Trump Is Wrong - Hundreds Of NATO Troops Died Supporting The U.S.

From Axios.com  

Seizing Greenland Would Be Trump's Stupidest Move

Donald Trump has done a lot of stupid things since starting his second term, but they would all pale in comparison to seizing Greenland - the territory of a NATO ally.

I can't understand what he thinks would be accomplished by doing that. Does he believe we need more bases or troops in Greenland to enhance U.S. security? We don't have to seize Greenland to do that. The 1951 accord between Denmark and the United States would already allow us to do that.

Does he want to mine Greenland's minerals (especially rare earth minerals? Both Greenland and Denmark have already said they are open to allowing that to happen.

Does he really think Russia or China would try to take Greenland? If they did, they would face the militaries of all of the NATO nations - which would be more formidable than the United States alone.

The truth is that seizing Greenland would be of no benefit to the United States (except to feed the ego of the narcissist currently living in the White House) - but it would have a huge negative effect.

It would amount to an attack on a NATO ally, and that very likely would destroy NATO. The NATO nations have backed the United States when it needed them (like in Afghanistan). But they would no longer be able to trust the United States if it attacked a fellow member. And an alliance without mutual trust is not an alliance at all.

Trump thinks taking Greenland would demonstrate American strength. But it would actually make the United States weaker, because it would then be alone without any allies to help it. And it wouldn't just be our European allies - how could our Asian and African allies trust that we would have their backs after seeing us attack an ally?

The United States is the strongest economic and military force of any nation, but alone it is much weaker. 

 

Gallup Poll Shows Trump Is Driving Away Our NATO Friends

The chart above is from the Gallup Poll -- done of at least 1,000 adults in 31 NATO countries. The margin of error for each country is between 3.4 and 5.4 points. 

Trump's "Peace Plan" Gives Russia Everything It Wants - It's A Bad Plan

Donald Trump has come up with a "peace plan" for the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Sadly, it gives Russia everything it wants, while denying Ukraine the ironclad guarantees it needs. I think it's a bad plan, but Trump is threatening to abandon Ukraine if they don't agree.

Here is Trump's plan:

Here is the text of a draft version of the 28-point peace plan for Ukraine backed by the United States, according to a copy seen by Reuters

1. Ukraine's sovereignty to be reconfirmed.

2. There will be a total and complete comprehensive non-aggression agreement between Russia, Ukraine and Europe. All ambiguities of the last 30 years will be considered resolved.

3. There will be the expectation that Russia will not invade its neighbours and NATO will not expand further.

4. A dialogue between Russia and NATO, moderated by the United States, will convene to address all security concerns and create a de-escalatory environment to ensure global security and increase the opportunities for connectivity and future economic opportunity.

5. Ukraine will receive robust security guarantees.

6. The size of the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be capped at 600,000.

7. Ukraine agrees to enshrine in its constitution that it will not join NATO, and NATO agrees to pass in its bylaws not to accept Ukraine at any point in the future.

8. NATO agrees not to station any troops in Ukraine.

9. European fighter jets will be stationed in Poland.

10. The U.S. guarantee:

a. The U.S. to receive compensation for the guarantee;

b. If Ukraine invades Russia, it forfeits the guarantee;

c. If Russia invades Ukraine, in addition to a robust coordinated military response, all global sanctions will be restored and recognition for the new territory and all other benefits from this agreement will be withdrawn;

d. If Ukraine fires a missile at Moscow or St. Petersburg then, the security guarantee will be considered null and void.

11. Ukraine is eligible for EU membership and will get short-term preferred market access to the European market while this issue is being evaluated.

12. Robust Global Redevelopment Package for Ukraine including but not limited to:

a. Creation of Ukraine Development Fund to invest in high-growth industries including technology, data centers, and AI efforts.

b. The United States will partner with Ukraine to jointly restore, grow, modernize, and operate Ukraine's gas infrastructure, which includes its pipelines and storage facilities.

c. A joint effort to redevelop areas impacted by the war to restore, redevelop and modernize cities and residential areas.

d. Infrastructure development.

e. Mineral and natural resource extraction.

f. A special financing package will be developed by The World Bank to provide financing to accelerate these efforts.

