"What is the point of NATO anymore?" Topic

35th, yes homicides are way down, declining a lot each year since the pandemic, for multiple reasons according to most experts. The decline began around the year 2000 and has been steady except for a couple of years. Since the pandemioc there is better prevention work going on in mental health, which relieves family and social and work relationship pressures where many situations can escalate.

The pandemic was probably one of the worst mass stress factors in recent history, creating voids in all kinds of services, fewer cops on the streets, first responders overwhelmed.

There is a higher level of awareness everywhere regarding situational escalations and how to handle them, better responses. The pandemic triggered a situational increase in drug and alcohol abuse, mental pressures, and the breakdown of norms.

The fentanyl death rate is down in part because Narcan is carried by trained personnel all over the country and is said to have made a big difference. The new fentanyl scanners are finally coming on line in sufficient numbers at the borders after Congress stalled the funding for the last couple of years and the scanners sat uninstalled in storage. A disgrace, as POTUS would say. And there has been more meth use as US consumers so often shift to different highs. These trends happen.

I know there are people who study the trends and will confirm there are multiple factors. it will be interesting to see what happens this year when so many social program cuts go into effect. Hopefully we will stay low, but I think a rise of some sort could occur.

As for Trump, still early to nail down the policy impact but he should get credit for his public anti-crime positons. I support the deportations though not some of the tactics. ICE misses out on so much community intel with their approach.

And the POTUS comments on crime being rampant in cities don't fit with these latest results. With such low crime rates, sending in the military instead of trying to talk to and work with state and local officials, hard as that may be, is not consistent with conditions everyone is seeing. When he told us Portland was burning to the ground this summer, I turned on the TV to see…no emergency in Portland.

This is Nato's Suez moment

link

Armand

Trump really got nothing in Davos.The USA could reinforce their troops as much as they wanted according to Thulesag 2 from 1951. And Greenland already refused chinese investors.
The speech of Carney was top-notch. Trump doesn´t make America great again, he only shrinks the influence and trust the USA enjoyed for decades. It is obvious that the rest of the world will form new connections, while the USA will become more and more isolated with disastrous monetary effects

chapeau…the Danes can say thanks to US, and coming from a man who served in first line in his own armed forces to teach lessons of bravery of course

"Between 2001 and 2021, 12,000 Danish soldiers were deployed to Afghanistan. 44 died, making Denmark the NATO country with the highest death toll relative to its population."

so, next Iceland, incapable of defending itself, no army, former Danish territory until 1944 protected by British then US garrison in WWII, NATO member essential Donaldian prerequisite, a perfect candidate and perfect future "pig" for a rape

In response to Trump's threats, Denmark is preparing its troops to defend Greenland.
According to Danish public broadcaster DR, soldiers sent to Greenland have been ordered to be ready for combat in the event of a US attack

Danish troops deployed to Greenland have been ordered to be combat-ready in the event of a US attack on this autonomous Danish territory, the public broadcaster DR reported Friday.

According to DR, the Danish military requested last week that troops sent to Greenland be equipped with live ammunition, mentioning the possibility of sending additional forces and resources later, if necessary.

Civilian and military aircraft have since begun transporting soldiers and equipment to Greenland, DR reported.

After weeks of aggressive rhetoric, Donald Trump suddenly announced on Wednesday in Davos "the framework for a future agreement" on Greenland, a very vague outline, and lifted his threats regarding both tariffs and military action.

Previously, Trump had not ruled out the use of force, arguing that the United States needed Greenland for its "national security."

The Danish military deployment was officially part of the Arctic Endurance military exercise, led by Denmark, which Copenhagen indicated it would continue "for much of the coming year."
link

😂
Tort

You gave me exactly what the MSM has made there sound bites and stories.

Nothing to see here. It was going on before. No credit to evil orange.

The same narrative for fentanyl, same for everything but the border.

Again:

"Murders plummeted more than 20% in 2025 from the year before, the single-largest one-year drop on record — and it might be the lowest murder rate in the U.S. since 1900"

2025 down 20% from 2024. I don't care if they had dropped some before. This was 20% in one year.

Now what happened?

Border closed. That alone contributed immensely.
Border patrol freed to do their jobs instead of acting as butlers opening the door to millions of illegals
Many of the worst of the worst sent home by those evil ice agents and BP. Not back on the streets again.
Crackdown on cities like DC and Memphis.
Other illegals to worried about being picked up then committing crimes.
Drug boats destroyed. Drugs stopped on the border by BP, now available again.
Crackdown on Venezuela.

There are others, but above enough.

Again the media will never credit him or his policies.

This thread is bringing out the best in irrelevant nonsense from the Usual Suspects.

Not irrelevant. It was for one person. But thanks for reading it. 😉

I won't defend the remarks. Don't agree with them. Also do not know the questions asked to generate that response, nor who he had been speaking to from NATO beforehand.

But I don't always agree with things he says. Still support much of his policies domestically and in the world. If I were to feel shame, I would've felt shame if I had voted for the previous occupant of the White House, knowing that he was suffering from either dementia or Alzheimer's, having no idea who was running the country. Yet still covering for him.

Each country went to Afghanistan for their own reasons. Just the UK:

"The UK justified its military involvement in Afghanistan (2001–2021) primarily to eliminate terrorist safe havens, specifically targeting Al-Qaeda after the 9/11 attacks, and to prevent Afghanistan from again being used for international attacks. Other key reasons included state-building, supporting the NATO alliance, combating drug trafficking, and promoting human rights."

I will not degrade anyone's contribution, but it was not only for the U.S.

This is today's "knickers in a knot" topic du jour.

He lives free in your heads. You think on him constantly. For him, that is a win.
He will have you outraged for another 3 years. So enjoy it.

You are talking about him, which is exactly what he likes. 😏

@tortorella

I support the deportations though not some of the tactics. ICE misses out on so much community intel with their approach.

Not by choice, but by necessity. For 23 years ICE was able to work with State and Local law enforcement nationwide, and Democrats and Republican officials both cooperated. ICE would ask for a criminal alien in custody to be remanded to them for deportation, and they would all honor that request. This even happened during Obama's deportation years. No riots. No protests. No friction.

