Does it affect us at all?
Does Europe become at risk to Russian influence? Does it really matter?
Does Europe become at risk to Russian influence? Does it really matter?
What are the real world consequences of us pulling out of NATO
11,030 Views |
199 Replies |
Last: 1 mo ago by Dirt 05
I really think it is more of a situation of the NATO countries pulling away from us to the point there is no longer a shared identity. We need to focus on North America and the western hemisphere.
AstroAggie15 said:
Does it affect us at all?
Does Europe become at risk to Russian influence? Does it really matter?
We will no longer have access to a lot of bases we currently use.
We'll have reduced favored trade status with many of those nations.
Some will turn to countries like China, which has already drawn the ire of President Trump.
Generally our influence will wane with Europe.
Europe is already toast due to mass immigration of third world people with different values. Their leadership is a bunch of limp wristed corrupt fools that have sold out. Let's part ways.
Everyone completely misses the fact we can negotiate a new mutual defense treaty with whomever wants, respects and will be an ally.
But first you have to kill the old one to drive home the point the old order is gone.
But first you have to kill the old one to drive home the point the old order is gone.
aTm '99
A $750 million savings in US budget.
NATO doesn't get pregnant.
NATO is the only alliance in history where the dominant military power gets 31 countries to organize their entire defense architecture around american leadership, american equipment, american interoperability standards, and american strategic priorities.
leaving surrenders the most favorable strategic arrangement any great power has ever negotiated and hands the board to russia and china for free.
leaving surrenders the most favorable strategic arrangement any great power has ever negotiated and hands the board to russia and china for free.
Not sure what good it does us to be in a military alliance where we can't depend on the alliance to help when we need it. Seems to me like in the last couple of decades it has become totally lopsided as far as who benefits from it.
I think Americans need to start accepting the idea that the old European alliances are no longer what they once were post WW2. Western Europe has trended politically and institutionally the way of our old enemy the Socialist Soviets, and now add in the Islamic elements and we no longer have a shared interest the way we once did. In fact, they have become flat out antagonistic on many fronts.
We don't need to burn any bridges that may need down the road, but we don't need to cater to them either. If countries want to pay their share and cooperate with us fine. If they don't, so be it. We've got to look out for our own interests, particularly in our own hemisphere.
I think Americans need to start accepting the idea that the old European alliances are no longer what they once were post WW2. Western Europe has trended politically and institutionally the way of our old enemy the Socialist Soviets, and now add in the Islamic elements and we no longer have a shared interest the way we once did. In fact, they have become flat out antagonistic on many fronts.
We don't need to burn any bridges that may need down the road, but we don't need to cater to them either. If countries want to pay their share and cooperate with us fine. If they don't, so be it. We've got to look out for our own interests, particularly in our own hemisphere.
If you tell me we are going to become totally isolationist or we will only get involved in areas in our hemisphere than ok NATO doesn't help us at all. However if you are concerned about national security from threats like Russia, the Middle East, China than I don't know why you would give away bases, arms sales to allies, influence of foreign policy across Europe and Asia. Secondly if you get out of NATO what is your alternative?
AlaskanAg99 said:
Everyone completely misses the fact we can negotiate a new mutual defense treaty with whomever wants, respects and will be an ally.
But first you have to kill the old one to drive home the point the old order is gone.
If Trump's admin, or Vance's/Rubio's negotiates the new mutual defense treaty and republicans (not RINOS) have control of Congress, then great.
If a marxist democrat negotiates, we're ******
No, I don't care what CNN or Miss NOW said this time
Ad Lunam
Ad Lunam
Ag87H2O said:
I think Americans need to start accepting the idea that the old European alliances are no longer what they once were post WW2. Western Europe has trended politically and institutionally the way of our old enemy the Socialist Soviets, and now add in the Islamic elements and we no longer have a shared interest the way we once did. In fact, they have become flat out antagonistic on many fronts.
This is a temporary situation. After half of the US becomes like Minnesota led by marxist democrats (our current trend) then we'll be in alignment again.
No, I don't care what CNN or Miss NOW said this time
Ad Lunam
Ad Lunam
VP at Pierce and Pierce said:
Europe is already toast due to mass immigration of third world people with different values. Their leadership is a bunch of limp wristed corrupt fools that have sold out. Let's part ways.
We will be the exact same, in the next 20 years.
We don't need to withdraw. We need to threaten to withdraw unless terms are renegotiated to address obvious failings and mission changes since the Cold War ended and there are enforcement mechanisms added for failure to meet terms. We need to have our interests in the treaty looked after proportional to our contribution.
Our possible allies in the larger region:
1.) Germany (changes with every election-tenuous)
2.) Poland (fairly solid)
3.) Greece (also changes, but pro-Israel at the moment) due to Turkish Islamization)
4.) UK (tenuous depending on each election)
5.) Israel (very solid due to shared interests and regional goals)
6.) Saudi/Jordan/Gulf states all of which rely on us.