13. Russia to be re-integrated into the global economy:

a. Sanction relief will be discussed and agreed upon in phases and on a case-by-case basis.

b. The United States will enter into a long-term Economic Co-operation Agreement to pursue mutual development in the areas of energy, natural resources, infrastructure, artificial intelligence, data centers, rare earth metal projects in the Arctic as well as other mutually beneficial corporate opportunities.

c. Russia to be invited back into the G8.

14. Frozen funds will be used as follows:

$100 billion of the frozen Russian funds will be invested in a US-led effort to reconstruct and invest in Ukraine. The US will receive 50% of the profits from this venture. Europe will match this $100 billion contribution to increase the investment available to rebuild Ukraine. The European funds that are frozen will be released. The balance of the frozen Russian funds will be invested in a separate US-Russia investment vehicle that will pursue joint United States Russia projects in areas to be defined. This fund will aim to strengthen the relationship and increase joint interests to build a strong motivation not to return to conflict.

15. A joint US-Russian Security taskforce will be established to promote and enforce compliance with all of the provisions of this agreement.

16. Russia will legislatively enshrine a non-aggression policy towards Europe and Ukraine.

17. The United States and Russia will agree to extend nuclear non-proliferation control treaties, including the START I Treaty.

18. Ukraine agrees to be a non-nuclear state under the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons).

19. The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant will be restarted under supervision of the IAEA, and the produced power shall be equitably in a 50-50 split between Russia and Ukraine.

20. Both countries commit to education programs in schools and throughout their society that promotes the understanding and tolerance of different cultures and eliminates racism and bias:

a. Ukraine will adopt EU rules of religious tolerance and the protection of linguistic minorities.

b. Both countries agree to repeal all discriminatory measures and guarantee the rights of Ukrainian and Russian media and education.

c. All Nazi ideology or activity should be renounced and forbidden.

21. Territories:

a. Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk to be recognized De-Facto as Russian, including by the United States.

b. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia to be frozen at the contact line, which would mean a De-Facto recognition at the contact line.

c. Russia to give up other agreed upon territories they control outside of the five regions

d. Ukrainian forces will withdraw from the part of Donetsk region that they currently control, and this withdrawal area will be considered a neutral demilitarized buffer zone, internationally recognized as territory belonging to the Russian Federation. Russian forces will not enter this demilitarized zone.

22. Once future territorial arrangements have been agreed, both the Russian Federation and Ukraine undertake not to change these arrangements by force. Any security guarantees will not apply in the event of a breach of this obligation.

23. Russia shall not obstruct Ukraine's use of the Dnieper River for purposes of commercial activities and agreements will be reached for grain shipments to move freely through the Black Sea.

24. A humanitarian committee will be established to resolve open issues:

a. All remaining prisoners and bodies will be exchanged on the principle of 'all for all'.

b. All civilian detainees and hostages will be returned, including children.

c. There will be a family reunification program

d. Provisions will be made to address the suffering of victims from the conflict.

25. Ukraine to hold elections in 100 days.

26. All parties involved in this conflict will receive full amnesty for wartime actions during the war and agree not to pursue claims or further settle grievances.

27. This agreement will be legally binding. Its implementation will be monitored and guaranteed by a Board of Peace, Chaired by President Donald J. Trump. There will be penalties for violation.

28. Upon all sides agreeing to this memorandum, a ceasefire will be immediately effective upon both parties withdrawing to the agreed upon points for the implementation of the agreement to begin. 

Three-Fourths Of U.S. Public Say NATO Support Should Be Maintained

 The chart above is from the Gallup Poll -- done between February 3rd and 16th of a nationwide sample of 1,004 adults, with a 4 point margin of error.

U.S. Should NOT Restrict Ukraine's Use Of Provided Weapons

Russia continues to attack Ukraine with every kind of weapon it has, and has recently increased its attacks on Ukraine's civilians. But Ukraine is unable to do the same to Russia. That's because the U.S. (and NATO) has restricted the use of weapons they provide to Ukraine (especially long-range weapons the provided like missiles and F-16's).

In effect, we are forcing Ukraine to fight with one hand tied behind their back. That's ridiculous, and it must change. War is a messy and horrible business. But if it must be fought, it should be fought on equal terms.