What changed? Democrats need an emotional issue to campaign on and THEY have caused 100% of this in order to position against Trump and the Republicans. This chaos and danger is ONLY happening in Democrat-controlled cities and States. And Democrats keep ramping up the violence -- like the AG of Arizona, an elected Democrat, who declared in a TV interview that it would lawful under "castle doctrine" to SHOOT ICE AGENTS. Insanity.

@Lilian

chapeau…the Danes can say thanks to US, and coming from a man who served in first line in his own armed forces to teach lessons of bravery of course

"Between 2001 and 2021, 12,000 Danish soldiers were deployed to Afghanistan. 44 died, making Denmark the NATO country with the highest death toll relative to its population."

And thanks again for the sacrifice. And let's not do that again, shall we? No more endless wars and nation-building. That's a primary reason why Trump was elected -- to stop all that. The WEF/Globalists have no inclination to stop wars where they have interests at stake -- indeed, they will START them when their interests are at stake, like Libyan War. Khadaffi wasn't a threat to the global order or his neighbors. He didn't want to be the next Saddam, so he renounced his WMD and surrended his WMD programs and materials, renounced terrorism and even paid reparations. But European/WEF interests were upset that TOTAL/ELF/FINA/SHELL were losing oil contracts to China at the time, as was the US Halliburton firm and others, and so they concieved the concept of "Humanitarian War" – manipulating NATO to declare a humanitarian emergency in Libya with President Obama's willing help. WEF/EU apparatchiks in the mold of Canada's Carney provided the "soft power" 'legal' structure for war, and the US provded the majority of the "hard power" with NATO assistance.

An actual War for Oil caused by the Eurocrats and Globalists, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of refugees -- and the cementing of Russian resolve against NATO since it saw NATO being used as as OFFENSIVE alliance, not just a defensive alliance.

So don't get too wrapped up in OrangemanBad's mean tweets and hyperbole, or even his high pressure negotiating style. Look as substance, look at what he's trying to do and what he's asking of countries that are supposed to be allies and partners. Look at the real threat to YOUR safety and well-being (aside from really bad domestic economic, social and immigration policies) -- and it's China, China, and China.

Europe is strong enough to put Vlad back in his box. But China has infiltrated your political class, it has bought deep influence across your system, and it wants to control you. Literally. I mean, Chinese politicians say it out loud all the time -- it's China's divine right to be in charge of the world, the middle kingdom will be the center of the universe, and they even go all ethnic chauvanism -- the CCP repeatedly makes ethnic superiority claims, framing Han Chinese as more "advanced," "civilized," or "evolutionarily successful" and more fit to rule.

Change is scary, Trump can be a loudmouthed a$$hole, but get over it. China's not your friend, and the US is not your enemy.

from a different tread:
"And dogtail, why should I feel unable to continue the current status. Oh, may, as SB wrote: "…unbalanced trade, enormous security costs, and the burden of enforcement. Trillions spent on defense, millions of casualties, endless deployments. For generations, American families defended Europe — in two world wars and through decades of Cold War deterrence. That stability wasn't free. It was paid for in blood, money, and political capital."

No thanks. I want balanced trade, sharing of the burdens of keeping a stable, democratic, free society, and less smug Davos-style, holier-than-thou elitism."

I don´t think the USA need a balance trade. Sorry for the long AI post that follows, but it is a complex issue:
Start of AI
A trade deficit—where imports exceed exports—is generally not inherently good or bad, but rather a complex symptom of broader macroeconomic conditions, such as strong domestic demand, high consumption, or low savings. While often viewed negatively, deficits allow countries to consume more than they produce, can indicate economic growth, and are financed by foreign capital inflows.

Sign of Economic Strength: A deficit can signify a robust economy with strong consumer demand, as seen in the U.S. for decades, where residents enjoy high living standards and diverse goods.
Capital Inflow: Deficits are typically balanced by a capital account surplus, meaning foreign investment flows into the country to purchase assets, which can stimulate domestic activity.
Potential Risks: Very large or persistent deficits can be concerning if they result from uncompetitive industries, leading to job losses in specific sectors (e.g., manufacturing) or if they reflect unsustainable debt accumulation.
Misconceptions: Contrary to common belief, a trade deficit does not automatically mean a country is "losing" at trade or becoming poorer; it often signifies a greater volume of trade and more available resources.

Ultimately, the importance of a trade deficit depends on whether it is driven by productive investment or excessive, unsustainable borrowing.
End of AI text.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not necessary for the security of International trade, the governments of the USA chose those wars for other reasons.

There is only a very small number of US troops in Europe, it is only a hub for the US Army.

The US fought in the First World War to secure their money investments, I would not say that about the Second world war, but spending money in a military industrial complex is a self-sustaining system that benefits a lot of people, especially in the country that produces the weapon systems for its allies.

And as I said before: the USA was the only superpower after the sovjet union fell apart, due to the politics of Trump Canada and Europe will increase their trade with China and decrease it with the US.
If you look at the results something went wrong

Simon Marks from LBS noted that the disastrous meeting in Davos was framed as a big win for Trump by FoxNews.
Karoline Leavitt claimed that Trump did not confuse Iceland and Greenland in his speech. So basically facts are quite different in Europe and the USA

I don´t think the USA need a balance trade.

I think you're arguing the wrong point -- what we want is balanced TRADE RULES. Reciprocal tariffs and market access within a Free Market system. Then if we're all competing within the same system with the same rules, let competition do its thing.

Misconceptions: Contrary to common belief, a trade deficit does not automatically mean a country is "losing" at trade or becoming poorer; it often signifies a greater volume of trade and more available resources.

It does with China. China is a predatory mercantilist power and there are only win-loss deals with them. Remember, the Chinese economy is an instrument of the State. It evolved seamlmessly from Communism to State Capitalism (aka actual economic Fascism) and has enriched itself at the expense of others. Look at the bad deal Carney made with China -- he agreed to essentially destroy the Canadian automobile market by allowing China to dump Temu Teslas in exchange for China MAYBE buying more canola oil. Seriously?? That's your deal with one of the most brutal regimes on the planet?

Trump seems to have made an impression on European leaders. Maybe not the one he wanted.

