TRUMP,might trump NATO.
 

Reported on BBC that "the Donald" might drop NATO military cover!:ooh:

OAP

Reference?

He's either being clever and ratcheting up the pressure for NATO countries to sub 2% GDP on defence, or cutting his nose to spite his face by compromising European and hence US security in threatening to pull the plug. Whatever else he might be, I do not think him to be stupid. Others may have different ideas...

If you read what trump actually said it seemed more a populist message aimed at his domestic audience, particularly the bit about not lecturing other countries "when our policemen are shooting people in the streets."

Wonder what that means? 2% GDP? Something else? Sorta vague.
Well, we've been shrinking the overseas footprint since about 1989, and our BRAC has been shrinking our bases here since 1993. It's a trend already in place.
....
A non sequitur, (different colors of money) but an interesting take on where money goes.
Heh, depends upon how you want to deploy and for how long.

From a study by the US Army, it took about 12 years of building up the logistics/basin in Kuwait to make the 2003 move into Iraq possible. I'll get the name of the study, read it back in the mid 00's.

Agreed ShotOne, however from what I can gather he said: "Look at what is happening in our country. How are we going to lecture when people are shooting policemen in cold blood?"

I can't believe I agree with Trump on anything, but he has a point.

NATO is about everybody standing together as a gang for mutual support. If 90% of the members can't be bothered to pull their weight, why should the US not tell them that the deal is off?

Seemed a lack of mutual support for Turkey from the rest of NATO when the sh*t was hitting the fan... mind you there were enough wizzing around in the skies without anyone else getting embroiled.

You're right, stitch although I stand by the substance of what I said. When Trump speaks, he does so to those with a vote. It's not about what we think.

NL, NATO does not interfere in internal affairs of its members, or indeed affairs between its members.

Interesting as US Forces were poised to drive into Iraq at the outset, not 12 years later.

Pontius, the politically expedient 100 hour war, and the loss of a lot of staging rights in Saudi as we soured in relationship to each other (see among other things how Khobar Towers played into that) meant that how we were set up in 91 was not going to be replicated in 2003.
Example, PSAB was not available.
I know one of the guys who worked on that report, I think it may be available in the public domain. Will get you a link if I can.
EDIT
Here you go: On Point (It's a pretty big pdf so it may take a while to download, if you are interested. )

Whatever, I'm sure he will wish to protect his personal real estate assets in UK.

Or maybe he will form a new military alliance with Scotland alone, if they hold that threatened second referendum... :E

Usual bickering from the cheap seat!

Sadly, I agree with Trump on this one. If you are in NATO, you pull your share to get the massive cover the US provides.

I seem to recall Brave Belgium refusing to sell us 1,000 lb bombs for GWI, and the subsequent discovery that they had lied about their NATO War Stocks.

However, here in the USA right now, the polls are level pegging. So Trump is NOT a certainty. Keep Calm, and Carry On. ;)

(I wish he didn't always remind me of Benito Mussolini)

Trump is an egomaniacal, short attention span, ignorant bigoted lunatic and represents as big a threat than any terrorist to the stability of this planet.


As flawed as Hillary is she's a FAR better choice than this moron.

If Trumps rhetoric spurs some NATO members to start meeting their commitments then that's surely not a bad thing?

Cheap seat or not, based on the true state of play...or aren't you aware of his interest in Scotland in particular?

If Trump (heaven forfend) was elected POTUS, would he have to give up all his business interests?