So far, Ukraine has attacked Russia, but only with their home-made drones. That's not good enough. They, like Russia, should be able to attack with any weapon they have (or can get).

I know that Russia has threatened to declare war on NATO if we allow Ukraine to use the weapons provided to attack Russia. That's just bluster. 

It's become obvious that Russia cannot defeat Ukraine, and is having a lot of trouble just hanging on to the eastern provinces it has taken. Declaring war on NATO would be a serious mistake - and Putin knows it. NATO has the weaponry and strength to quickly push Russia out of all of Ukraine - and easily defend all NATO nations.

The same is true for nuclear weapons. Putin knows he cannot use them without causing Russia to suffer massive destruction!

The U.S. and NATO should provide Ukraine with all the weapons they request, and then let them use those weapons without any restrictions.  Not allowing them to fight on an equal basis with Russia just makes no sense!

Trump's NATO Remarks Did Not Go Over Well With Voters

The charts above reflect the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between February 18th and 20th of a nationwide sample of 1,562 adults (including 1,360 registered voters). The margin of error was 3.1 points for both adults and registered voters.

It has been obvious for years now that Donald Trump doesn't like NATO. When meeting with NATO leaders during his presidency, Trump wanted to withdraw from the organization according to his National Security Advisor John Bolton. He had to be talked out of it by his advisors.

Recently Trump again attacked NATO -- saying he would not defend member that was behind in dues, and would even ask Russia to attack them. That might have gone over well with the members of his cult, but most Americans did not like it. 

About 53% of adults (and 58% of registered voters) have a favorable opinion of NATO. And 54% of adults (and 58% of registered voters) disapproved of Trump's remarks.

Trump is not winning any votes with this unpopular stand against NATO.

Another Trump Term Would Make The World More Dangerous

The world is a very dangerous place, and one of the biggest dangers is Putin's Russia. Putin did not like the breakup of the Soviet Union, and it is his fervent desire to re-establish control over the former Soviet states (and then ultimately the rest of Europe).

One only has to look at his aggressive moves -- first against Georgia, and then against Ukraine. Ukraine has proven to be a difficult task, but he hasn't given up. He's hoping to get some help from the United States after the next election if his protege (Donald Trump) can get elected to a second term.

Trump doesn't like Ukraine, because they refused to instigate a fake investigation into Hunter and Joe Biden. He wanted to use that to smear Biden and win the 2020 election. Now Trump would be happy to let Russia take part or all of Ukraine.

The only thing stopping Putin is NATO. The NATO nations have come to the defense of Ukraine by providing it with weapons and money. Putin would like to see NATO destroyed. He knows he could not defeat a united NATO.

That is another reason that Putin would love to see Trump elected. He knows that the biggest danger to NATO is Donald Trump. Trump doesn't care that NATO is the defender of all Western democracies. He only cares about himself, and would happily destroy NATO if it didn't kowtow to his wishes.

In his first term, he considered withdrawing from NATO. When he had some backlash (even from Republicans), he backed down. But he still threatened to refuse to come to the defense of any NATO nation that refused to bend to his will. 

He said it was only "fair" that other members of NATO budget more money to their militaries. He completely ignored the fact that article 5 of the NATO agreement ( that every NATO nation would come to the defense of any member nation that was attacked) has only been invoked once. That was when the U.S. was attacked on 9/11/2001. The NATO nations joined the United States in going after the attackers in Afghanistan.

True fairness would be to recognize that fact, and to assure the other NATO nations that the U.S. would reciprocate. But Trump doesn't care about real fairness, or about defending the Western democracies (which benefits all democracies, including the U.S.). He only cares about who is willing to kiss his ass and who is not.

A second Trump term would pose a danger to NATO, possibly even destroying it. And that would pose a danger to the world, as Putin (and other dictators) would feel free to attack and engulf their neighbors. 

Trump thinks the United States could stand alone in the world. He is wrong, and his re-election would be disastrous to the entire world. 

U.S./U.N./NATO Must Take Action To Defend Human Rights

This is what President Zelensky told the United Nations about the atrocities committed against Ukrainian citizens by Russian soldiers:

“They cut off limbs, slashed their throats, women raped and killed in front of their children. Their tongues were pulled out only because the aggressor did not hear what they wanted to hear from them.”