Nah, he expected this reaction from the weaselly Eurocrats. If you haven't noticed by now he uses deliberately provocative words to frame an issue and force his opponents to respond – and they usually respond with predictable outrage and emotionalism in a way that tips their hand and exposes the core subject.

Like Greenland. Now the WORLD and absent minded American voters, know that Greenland is 1) Strategic for nation defense in a changing age, 2) is too to be defended by Denmark who has taken it for granted, 3) only has like 56,000 inhabitants, many of whom are not happy with the relationship with Denmark, 4) has lots of valuable minerals and 5) China has been relentless about getting control of Greenland through trade and attempts at infrastructure agreements.

And the Eurocrats were exposed as weak and petulant. Like the PM of Finland who boldly declared Europe doesn't need the US, and when challenged on would Europe be safer if the US left NATO went into reverse gear very quickly…

And now Trump has the deal in process that he probably always wanted all along…

Oh, and in contrast PM Meloni kept a level head, didn't react to Trump's hyperbole and chumming and weathered the tempest in a tea pot quite well. And Argentina's Millei -- cut a deal with the US that helped his country in quite rational reasonable terms without the emotional theatrics. Trump didn't need to thrown chum in the water, because both sides negotiated in good faith and on reasonable terms and demeanor. He wanted a deal, not emotional headlines and posing.

The world top economy is the USA, right? It is for decades.
All the talk how unfair the USA are treated and that everybody is taking advantage of the USA is something that I have not heard before DJT. The western world was doing well before 2008.
If the deal with China is bad Carney will be voted out of office. Even though I have no sympathy for the chinese government, I do not see China as a threath to the territorial integrity of any european nation. Trump on the other hand tries to desintegrate the EU

All the talk how unfair the USA are treated and that everybody is taking advantage of the USA is something that I have not heard before DJT.

You haven't been listening. Trump is really just the reaction to the state of things, not the cause.

If the deal with China is bad Carney will be voted out of office. Even though I have no sympathy for the chinese government, I do not see China as a threath to the territorial integrity of any european nation. Trump on the other hand tries to desintegrate the EU

I bet Carney will call for an early election and lean heavily into TrumpHatred to deflect from poor policies and probably get re-elected. Once.

If you don't see China as a threat you're a fool. Trump and most Americans want a strong solid Europe as a partner, but the current state of the EU we see a bunch of backbiting would-be authoritarians wedded to their globalist vision of world order that empowers and enriches them at evertyone elses expense. Seriously, if you keep allowing them to deflect and get you to keep focussing on OrangeManBad you're screwed.

We cannot let anyone besmirch they [sic] duty and sacrifice …

Ah good you corrected my mistake made in haste … I'd say thanks … why bother ?

Better have a word with yer man about that.

link

I'd say that answers the question posed by this thread, so if you all could Bleeped text out of Europe, including Greenland, that would be fine.

Perhaps you could inform him that only one NATO member has ever invoked Article 5 while you're there.

That is basically what I thought you'd post. You never fail to not disappoint …

Some history for the ignorant, written by a Dane.

If we already know about that history are some still ignorant ? Just say'n …

This thread is bringing out the best in irrelevant nonsense from the Usual Suspects.

I was going to say the same thing. But from the other side of this conversation.

A Wargame Shows Just How Vulnerable Europe Is to a Russian Attack

link

Armand

Russia Attacks a NATO Country in a War Game. It Doesn't End Well.

link

Armand

It will all start out very differently… One of the Baltic pirates will try again to hijack a Russian vessel heading to Kaliningrad, but this time they'll get a missile or a torpedo…
And what will you do then?
The railway route through Lithuania to the Kaliningrad Oblast has existed for a long time and, until recently, operated without any problems. Russian trains simply traveled non-stop along the roadside area guarded by Lithuanian border guards. And they even paid for transit… But NATO really wants to take the Kaliningrad Oblast from Russia and is looking for ways to blockade it…
This could become a real pretext for war.

Russia Attacks a NATO Country in a War Game. It Doesn't End Well.

Yes, that exercise supposed no active US involvement -- so by themselves the Europeans are not ready for a major conflict. That's why the Trump admin has been placing such heavy pressure on NATO countries to up their spending and be more authoritative and realistic. Now, in the recent security NATO announced most countries are now at 5% spending goal, and the US has moved to place European generals into key positions in NATO formerly held by US generals to give them senior command experience.

FWIW I heard a report the Germans have a Mech Hvy Bde in the Baltic States. Including about 100 of the newer version of the Leo 2A7+ MBTs. The last time Germans were in that area was WWII. Now they are part of NATO. Defending NATO states against Russian.

Amnerica is nolonger an allie it is a failed state, army on the streets only just removed, allows croup felons to be president, heathcare worse than India, atred and threats against allies. Massive pressure (hopeless but nonthe less applied) to buy US arms that now threaten countrys soverenty. Answer NATO is still needed but the North Atlantic section is now only Canada, US is now nolonger a force to be reconed with, utter isolationist approach.

Ush,

If so, this to shall pass. This is the amazing aspect of a democracy. Leadership change. Four years from now things could be completely different. Many Americans would disagree with what you wrote and many would support what you say. Many Americans like what is happening now and many long for a day when a certain leader is gone. All part of democracy.

Ush, "failed state?". The United States is still the largest
economy on earth, still fields the most capable military in the world, and still anchors the very NATO alliance you say is necessary. That's not what collapse looks like. I get that you dislike Trump, fine -- but update your thinking.

You're arguing like it's 1995 — as if the post–Cold War order was sacred, permanent, and free. It wasn't. It ran on U.S. overextension and European underinvestment for decades.
Alliances aren't charity programs. They're leverage arrangements. If partners step up on defense, trade fairness, and energy security, that strengthens the alliance — it doesn't kill it. Popularity polls in Denmark don't determine deterrence against China in the Pacific.

The real question isn't whether the "old order" feels comfortable. It's whether it was sustainable. Enforcing NATO commitments, reshoring supply chains, and forcing Europe to shoulder more of its own security burden doesn't make Beijing pop champagne — it forces them to deal with a bloc that actually carries its weight.

The world changed. Pretending it didn't is what got us here.

