. England, USA, Europe, China, NATO, UN ect ect...

IMHO we're too often looking for a daddy, when we should a much more powerful and independent nation than we are. We have everything the world wants.
 
Further to...

It is incumbent on the politicians we elect to supply a system resilient enough to manage the consequences of bad decisions, our own, our friends and our enemies.
 
Some Canadians have an unhealthy admiration of Europe. Just like some to for the USA.

Canada seems to have been continuously in search of someone to be incharge of it. England, USA, Europe, China, NATO, UN ect ect...

IMHO we're too often looking for a daddy, when we should a much more powerful and independent nation than we are. We have everything the world wants.

There are those who want to lead, those who want to follow and those who just want to be left alone.

There is power, prestige and wealth to be gained from leading.
There is comfort in following - no moral hazards.
Independence is an insecure life but the risks and rewards are your own.

Canada has a very large, and growing, population of followers that have never heard the gospel of free will.
It also has a sizeable cohort of wannabe leaders. Many of whom want the rewards of leadership with all the comforts of following.
 
Back
Top