“The Russian military … purposefully killed anyone who served our country. They shot and killed women outside their houses…They killed entire families, adults and children, and they tried to burn the bodies. I am addressing you on behalf of the people who honor the memory of the deceased every single day and the memory of the civilians who died, they were shot and killed in the back of their head after being tortured. Some of them were shot on the streets.” 

“There is not a single crime they would not commit there just for their pleasure.” 

“Where is the security that the Security Council is supposed to be guaranteed?” 

“Are you ready to close the U.N.? Do you think that the time of international law is gone? If your answer is no, then you need to act immediately.”

His words are powerful because he is right. War crimes are being committed against innocent civilians in Ukraine. Genocide is being committed against the Ukrainian people. And that's not all. Putin has ordered the bombing and missile strikes against civilian population centers.

One American general has declared that the war could go on for years. If true, that would be devastating for the Ukrainian population. The population would virtually be wiped out!

The United Nations is failing the Ukrainian people!

NATO is failing the Ukrainian people!

The United States is failing the Ukrainian people!

All of these organizations claim to be defenders of human rights. But they are failing in their duty to actually defend human rights. 

Applying and supporting economic sanctions does not stop the human rights violations. Supplying weapons to the Ukrainian army does not stop the human rights violations, since it could take years for them to win the war.

I am not usually in favor of any war. But there are times when it cannot be avoided, and failure to engage those committing human rights violations on a massive and continuing scale is cowardice -- not prudence.

The United Nations cannot act because of their structure (with Russia having a veto over any proposed action). But the United States and NATO could act. 

At the very least, a no-fly zone could be established over Ukraine (including the Eastern provinces). This, along with supplying missile defenses, could stop much of the carnage. And the West should stop saying troops would not engage the Russians in Ukraine. That should be an option that Russia has to consider when violating human rights, and may actually be needed in the future.

It's easy to mouth platitudes about human rights. But it's time for the West to live up to their words.

Most Of NATO Has Higher Opinion Of U.S. Leadership

The chart above is from the Gallup Poll. They questioned a representative sample of adults in the NATO Countries between April 2021 and January 2022, and the margin of error for each country was between 2.8 and 5.0 points. Since Biden became president, most NATO nations have a higher opinion of U.S. leadership.

WWIII Has Started (Though Most Don't Want To Admit It)

 

In the 1930's, nations tried to appease Hitler by allowing him to annex the Sudentenland. They mistakenly thought this would satisfy Hitler and prevent war. They were wrong. He went on to invade Poland and many other countries.

History is now repeating itself. The U.S. and NATO did nothing as Putin seized Crimea. They thought that allowing him to do that would prevent a wider war. They were wrong. He has now invaded Ukraine, and there is no reason to believe he will stop there. He wants to restore the old Soviet empire, and if allowed to do that, will go even further.

Still leaders of the U.S. and NATO refuse to believe what is actually happening. The truth is that World War III has already started. This is not just a war between two countries -- Ukraine and Russia. At least 30 other countries are already involved (the members of NATO). They are sending supplies and weapons to Ukraine. That makes them involved, even though they are too cowardly to actually fight.

The West is acting like it is afraid of Putin. Many think if they become involved in the war with troops, Putin will respond with nuclear power. I doubt that though. Even if Putin was crazy enough to do that, his generals are likely to stop him (even if they had to depose him). They know that Russia would be devastated in a nuclear war. 

Besides, if Putin is likely to use nukes now, wouldn't he do the same after invading a NATO country? He is likely to do that if he gets away with bullying the West now with his nuclear threats. Why shouldn't he believe the West will continue to back down as long as he makes nuclear threats? The refusal to intervene in Ukraine just makes Putin bolder.

Until the West acts to stop Putin, the war will grow and soon grow beyond Ukrainian borders. Putin is already threatening to attack convoys sending military help to Ukraine. Is the West going to let him get away with that?

World War III has started. The U.S. and NATO has the military power to end it now -- before it becomes a worldwide conflict. They should do it! Cowering in fear every time Putin threatens to use his nukes is the road to disaster, and a much wider war.