Gratten +1

SBm +1

Amnerica is nolonger an allie it is a failed state,

You are drinking the Left, woke progressive, Socialist, Liberal, etc. Kool Aid … Just say NO …

army on the streets only just removed,

Was not the Amry. A few hundred State NG. Fact – the Federal Gov't can active, deploy etc. Active Duty, NG, etc. to protect Federal assets. E.g. Federal structures and personnel, key pieces of infrastructure, etc. We trained to do this when I was in the 101. It is called Riot Control …

Note a few hundred Federalized NG is not the Army running thru the streets. Nor are Federal assets e.g. ICE, CBP, etc. Those being Federal LEOs, federalized NG are there to protect them from the Leftist lunatics. Who thing they are being revolutionaries, like during the AWI. They are just useful dupes for the far left, socialists, globalists, etc.

allows croup felons to be president

You mean the previous POTUS, his cronies in Congress, DC etc. His family selling influence in his name, etc. Trump really has never been arrested and go to jail. As the things he was charged with were did not happen. Now the last POTUS did many of those things they charged Trump with …

heathcare worse than India

Really ? Where did you hear that drivel ? US Healthcare is not perfect, but generally it is pretty good. I'm here … people I know, etc. are here. You are not so … frankly you don't know what you are talking about … dare I say … again …

hatred and threats against allies.

Only if you don't understand how the POTUS does business, how he makes a deal. Is he abrasive, outspoken, hard nose, etc. etc. But he only wants NATO to pull their own weight … And they have not for a long time in many ways …

But the US is still the Big Dawg on the block in the West and even elsewhere. So allies have been taking advantage of the USA. Not more of that with this current POTUS.

You like many others are on the outside looking in. And only see what they want to.

US is now nolonger a force to be reconed with

You been keeping up with current events ? Does not sound like it. E.g. the US/IDF strikes on Iran's Nuke facilities. The Raid on Venezuela. One of most successful raids ever done.

What are you missing here ?

Legion 4, last time for the Germans it ended with the capture of the Reichstag by Russian soldiers)))

True… of course, once again you forget to mention that thanks to the help of three-quarters of the rest of the world, including none other than the USA… today on your own… as alone as you are now (except for the phantom train from Iran and North Korea) you wouldn't even make it across the Polish border…

Armand

Tango, could three-quarters of the rest of the world have been defeated without the USSR, which destroyed three-quarters of the Nazi army?)))

Alone? Thanks for the compliment))) Not bad for someone who has been single-handedly resisting yet another aggression from the "entire civilized world" for four years, not defending himself, but advancing, albeit slowly.

One of the top Presidential candidates of the Democratic Party in 2028 on support for Taiwan on the Munich world stage.

Subject: AOC on Taiwan – YouTube


YouTube link

And another one on the Ukraine

Subject: Daniel Garza on X: "Gov @gretchenwhitmer most basic of foreign policy questions. / X


link

And Gretchen said AOC knows more about foreign policy than she does. 😳😵‍💫

Legion 4, last time for the Germans it ended with the capture of the Reichstag by Russian soldiers)))

Really !?!?! 😨 I didn't know that !!!😏

Reality Check:

1) No one in NATO is deployed to do anything but keep the Russians from going any further then their attrited and battered forces already are. Which is not too far even into Ukraine.

2) Based on the Russian's and their allies' slow rate of advance and extremely high losses in men and material. I'm pretty sure where the front lines are now won't go too far if at all than where they are now …

FWIW – US GEN Ret in an interview recently made it clear and was very accurate with his comments. Basically, the US[and IDF] military are the most well prepared, combat ready forces on the planet. Plus, Ukraine's 4-year defense of their homeland against Russian imperialism. Is the most combat ready, effective force in Europe. The Russians and their allies don't even come close. As their losses mount/ equipment destroyed.

Look at a map … look at how little ground the Russians gained along with their massive losses. Yes Ukraine has taken many losses too. Including many noncombatant deaths. But Ukraine's forces have given little ground. While Russian and their allies continue to die with little to show for it.

This is a close as Russian Forces with get to where the Reichstag was …

Tango +1

three-quarters of the rest of the world have been defeated without the USSR, which destroyed three-quarters of the Nazi army?)))

Alone? Thanks for the compliment))) Not bad for someone who has been single-handedly resisting yet another aggression from the "entire civilized world" for four years, not defending himself, but advancing, albeit slowly.

Generally historically accurate. But this is not 1945 … And the US, UK and France did give some critical aid/support to the USSR to assist in that victory in the East. So again now march on the Reichstag … Actually, again the Russians and their allies are pretty much as far they are going to go …

And Gretchen said AOC knows more about foreign policy than she does.

And unbelievably very poor performance in Munich last week. But … well won't mention any names or party affiliation. It is obviously known what I'm talking about. However, watching the news …

I'm shocked … totally dumfounded, etc. at such incompetence, etc. of those elected to state governments and Congress. Any Europeans that were there or watch this almost comical display of "statesmanship" in the media. After the Euros are done laughing … they should be afraid … very afraid of any of those poor excuses for leaders. They should pray to the gods these "imposters", socialists, globalists, etc., etc. individuals ever get close to the WH. As many in their current positions in gov't should find a new line of work …

IMO …

But this is not 1945 … And the US, UK and France did give some critical aid/support to the USSR to assist in that victory in the East.

SOME? How about MASSIVE aid! In addition to strategic bombing campaigns with high aircrew losses to blast Nazi industry and transportation, the US Lend Lease kept the Red Army moving. Through Lend-Lease, the U.S. delivered to the USSR:

400,000+ trucks

14,000 aircraft

13,000 tanks

1,900 locomotives

11,000+ railcars

Millions of tons of food

Massive quantities of aluminum, copper, explosives, radios, boots, fuel additives

The drive on the Reichstag was kept moving on AMERICAN built Studebakers and General Motors trucks… using AMERICAN radios… using AMERICAN trains and rail cars and track… often using AMERICAN food and fuel.

So did the Soviets do all the bleeding on the Eastern Front engaging the bulk of the German Army? Yes. But not without American help, the "three front war" (remember the US and UK/Commonwealth actions in Italy kept multiple experienced German divisions tied down), and strategic bombing.