Semi-allies:
France, Italy, Portugal, other east bloc European states, Benelux, Nordic countries, Czech/Slovakia, Balkan countries
Ideological opponents: Ireland and Spain due to friendship with our enemies. The Vatican.
Neutral: Austria, Switzerland
1.) Germany (changes with every election-tenuous)
2.) Poland (fairly solid)
3.) Greece (also changes, but pro-Israel at the moment) due to Turkish Islamization)
4.) UK (tenuous depending on each election)
5.) Israel (very solid due to shared interests and regional goals)
6.) Saudi/Jordan/Gulf states all of which rely on us.
Semi-allies:
France, Italy, Portugal, other east bloc European states, Benelux, Nordic countries, Czech/Slovakia, Balkan countries
Ideological opponents: Ireland and Spain due to friendship with our enemies. The Vatican.
Neutral: Austria, Switzerland
“If you’re going to have crime it should at least be organized crime”
-Havelock Vetinari
-Havelock Vetinari
GeeBee said:
A $750 million savings in US budget.
I think you mean a redirect of $750 million within the Pentagon's budget.
We're not actually "saving" a penny.
this argument only works if you define "shared interests" as "cultural and demographic identity" rather than strategic, economic, or security alignment. by every measurable dimension of the latter, the NATO partnership is deeper, more active, and more mutually beneficial than at any point since the Cold War.Ag87H2O said:
Western Europe has trended politically and institutionally the way of our old enemy the Socialist Soviets, and now add in the Islamic elements and we no longer have a shared interest the way we once did. In fact, they have become flat out antagonistic on many fronts
" 4.) UK (tenuous depending on each election)"
What? We've historically had solid relations with both main Political parties in the UK
What? We've historically had solid relations with both main Political parties in the UK
you mean the bases that we were already denied access to ? Huge loss no doubt for the tds infected group.aggiedent said:AstroAggie15 said:
Does it affect us at all?
Does Europe become at risk to Russian influence? Does it really matter?
We will no longer have access to a lot of bases we currently use.
We'll have reduced favored trade status with many of those nations.
Some will turn to countries like China, which has already drawn the ire of President Trump.
Generally our influence will wane with Europe.
The acronym will be changed to NotA
( ...voice punctuated with a clap of distant thunder... )
( ...voice punctuated with a clap of distant thunder... )
If only our "allies" bothered to keeping up their end of the deal. Which they haven't.
And then they tie their economies to the great red bear.
They want all of the benefit at nearly zero cost.
Because reasons?
And then they tie their economies to the great red bear.
They want all of the benefit at nearly zero cost.
Because reasons?
aTm '99
AgDad121619 said:you mean the bases that we were already denied access to ? Huge loss no doubt for the tds infected group.aggiedent said:AstroAggie15 said:
Does it affect us at all?
Does Europe become at risk to Russian influence? Does it really matter?
We will no longer have access to a lot of bases we currently use.
We'll have reduced favored trade status with many of those nations.
Some will turn to countries like China, which has already drawn the ire of President Trump.
Generally our influence will wane with Europe.
Incorrect……… we still have access to all our European bases. Some governments asked we not fly combat missions from those bases. Equipment is still being staged from many of those bases however.
Loss of those bases would definitely impact our ability to project power in the future. Don't pretend it wouldn't.
aggiedent said:AgDad121619 said:aggiedent said:AstroAggie15 said:
Does it affect us at all?
Does Europe become at risk to Russian influence? Does it really matter?
We will no longer have access to a lot of bases we currently use.
We'll have reduced favored trade status with many of those nations.
Some will turn to countries like China, which has already drawn the ire of President Trump.
Generally our influence will wane with Europe.
you mean the bases that we were already denied access to ? Huge loss no doubt for the tds infected group.
Incorrect……… we still have access to all our European bases. Some governments asked we not fly combat missions from those bases. Equipment is still being staged from many of those bases however.
Loss of those bases would definitely impact our ability to project power in the future. Don't pretend it wouldn't.
This presumes that we couldn't adapt a strategy to develop/contract for basing rights in friendly nations, if/as needed.
NATO worked well during the cold war but now most members have abandoned their responsibilities under the agreement.
If our Allies want the US to provide security for them, they will have to pay for it.
If our Allies want the US to provide security for them, they will have to pay for it.
Shot:
Chaser:
.@PressSec reads a direct quote from @POTUS on NATO:
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 8, 2026
"They were tested, and they failed." pic.twitter.com/azjM94r18W
Chaser:
Trump will discuss the U.S. withdrawing from NATO with Secretary General Rutte today. pic.twitter.com/zl4Af7L8xE
— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) April 8, 2026
The real consequence of pulling out of NATO is that it destroys the modern version of the same playbook that led to WWI
what do you mean by this, specifically?AlaskanAg99 said:
If only our "allies" bothered to keeping up their end of the deal. Which they haven't.
same question, what does this mean specifically?ntxVol said:
NATO worked well during the cold war but now most members have abandoned their responsibilities under the agreement.