Russia Is Not A Superpower - Just A Criminal Government

For decades now, Russia has been considered a superpower by the West. Are they really?

They have never been an economic superpower. There are 10 countries with larger economies -- several significantly larger. The U.S. economy is about 20 times the size of Russia's, and China's is about 14 times larger. Japan's is 5 times as large and Germany's is 3 times as large. Several other nations have twice as large an economy.

In fact, there are three U.S. states with an economy larger than that of Russia -- California, Texas, and New York.

Obviously, Russia is not an economic superpower.

What about being a military superpower? Most people have considered Russia to be a military superpower. But their invasion of Ukraine has exposed that as a myth. Everyone, including Putin, thought the powerful Russian military would roll right through Ukraine, and probably take the country within days.

That has not happened. More than three weeks later, they find themselves bogged down. The Ukrainian military has fought them to a draw -- at least so far. And the West is supplying the Ukrainian military with some sophisticated weapons to fight with. If Russia is able to conquer Ukraine, it will be a long and difficult slog -- and they may not be able to do it at all.

We now know Russia is not a military superpower.

To counter for the weakness of his military, Putin has decided to bomb Ukraine into submission. He is bombing civilians (apartments, hospitals, schools, etc). This is a war crime! And it probably won't work. It will just cost the lives of thousands, if not millions, of Ukrainians. It is genocide!

All of this makes me wonder -- why is the world (especially the U.S. and NATO) allowing this to happen?

Some say doing more (like instituting a no-fly zone) would cause a war. We are already in a war -- not only Ukraine, but also the nations supplying it with weapons. Are we really afraid of the Russian military? So afraid that we will allow genocide? That doesn't speak very well of either our courage or humanity.

Others say it could lead to a nuclear war. Really! Don't the Russians know that would lead to their own destruction. Even if Putin's was crazy enough to use nuclear weapons, I doubt that his generals are that crazy. Such a move would probably result in Putin's removal from power to save Russia from annihilation.

The world, especially the democracies, like to talk about protecting human rights. It is time they acted to do so.

Both Russian & Ukrainian Americans Oppose Putin's War

The charts on this page are from a new USA Today / Suffolk University Poll -- done between March 5th and 10th of 500 Ukrainian-Americans and 500 Russian-Americans, each with a margin of error of about 4.4 points. 

The chart above reflects to answers of Ukrainian-Americans, and the chart below reflects the answers of Russian-Americans. Note that both groups oppose the war, want to see Ukraine win the war, think Putin has committed war crimes, and don't believe NATO is a threat to Russia.

U.S./NATO Are Giving Putin The Idea They Are Weak/Afraid

In 1938, the United Kingdom and France signed the Munich Agreement (with Germany and Italy). The agreement, now known as the "appeasement", allowed Germany to seize the Sudetenland part of Czechoslovakia. They thought giving that land to Hitler would prevent him from starting another World War. They were wrong. It just made Hitler think the U.K. and France were weak, and only a year later he invaded Poland, starting World War II.

We seem to be seeing a repeat of history -- only this time it is Putin and Ukraine. The Western nations expect Putin's army to be successful in taking Ukraine, and they seem to be willing to let Putin gobble up that nation. They say opposing his aggression militarily would start a war -- possibly a world war. Isn't this just a modern version of appeasement?

The U.S. and NATO have applied some economic sanctions to Russia and are sending some weapons to Ukraine. The sanctions are meaningless. Putin is one of the richest men in the world, and if he were to lose 90% of his wealth, he would still be a very rich man. The sanctions will hurt the Russian people, but Putin doesn't care about them. He has an iron grip on power in that country, and if he can get the territory he wants, he's willing to let the Russian people suffer.

While the West is sending some weapons, they have refused to institute a no-fly zone because they think Putin would consider than an aggression. They also are refusing to allow Poland to send Soviet era jets to Ukraine (which Ukrainian pilots know how to use), for the same reason.

This is giving Putin the idea that NATO and the U.S. are weak and afraid of him. That will not stop him in Ukraine, and it will not keep him from attacking another country once successful there. Tyrants don't respect appeasement. It just makes them bolder. The only thing they respect is strength.