You don't bully your allies. It tends to make them question why they're your allies. Especially when you try to force them to increase defense spending.

Asking nicely didn't work. So this pressure has shown who is an ally, and who is not. We see a division with Europe -- the European Union bureaucracy has clearly just proclaimed itself in charge of Europe and it is hostile to the US. Most NATO level leaders and especially leaders in Eastern Europe and Italy are NOT hostile to the US.

You have a far right authoritarian dictator in office. That seems to be what America wants, good luck to yer.

That's pretty shallow analysis. If Trump were actually a dictator, the anti-ICE movement and organized opposition wouldn't be operating openly — they'd be shut down. Instead, protests continue, media criticism is constant, and political opposition is active. Calling the U.S. a dictatorship ignores basic facts: we still have competitive elections, a hostile press, independent courts that block executive actions, and opposition parties asserting themselves in Congress. Trump operating within the constitutional framework — even aggressively — is not the same thing as dismantling it. Disliking a president does not make him a dictator.

If we're concerned about authoritarian drift, look globally — emergency powers in Canada, speech policing in the UK, legislative bypass in France, technocratic centralization in the EU, leftist Establishment courts prosecuting opposition leaders and parties and even overturning elections. That's why JD Vance gave his speech at the Munich Security Conference last year warning about this:

YouTube link

Authoritarianism isn't "the other party won." It's when institutions stop constraining power. That hasn't happened in the U.S…. but it is happening in Europe with alarming regularity.

And remember, what are all those squishy protesters on the streets of Minneapolis and elsewhere protecting?…. Criminals. Not innocent US citizens. Just non citizens who broke US laws and in many cases, very, very serious laws…. Many times.

As I always say: Never bring facts to a feelings fight. 🙄

Case in point: 😵‍💫

Subject: Gunther Eagleman™ on X: "Liberal women are crazy. t.co/FOjAgZCABy / X


link

SOME? How about MASSIVE aid! In addition to strategic bombing campaigns with high aircrew losses to blast Nazi industry and transportation, the US Lend Lease kept the Red Army moving. Through Lend-Lease, the U.S. delivered to the USSR:

400,000+ trucks

14,000 aircraft

13,000 tanks

1,900 locomotives

11,000+ railcars

Millions of tons of food

Massive quantities of aluminum, copper, explosives, radios, boots, fuel additives

The drive on the Reichstag was kept moving on AMERICAN built Studebakers and General Motors trucks… using AMERICAN radios… using AMERICAN trains and rail cars and track… often using AMERICAN food and fuel.

So did the Soviets do all the bleeding on the Eastern Front engaging the bulk of the German Army? Yes. But not without American help, the "three front war" (remember the US and UK/Commonwealth actions in Italy kept multiple experienced German divisions tied down), and strategic bombing.

yes but…death toll reaching 26 millions of which 11,3 to 14,6 military…

the cumulative military losses of United States United Kingdom France between 1939 and 1945 didn't reach the million, 879 842

demographic impact by republics they lost one quarter of people in Byelorussia
1 – Byelorussia (25,3%)
2 – Ukraine (16,3%)
3 – Latvia (13,7%)
4 – Armenia (13,6%)
5 – Lithuania (12,7%) and Russia (12,7%)

in a country like Ukraine this means from the 41.7 million of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic before the war Official figures report at least 8 millions of deaths, including 5.5 to 6 million of civilians, and more than 2.5 million military personnel killed on the front…
it is like if the USA had lost around 8 millions of military personnel not to mention the civilian losses

Did you read where I wrote, "So did the Soviets do all the bleeding on the Eastern Front engaging the bulk of the German Army? Yes."

So I do not dismiss their sacrifice -- HOWEVER, you cannot dismiss that without US aid the USSR would have NOT been able to go on the offensive as it did in 1943, no Operation Bagration, just a steady grinding march into Germany, no Reichstag flag raising. The war would still probably end in German defeat but the Western Allies would probably reach Berlin first and the map of post-War Europe would be different.

The Western Allies would have likely liberated Prague before the Soviets and all of Austria, and the "Iron Curtain" pushed hundreds of miles east. So NATO would have included MORE of Germany plus Austria and most of Czechoslovakia.

SBminisguy, this isn't the right topic to discuss the role of Lend-Lease on the Eastern Front. Especially since we've done that before.
In Russia, people remember the Allies' aid and are grateful for it. I can convey the personal gratitude of my father, who, even though he was five years old, still remembers powdered eggs and Spam in cans from the US.
It's a shame that the Allies are now trying to devalue the contribution of the peoples of the USSR to the overall victory over Nazism…
But now some figures to supplement those you listed:

Aid to the USSR was three times less, in monetary terms, than aid to Britain. Compare Britain's contribution to the USSR's contribution to the destruction of Nazism (with all due respect to Britain's allies). Do you see the difference?

The combined amount of American, British, and Canadian aid amounted to 9.45% of the USSR's total defense budget expenditures from 1941 to 1945. Lend-Lease supplies to the USSR accounted for 3.2% of the US defense budget from 1941 to 1945, and 1.1% of GDP.
Is that a lot? Yes. Is it important? Yes. Was it decisive? No.

More than half of all Lend-Lease aid arrived in 1944-45. This dramatically increased the Red Army's mobility during the final stages of the war. But during the most difficult period for the USSR, 1941-43 (when Soviet industry reduced its production due to an unprecedented evacuation to a new location and the army experienced severe supply problems), the aid was relatively small, although quite significant.

So: Lend-Lease was very important, but it was not decisive.

But how would the course of the world war have changed if the USSR had fallen in 1941? What if Japan and Germany had gained direct overland rail communication and the USSR's resources?

Would the Allies have landed in Europe at all if the largest (and most combat-ready) part of the German army had not been on the Eastern Front?

Lilian, the Soviet Union's combat losses in World War II were approximately 11-12 million. Of these, two to four million were prisoners of war killed by the Nazis.
All other victims were civilians. And not just collateral damage—they were deliberate exterminations. The liberation of territory from unwanted populations. Read about the "Backe Plan" or the "Hunger Plan." The Nazis considered most of the peoples of the USSR to be Untermenschen, subject to complete extermination, and they actively pursued this goal.

