Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Showing Original Post only (View all)Trump’s Loose NATO Talk Already Has Endangered Us [View all]
Defense One:We reached a new low this week when one of the two major presidential candidates called into question our U.S. treaty obligation to NATO. Donald Trumps remarks in a New York Times interview that he would only defend the Baltic states against a Russian invasion if they have fulfilled their obligations to us leaves open the question of whether under a President Trump the United States would honor its Article V commitment to treat an attack against one NATO member as an attack against all. Our obligation, and that of the Baltic states, is to come to the assistance of any NATO ally, without conditions.
Trump told the Times he had a condition that the United States would be reimbursed. This obligation he refers to is the relatively recent agreement among NATO members that they would each spend at least 2 percent of their GDP on defense. The United States has long sought to persuade our allies to pick up more of the cost of modernizing, deploying, and fighting. But the 2 percent is a political target. Currently, only 5 of 28 NATO members meet the target and, indeed, the next president will have to work harder to convince European capitals to increase defense spending. Success, however, is more likely through diplomacy, and not bullying. And it is more likely to fail if the U.S. government questions the foundation of NATO: the Article V commitment of the 1949 Washington Treaty. Collective security works only when all countries believe everyone is committed to the common defense. And paying 2 percent of GDP to NATO is not a treaty obligation; defending each other is.
Trumps statements run counter to international law and commitments, counter to the very status quo that helps America prosper and keeps us safe. It questions the foundation of our only operational collective security alliance, an institution that has served us well in many ways, starting from keeping the peace in the aftermath of World War II and through the Cold War. This was no small feat. We deterred the Soviet Union with conventional and nuclear NATO forces until under Gorbachev the USSR changed its approach to the West and ultimately ceased to exist.
http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/07/trumps-loose-nato-talk-has-already-endangered-us/130162/?oref=site-defenseone-flyin-sailthru
Defense One also published the following article recently.
How Putin Weaponized Wikileaks to Influence the Election of an American President
http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/07/how-putin-weaponized-wikileaks-influence-election-american-president/130163/
22 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I think enough people are still concerned about Russia to prevent that argument.
auntpurl
Jul 2016
#8
He really is dangerous, everything about this hypocrite is based on money, everything, and his
turbinetree
Jul 2016
#10