I'm not suggesting that NATO and the U.S. invade Russia. That would be dumb (and wrong). But they should at least institute a no-fly zone over Ukraine -- and let Ukraine have the Soviet era MIG's. 

Would Putin use nuclear weapons as he has threatened? NO! He knows that doing so would mean an instant reprisal from the United States (and he would no longer have a country)!

The West must show Putin they are brave enough and strong enough to defend democracy -- in Ukraine and elsewhere. That is the only way to stop a new world war. Anything less is just another step down the road to that war. Appeasement does not work! 

Putin Wants A New Russian Empire - He Must Be Stopped

 

Vladimir Putin has invade the sovereign nation of Ukraine. He has tried to justify the invasion by claiming that Russians were being mistreated in that nation. It was a lie. He then claimed that Nazi's were in control of Ukraine and posed a danger to Russia. That was another lie. Ukraine is a democracy that elected a Jewish president (who has proven to be intelligent and heroic).

The truth is much darker. Putin, a former KGB agent, still laments to dissolution of the Soviet Union. In 2014, he called the collapse of the USSR the disaster of the century. His dream is to re-establish a Russian empire -- with him as its authoritarian head.

Why would he think he could get away with such an outrageous thing? Sadly, because the free world has allowed him to think such a thing was possible. The world did virtually nothing when he sent his troops into Georgia. The world did virtually nothing when he seized control of Crimea (which was a part of Ukraine). Then Trump became president, and instantly began kissing Putin's butt -- and causing dissension in NATO.

Putin got the idea that NATO was a toothless relic of the past - a relic that could not and would not stand in the way of his dream of empire. He decided he could act with impunity, and invaded Ukraine -- hoping to make it the first of his new conquests. If he succeeded, he could then take on the other breakaway republics.

Hopefully, he has misjudged the situation. Ukraine has not rolled over and quickly surrendered as he had expected. They are fighting, and while they may not be able to succeed, they can make it difficult and possibly a lengthy process. And Russians will start to see thousands of their soldiers come home in body bags.  There is already some dissent happening in Russia, and this will only increase it.

In addition, NATO has proven stronger than Putin believed. In fact, the invasion has strengthened NATO, and they are now a more powerful force. The NATO countries have joined in much more powerful sanctions than ever in the past. The new sanctions, if left intact, will do serious damage to the Russian economy (which wasn't doing great anyway).

If the economy collapses and the Ukrainians continue to hold out, Putin's position as the Russian leader could even be in danger. I hope so. Putin has overreached, and the West must hold firm. He must pay a heavy price for invading Ukraine -- a price so severe that he will never consider doing that again with any country.

His dream of empire must be stopped now!

Trump's Actions At NATO Endangers World Peace/Stability

(This photo of Trump is by Anthony Behar - Sipa/AP, and is from Time.com.)

Donald Trump recently attended the summit meeting of NATO leaders. While there, he embarrassed his country, showed his ignorance of history and diplomacy, and set in motion the possible dissolution of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. He made the world a much more dangerous place for everyone.

Here is just part of an op-ed in The Washington Post by Robert Kagan:

NATO has never been a self-operating machine that simply chugs ahead so long as it is left alone. Like the liberal world order of which it is the core, it requires constant tending, above all by the United States. And because it is a voluntary alliance of democratic peoples, it survives on a foundation of public support. That foundation has been cracking in recent years. This week was an opportunity to shore it up. Instead, Trump took a sledgehammer to it.

Never mind the final communique that Trump deigned to sign, or his reassurance at the end that the alliance was “very unified, very strong, no problem,” and or his claim that “I believe in NATO.” In his press comments alongside NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in his tweets and in his private comments to European leaders, Trump made clear that he does not believe in NATO. In fact, he used this summit to lay out for the American people why NATO was not only “obsolete,” as he once said, but also a rotten deal for them.

Consider the question of allied military spending. As many pointed out, Trump could have come to Brussels and taken credit for the increased commitments that the Allies have made — and of course he did force Stoltenberg to give him credit. But then he moved the goal posts. He insisted the 2 percent of gross domestic product mark must be reached not by 2024, as agreed by the alliance (including the United States), but by January — something he knows is impossible. Then he went further, insisting that the allies spend 4 percent of their GDP on defense, higher even than his own defense budget.