No one is trying to downplay Soviet sacrifice. The USSR took the heaviest losses and destroyed most of the German Army. That's a fact.

But the argument isn't about courage — it's about how industrial war works.

Yes, Britain got more total Lend-Lease dollars. That's true. But raw dollar totals miss the point. The aid to the USSR was heavily focused on bottlenecks: trucks, locomotives, rail cars, aluminum, fuel additives, food and communications.

By 1944, a huge part of Red Army mobility depended on American trucks. Most modern locomotives in Soviet service were American-built. That doesn't show up as a giant percentage of the Soviet budget, but logistics wins mechanized wars. Over 4,000 Sherman tanks bulked up the 1st, 3rd, and 9th Guards Mechanized Corps. TEN THOUSAND fighter planes and thousands of other planes, including 1,000 C-47s comprised 18% of the Red Army Airforce. ALL of the 1944-1945 airborne operations were conducted using C-47s.

It's also true that most Lend-Lease arrived in 1944–45. That matters — because that's when the Red Army went from grinding forward to moving fast across Eastern Europe. Without that boost in mobility, the Soviets likely still win, but more slowly, with more losses, and possibly with different borders at the end.

The USSR probably survives 1941–42 even without Lend-Lease. Moscow and Stalingrad were held largely with Soviet resources. But turning survival into rapid victory is where Allied industry mattered.

Recognizing that doesn't diminish Soviet sacrifice. It just recognizes that Germany was defeated by a coalition. The Red Army broke the Wehrmacht's back. The Western Allies broke its air power, oil, and opened a second front. The US supplied everybody AND fought a multifront war. All of those things were true at the same time.

You don't bully your allies. It tends to make them question why they're your allies. Especially when you try to force them to increase defense spending.

Bullying ? Sounds like to me and others. The POTUS wanted them to pay their NATO dues. Even at IIRC, even IIRC at 2% many were not even doing that. The POTUS wants the other NATO members to pull their own weight. With may of NATO nations downsizing their militaries as a modern high tech military is very expensive.

Of course "bullying" … sound like some may have some thin skin. Even as an Officer, I got chewed out if it was perceived I screwed up, was not pulling weight, etc. It was rare regardless like any team there has to be some good, effective, hard training. And sometimes it's not like Sunday school church camp. It's the military …

The POTUS also pushed NATO to go to 5% to build up their weak declining numbers. As again, if the hits the fan they have to be ready. As in modern war things move very fast. As we saw in WWI and WWII playing catch up cost men and material. And the war takes longer, cost more in both blood and treasure.

As we see many in NATO are spending more to get their militaries more combat ready, more high equipment, etc.

Questioning why they are allies of the US, well … that could work both ways. I think what the POTUS was basically saying, "Get your together, quit dragging .

If some don't like that … well … the USA was playing softball too long. And frankly if the US left NATO, I'm pretty sure NATO would be much less effective. And I'm not the only one.

You have a far right authoritarian dictator in office. That seems to be what America wants,

Some may feel that way but many don't … The POTUS took many measures to protect the US population. It required a firm hand as the previous POTUS, Admin, etc. didn't have the right stuff to do what was needed. In fact the last POTUS, etc. purposefully did things that caused a lot of problems in the US. And Trump and his admin have a lot of things that clean up, after the Biden Admin. It is going to take time. As quite a mess was made by those who shouldn't have been anywhere near the WH, DC, etc.

Now you and others may not get it. But many of you are on the other side of the pond. We're here … we are at ground 0. It is not a video game. You across the pond are watching from a far. And looking thru a straw … Not getting actual news, but agenda driven narratives that border on propaganda. Or just plain lies …

Europe is starting to remember though that you don't appease far right authoritarian dictators, especially when they start saying things like "we have no other territorial claims in Europe other than <s>Greenland</s> the Sudetenland. "

This is not 1939 … many things have changed since then. Greenland is key strategic terrain. The Chicoms and Russians can't get even a little foothold in that region. Could the POTUS have handled it differently? Yeah probably, but he does not email me for advice. And I have said this so many time before. We don't know what is going on behind closed doors. Among the leadership of NATO, etc., etc.

And here is a news flash for you. The US does not want any territory in Europe. The US wants to do business with Europe after the Marshel Plan rebuild it. We would say you are talking out your . Or as I have said before you really don't know what you're talking about. But don't let me stop you …

TACOs when someone calls him out.

That is more misinformation. The POTUS does things on the US time-table … not anyone else's. He has done more positive actions, initiatives, etc. to fix the mess that the last POTUS made … And it has only been a year in the WH. That whole TACO cramp is the other faction/party in the US governmental structure. Whose agenda is not what most people here want. Regardless of what many in the media say. Of course you and many others in Europe are victims of that type of propaganda. But again you are looking from very, very far away.

Carney did, big time, and he went into a bit of a tailspin, claiming on Truth (ha) Social (dangerous word that, it's almost 'socialist') that China would ban ice hockey as part of their deal with Canada. That didn't make the prez look tough, it made him look a fool to the whole world.

Wow you really must be watching a different movie than many here. Let me say again … you don't know about what really is going on here.

SBm +1

OVI +1

SOME? How about MASSIVE aid! In addition to strategic bombing campaigns with high aircrew losses to blast Nazi industry and transportation, the US Lend Lease kept the Red Army moving.

Of course I know all that. But I didn't want to go into all that. As we see it turned into a ing contest. Which I was trying to avoid.

However I'm glad you listed all the support, etc. that the US provided. As it may be enlightening to some here. Especially some from over there.

Your faith in truth, justice and the American Way is touching if not confused.

No … I'm pretty sure you are the one that is confused. Usually about most things that happen over here.

the cumulative military losses of United States United Kingdom France between 1939 and 1945 didn't reach the million, 879 842

So what is your point. It is not a contest to list who took more losses in WWII.

FWIW the USA supplied the UK, France, Canada, the Poles, etc. with equipment, etc., too. I'd say that is decisive …

Is that a lot? Yes. Is it important? Yes. Was it decisive? No.