If our Allies want the US to provide security for them, they will have to pay for it.
nortex97 said:aggiedent said:AgDad121619 said:aggiedent said:AstroAggie15 said:
Does it affect us at all?
Does Europe become at risk to Russian influence? Does it really matter?
We will no longer have access to a lot of bases we currently use.
We'll have reduced favored trade status with many of those nations.
Some will turn to countries like China, which has already drawn the ire of President Trump.
Generally our influence will wane with Europe.
you mean the bases that we were already denied access to ? Huge loss no doubt for the tds infected group.
Incorrect……… we still have access to all our European bases. Some governments asked we not fly combat missions from those bases. Equipment is still being staged from many of those bases however.
Loss of those bases would definitely impact our ability to project power in the future. Don't pretend it wouldn't.
This presumes that we couldn't adapt a strategy to develop/contract for basing rights in friendly nations, if/as needed.
Sure, and likely some would. Others are almost antagonistic to the current administration and I doubt they would.
It goes back to the origin of the term soft power. The reason why the official business currency is the dollar, official language English, and why we have more bases across the globe than Russia and China combined. As we withdraw our goodwill (NATO, healthcare funding to 3rd world countries, etc.) someone will fill the void. We will definitely lose some bases, and we will lose some cooperation militarily, economically, and socially.
Everything comes with a cost and not every payment is with money.
Old McDonald said:same question, what does this mean specifically?ntxVol said:
NATO worked well during the cold war but now most members have abandoned their responsibilities under the agreement.
If our Allies want the US to provide security for them, they will have to pay for it.
They have a combined few operable planes, a tiny navy, little land forces and are dependent on the untied states for their defense. For the vast majority of natos existence, euro countries have not contributed enough to maintain a basic level of military readiness. Instead, they spent the money of social programs (which we also subsidize).
Only when russia reached their doorstep have they made any effort to increase spending or bring their militaries up to par.
We've paid billions in money and equipment to keep russia mostly still in russia. Yet, they stifle free speech and disallow elections they don't like. They come after our companies to help pay for their surveillance states. Theyve moved from liberal to leftist in many of their political plays.
We cant even trust them to keep secrets anymore.
When we asked for help for this conflict, they shut their airspace to us and refused to send any real assistance. The one British boat that did come broke down. The French sent a "fleet" but haven't done anything other than protect their own interests.
Fewer tote bags embroidered with a NATO logo.
We effectively cannot use those bases for our own interests anymore. We need to pack up and let them turn them into Muslim habitats.
UTExan said:
Our possible allies in the larger region:
1.) Germany (changes with every election-tenuous)
2.) Poland (fairly solid)
3.) Greece (also changes, but pro-Israel at the moment) due to Turkish Islamization)
4.) UK (tenuous depending on each election)
5.) Israel (very solid due to shared interests and regional goals)
6.) Saudi/Jordan/Gulf states all of which rely on us.
Semi-allies:
France, Italy, Portugal, other east bloc European states, Benelux, Nordic countries, Czech/Slovakia, Balkan countries
Ideological opponents: Ireland and Spain due to friendship with our enemies. The Vatican.
Neutral: Austria, Switzerland
Maybe we should take Ireland( including Northern Ireland) next. There army is 6K and the Navy looks like a small Coast Guard. Impose Martial Law, eliminate the welfare spending, lock up the middle east rapists and move all our British Bases over one Island.
the spending complaint was legitimate for decades, but has since been addressed which weakens the urgency of the argument.
the bits about free speech and tech companies and leftism are just vibes and ultimately immaterial to a defense alliance. the US has defense partnerships with saudi arabia, which beheads people for sorcery, with egypt, who holds sham elections as a matter of routine, with turkey which jails journalist at industrial scale, and nobody in the american right orbit argues these partnership should be dissolved because of shared value deficits.
regarding Iran, NATO is working as intended. european allies are signaling that this particular war lacks legitimacy, which is what sovereign allies in a defensive alliance are supposed to do when they think you're wrong. NATO is a mutual defense pact, it's not a blank check for wars of choice.
the bits about free speech and tech companies and leftism are just vibes and ultimately immaterial to a defense alliance. the US has defense partnerships with saudi arabia, which beheads people for sorcery, with egypt, who holds sham elections as a matter of routine, with turkey which jails journalist at industrial scale, and nobody in the american right orbit argues these partnership should be dissolved because of shared value deficits.
regarding Iran, NATO is working as intended. european allies are signaling that this particular war lacks legitimacy, which is what sovereign allies in a defensive alliance are supposed to do when they think you're wrong. NATO is a mutual defense pact, it's not a blank check for wars of choice.
Featured Stories
See All
Graduation admiration from a damn-proud LSU dad
by Olin Buchanan
15:00
12h ago
2.8k
10:39
17h ago
1.4k
Spring in Aggieland opened Tawfiq Byard's eyes to SEC football
by Kaylee Dreyer