These are not negotiating tactics. They are the tactics of someone who does not want a deal. In the private meeting, Trump is reported to have warned the allies that if they did not meet the 2 percent standard by January the United States would “go it alone.” To Stoltenberg he publicly warned that the United States was “not going to put up with it.” Whether he has any intention of making good on such threats scarcely matters. In his tweets, he asked, “What good is NATO” if Germany was paying Russia for gas? Why should the United States pay billions to “subsidize Europe” while it was losing “Big on Trade”? Those comments were not aimed at Europe. They were designed to discredit the alliance in the eyes of his faithful throng back home.

But even Trump must know the likely response in Europe. The insults and humiliations he inflicted on allied leaders will not be forgotten or forgiven. They will make it impossible for European leaders to win public support for the spending Trump disingenuously claims to want. What German leader after such a tongue-lashing could do Trump’s bidding and hope to survive politically?

Any student of history knows that it is moments like this summit that set in motion chains of events that are difficult to stop. The democratic alliance that has been the bedrock of the American-led liberal world order is unraveling. At some point, and probably sooner than we expect, the global peace that that alliance and that order undergirded will unravel, too. Despite our human desire to hope for the best, things will not be okay. The world crisis is upon us.

Trump Lies About NATO Funding (& Threatens To Leave)

In a July 5th rally of his supporters, Donald Trump made a ridiculous claim. He said the United States  was paying between 70% to 90% to "protect Europe".  He also said at the NATO summit breakfast that many NATO nations are delinquent on their payments.The truth is far different. There is a formula for what each NATO member owes to fund NATO operations (based on their economy size and ability to pay). That formula is shown in the chart above.

The truth is that the United States only pays 22.1% of NATO funding, while the other nations pay 77.9%. And every single nation in NATO is current on those payments. NONE of them are delinquent!

Trump's real argument with the NATO nations is not on them paying their NATO bill -- they all do that. It is on how much they spend to fund their own military. Presidents Bush and Obama have requested they spend 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on their individual militaries. Most do not spend that much right now, but they all agreed to be spending that 2% by 2024 (and they made that agreement during the Obama administration).

That's not good enough for Donald Trump. Trump wants them to double that spending to 4% -- a level that the United States does not even meet (currently spending about 3.5% of GDP). He said they agreed to that -- they did not. Trump went on to threaten NATO. He said if all the NATO nations aren't paying 2% by next January, the United States would "go it alone".

Some people tried to gloss that over, saying it does not mean the U.S. might leave NATO. But that's exactly what it sounds like to me. What else could "go it alone" mean?

Can Trump withdraw the United States from NATO by himself? Most legal scholars say no (because it was ratified by the Senate), but some believe he can. The question has never been decided by the Supreme Court. But even if he can't officially withdraw from NATO with the consent of the Senate (which he would not get), he could (as Commander-in-Chief) refuse to honor article 5 of the NATO treaty and refuse to send American troops to defend a NATO nation that was attacked (especially if they had not met the 2% threshold) -- and that would amount to the same thing.

The other leaders in NATO should be very worried. In the past, they had a solid ally in the United States -- an ally that would spring to their defense if they were attacked. Trump has basically turned that alliance into a "protection racket" -- pay what the U.S. wants or you don't get protected.

Vladimir Putin has to be positively giddy about Trump's performance at the NATO summit. Putin would like nothing better than a weak NATO (or no NATO at all) -- and that is exactly what Trump is doing for him.

Trump Continues His Attacks On NATO

(Cartoon image is by Matt Wuerker at Politico.com.)

Article 5 of the charter of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) says if any member nation is attacked, it will be considered an attack on all of them, and they will all respond to that attack. This article has only been invoked one time in the history of NATO -- after the terrorist attack on New York City on 9/11. All the NATO nations joined the United States in sending troops to fight in Afghanistan (and those nations all lost soldiers defending the United States).

One would expect a leader of the United States to appreciate this. Unfortunately, we now have an ignorant and incompetent leader who doesn't know or respect the history of NATO -- or its value in protecting the free world.  Upon taking office, Donald Trump almost immediately attacked NATO, berating the NATO nations for not spending enough money (the only thing he has ever cared about) and even suggesting he might withdraw from NATO.