Well without the US, UK, etc. aid and support, it would have taken the USSR more time to get to, e.g. Berlin. Plus take more losses …

But yeah … not decisive …

Thank you for your objective perspective.
A few additions:
The USSR received what it asked for. Receiving many items from its allies allowed the USSR to free up production capacity for other products. For example, Soviet locomotive factories were repurposed for tank production because the necessary locomotives could be obtained from the United States. The conclusion is that the USSR would have had the necessary locomotives, but the number of tanks produced would have significantly decreased…
Gasoline supplies to the USSR were needed to fuel American and British equipment, since the USSR did not produce the necessary grades of fuel.
Soviet aviation was rather weak, as aluminum production had declined due to the loss of some deposits and electricity generation capacity due to the German occupation of the most developed industrial regions. Most Russian fighter aircraft were made of wood, and the payload capacity of bombers was low. When you look at the number of Russian bombers in any given battle, keep in mind that about half of those bombers were night bombers Po-2s… Even at Kursk in 1943.
Most of the oil fields in Siberia and the Far East were not discovered and were not developed. Soviet oil was limited to the Caucasus, and Soviet industry was limited to the European part of the country (there was very little industry east of Moscow). Equipment from factories in the European part of the country was transported to the east and installed and put into operation in the winter, right in the fields, and the walls of the workshops were built around the machines already in operation and producing products.
The loss of chemical plants under the occupation became a huge problem for the USSR. The production of explosives and gunpowder in the USSR fell catastrophically, and supplies from the US were critical. In my opinion, this is where Lend-Lease was crucial – here, in 1942, the USSR had a real chance of defeat, since for every shell fired by the Red Army, five German shells would land in response… It was hell on earth.
Therefore, no matter what the relationship between our countries is like now, we will never forget your assistance.

SB, Legion and Caprum2 +1 on US/Soviet WW2
It took all sides.

If one did not hear M. Rubio's Munich speech, you should listen to it, especially the administrations opponents. I am furnishing the transcript. He received a standing ovation from Europeans there.

"SECRETARY RUBIO: Thank you very much. We gather here today as members of a historic alliance, an alliance that saved and changed the world. When this conference began in 1963, it was in a nation – actually, it was on a continent – that was divided against itself. The line between communism and freedom ran through the heart of Germany. The first barbed fences of the Berlin Wall had gone up just two years prior.

And just months before that first conference, before our predecessors first met here, here in Munich, the Cuban Missile Crisis had brought the world to the brink of nuclear destruction. Even as World War II still burned fresh in the memory of Americans and Europeans alike, we found ourselves staring down the barrel of a new global catastrophe – one with the potential for a new kind of destruction, more apocalyptic and final than anything before in the history of mankind.

At the time of that first gathering, Soviet communism was on the march. Thousands of years of Western civilization hung in the balance. At that time, victory was far from certain. But we were driven by a common purpose. We were unified not just by what we were fighting against; we were unified by what we were fighting for. And together, Europe and America prevailed and a continent was rebuilt. Our people prospered. In time, the East and West blocs were reunited. A civilization was once again made whole.

That infamous wall that had cleaved this nation into two came down, and with it an evil empire, and the East and West became one again. But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion: that we had entered, quote, "the end of history;" that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.

This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history. And it has cost us dearly. In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.

We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves. This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests. To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.

And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people. We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.

Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization's past. And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.

For the United States and Europe, we belong together. America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before. The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.

We are part of one civilization – Western civilization. We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir.

And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel. This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe. The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply. We care deeply about your future and ours. And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily. We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally. We want Europe to be strong. We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history's constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.

National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions. They are. But they are not the fundamental one. The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions. Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation. Armies fight for a way of life. And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny.

It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born. It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution. It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels. They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future. But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future.

Deindustrialization was not inevitable. It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence. And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade. It was foolish. It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis.

Mass migration is not, was not, isn't some fringe concern of little consequence. It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West. Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people. But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past. It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century. Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South. Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century.

But we must also gain control of our national borders. Controlling who and how many people enter our countries, this is not an expression of xenophobia. It is not hate. It is a fundamental act of national sovereignty. And the failure to do so is not just an abdication of one of our most basic duties owed to our people. It is an urgent threat to the fabric of our societies and the survival of our civilization itself.

And finally, we can no longer place the so-called global order above the vital interests of our people and our nations. We do not need to abandon the system of international cooperation we authored, and we don't need to dismantle the global institutions of the old order that together we built. But these must be reformed. These must be rebuilt.

For example, the United Nations still has tremendous potential to be a tool for good in the world. But we cannot ignore that today, on the most pressing matters before us, it has no answers and has played virtually no role. It could not solve the war in Gaza. Instead, it was American leadership that freed captives from barbarians and brought about a fragile truce. It had not solved the war in Ukraine. It took American leadership and partnership with many of the countries here today just to bring the two sides to the table in search of a still-elusive peace.

It was powerless to constrain the nuclear program of radical Shia clerics in Tehran. That required 14 bombs dropped with precision from American B-2 bombers. And it was unable to address the threat to our security from a narcoterrorist dictator in Venezuela. Instead, it took American Special Forces to bring this fugitive to justice.

In a perfect world, all of these problems and more would be solved by diplomats and strongly worded resolutions. But we do not live in a perfect world, and we cannot continue to allow those who blatantly and openly threaten our citizens and endanger our global stability to shield themselves behind abstractions of international law which they themselves routinely violate.

This is the path that President Trump and the United States has embarked upon. It is the path we ask you here in Europe to join us on. It is a path we have walked together before and hope to walk together again. For five centuries, before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding – its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe.

But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, it was contracting. Europe was in ruins. Half of it lived behind an Iron Curtain and the rest looked like it would soon follow. The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world and drape the red hammer and sickle across vast swaths of the map in the years to come.

Against that backdrop, then, as now, many came to believe that the West's age of dominance had come to an end and that our future was destined to be a faint and feeble echo of our past. But together, our predecessors recognized that decline was a choice, and it was a choice they refused to make. This is what we did together once before, and this is what President Trump and the United States want to do again now, together with you.