As late as last week, Trump suggested that the United States gets nothing from NATO (forgetting their response to 9/11), leaving the impression that the U.S. would be better off leaving NATO. This left the NATO nations wondering what would happen when it held its meeting on July 11th and 12th. They were right to be nervous, because Donald Trump wasted no time attacking. His first attack was directed at Germany.

Here's how The Guardian reported it:

At his first meeting of the summit, with the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, Trump described the relationship between Germany and Russiaas “inappropriate”.

Nato officials had been nervously awaiting the first meeting as an indicator of how Trump – who arrived in Brussels on Tuesday night – would behave over the next two days. Within minutes they had their answer.

This summit is shaping up to be the most divisive in Nato’s 69-year history. Normally, Nato summits are mostly fixed in advance and proceed in an orderly fashion. Trump’s first words signalled this one was not going to be like that.

He complained that German politicians had been working for Russian energy companies after leaving politics and said this too was inappropriate. Germany was totally controlled by Russia, Trump said.

With Stoltenberg looking on uncomfortably throughout, the US president was unrelenting. “I think it is very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia,” Trump said. “We are supposed to be guarding against Russia, and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions dollars a year to Russia.

“We are protecting Germany, we are protecting France, we are protecting all of these countries and then numerous of the countries go out and make a pipeline deal with Russia where they are paying billions of dollars into the coffers of Russia. I think that is very inappropriate.”

He added: “It should never have been allowed to happen. Germany is totally controlled by Russia because they will be getting 60-70% of their energy from Russia and a new pipeline. 

“You tell me if that’s appropriate because I think it’s not. On top of that Germany is just paying just a little bit over 1% [of GDP on Nato defence contributions] whereas the United States is paying 4.2% of a much larger GDP. So I think that’s inappropriate also.” 

His comments were linked to his push for other European countries – particularly Germany – to pay more for Nato’s defence needs. 

“I think it is unfair,” Trump said. Other US presidents had raised the matter of European defence spending levels in the past but he was intent on dealing with it, he continued. “We can’t put up with it.”

Confidence In U.S. Leadership Now Low In NATO Nations

Trump is to meet with the heads of the NATO nations in Belgium today and tomorrow (July 11th and 12th). It's an understatement to say most of those nations are troubled by the actions of Trump, and his continual sniping at the organization. Trump has even gone so far as to question whether he would honor the U.S. commitment to NATO, or even stay in the organization. That probably makes Vladimir Putin very happy, but it is making the NATO nations very nervous. In the past, they have never had to worry about the commitment of the United States to NATO.

The charts above show the results of polls done by the Gallup Poll of citizens in the NATO nations. Note that confidence in U.S. leadership has fallen dramatically among most of those nations. This brings up an important question -- can NATO survive if there is no confidence that U.S. leaders will meet their obligations?

One Example Of What NATO Has Done For The U.S.

Donald Trump again blasted the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in a speech this week. He said we are the "schmucks" paying for NATO, and questioned whether the United States gets any "protection" by participating in NATO. It was an outrageous statement, and I'm not surprised that it troubles our allies -- especially since Trump will be attending a meeting of NATO countries on his way to meet with Putin in Russia. Is he going to embarrass the United States at that meeting by again attacking our allies?

Trump needs a little reminder of some recent history. I don't know if he's ignorant of this history, doesn't listen to his own military and intelligence, is incapable of using Google, or is just incredibly stupid -- maybe all of the above -- but the chart above should be enough to shut him up.

After the United States was attacked on 9/11, President George Bush went to NATO (and some other allies) and asked for help in the war in Afghanistan. NATO responded by helping the U.S. -- and 22 NATO nations lost soldiers in that war. They lost citizens fighting for us! (see above chart)

It is outrageous that Trump questions whether NATO would spring to our defense. They have already done so. And it is disrespectful to the families of those who died defending us from those NATO nations.

Trump is whining about money -- which seems to be all he ever thinks about. But there's something more important than money, and one of those things is having allies who will fight beside when necessary. We have that in NATO. Let's hope Trump doesn't destroy that.