And this is why we do not want our allies to be weak, because that makes us weaker. We want allies who can defend themselves so that no adversary will ever be tempted to test our collective strength. This is why we do not want our allies to be shackled by guilt and shame. We want allies who are proud of their culture and of their heritage, who understand that we are heirs to the same great and noble civilization, and who, together with us, are willing and able to defend it.

And this is why we do not want allies to rationalize the broken status quo rather than reckon with what is necessary to fix it, for we in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West's managed decline. We do not seek to separate, but to revitalize an old friendship and renew the greatest civilization in human history. What we want is a reinvigorated alliance that recognizes that what has ailed our societies is not just a set of bad policies but a malaise of hopelessness and complacency. An alliance – the alliance that we want is one that is not paralyzed into inaction by fear – fear of climate change, fear of war, fear of technology. Instead, we want an alliance that boldly races into the future. And the only fear we have is the fear of the shame of not leaving our nations prouder, stronger, and wealthier for our children.

An alliance ready to defend our people, to safeguard our interests, and to preserve the freedom of action that allows us to shape our own destiny – not one that exists to operate a global welfare state and atone for the purported sins of past generations. An alliance that does not allow its power to be outsourced, constrained, or subordinated to systems beyond its control; one that does not depend on others for the critical necessities of its national life; and one that does not maintain the polite pretense that our way of life is just one among many and that asks for permission before it acts. And above all, an alliance based on the recognition that we, the West, have inherited together – what we have inherited together is something that is unique and distinctive and irreplaceable, because this, after all, is the very foundation of the transatlantic bond.

Acting together in this way, we will not just help recover a sane foreign policy. It will restore to us a clearer sense of ourselves. It will restore a place in the world, and in so doing, it will rebuke and deter the forces of civilizational erasure that today menace both America and Europe alike.

So in a time of headlines heralding the end of the transatlantic era, let it be known and clear to all that this is neither our goal nor our wish – because for us Americans, our home may be in the Western Hemisphere, but we will always be a child of Europe. (Applause.)

Our story began with an Italian explorer whose adventure into the great unknown to discover a new world brought Christianity to the Americas – and became the legend that defined the imagination of a our pioneer nation.

Our first colonies were built by English settlers, to whom we owe not just the language we speak but the whole of our political and legal system. Our frontiers were shaped by Scots-Irish – that proud, hearty clan from the hills of Ulster that gave us Davy Crockett and Mark Twain and Teddy Roosevelt and Neil Armstrong.

Our great midwestern heartland was built by German farmers and craftsmen who transformed empty plains into a global agricultural powerhouse – and by the way, dramatically upgraded the quality of American beer. (Laughter.)

Our expansion into the interior followed the footsteps of French fur traders and explorers whose names, by the way, still adorn the street signs and towns' names all across the Mississippi Valley. Our horses, our ranches, our rodeos – the entire romance of the cowboy archetype that became synonymous with the American West – these were born in Spain. And our largest and most iconic city was named New Amsterdam before it was named New York.

And do you know that in the year that my country was founded, Lorenzo and Catalina Geroldi lived in Casale Monferrato in the Kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia. And Jose and Manuela Reina lived in Sevilla, Spain. I don't know what, if anything, they knew about the 13 colonies which had gained their independence from the British empire, but here's what I am certain of: They could have never imagined that 250 years later, one of their direct descendants would be back here today on this continent as the chief diplomat of that infant nation. And yet here I am, reminded by my own story that both our histories and our fates will always be linked.

Together we rebuilt a shattered continent in the wake of two devastating world wars. When we found ourselves divided once again by the Iron Curtain, the free West linked arms with the courageous dissidents struggling against tyranny in the East to defeat Soviet communism. We have fought against each other, then reconciled, then fought, then reconciled again. And we have bled and died side by side on battlefields from Kapyong to Kandahar.

And I am here today to leave it clear that America is charting the path for a new century of prosperity, and that once again we want to do it together with you, our cherished allies and our oldest friends. (Applause.)

We want to do it together with you, with a Europe that is proud of its heritage and of its history; with a Europe that has the spirit of creation of liberty that sent ships out into uncharted seas and birthed our civilization; with a Europe that has the means to defend itself and the will to survive. We should be proud of what we achieved together in the last century, but now we must confront and embrace the opportunities of a new one – because yesterday is over, the future is inevitable, and our destiny together awaits. Thank you. (Applause.)"

we will never forget your assistance.

Nor will we … those of us who know or study anything about history. Most Americans are oblivious of history. And many schools today don't teach real or accurate history. But more about CRT/1619 Project, woke progressivism, anti-Americanism, etc., etc.

The war against Nazis and Imperial Japan was horrific for all involved. As we so often say, if you don't study history … you are bound to repeat it. It seems many of our elected and appointed officials fall into that group. And it is not just in the USA.

OVI +1

Yes, Rubio's speech says it all … Glad you posted this. Some here who throw stones at US leadership. Particularly those from across the pond, you know who you are. Should read this and if need be, reread it. Until it sinks in …

Also today, IIRC it was US Ambassador Whitaker. Made it clear the US does not want to leave NATO nor disengage from Europe. However, with the supposed "Peace Dividend" with was to result at the end of the Cold War. Even the US did some downsizing of its Armed Forces. As did much of Europe who downsized their militaries to a point of being almost being a shadow of itself. Which appeared as though, as before, they were hoping, depending, etc. for the USA to come into e.g. WWIII. As happened in WWI and WWII.

We see and many of us believed this to be the case. That this downsizing would have a negative effect overall. As we never should have totally trusted the former USSR. Old habits and beliefs are hard to break. Plus it didn't take long as we saw. With the GWoT rising to fill the void. Which we are still involved in today.

However, with the Russian's invading Ukraine. It woke up NATO. It forced NATO to come to the reality that the reason in came about was the Russian threat to the West. It was still there. But like WWI that resulted into WWII, it only took a little time out.

Interestingly many NATO nations didn't drop the ball. They over time they rebuilt their armed forces to a level of being more combat ready. E.g. Germany, Poland and the Baltic States. Some could say the "traditional" enemies of Russia.

Plus two more nations that are neighbors of Russia, Sweden and Finland. Joined NATO in direct response to Russian Imperialism. With the invasion of Ukraine. Note Finland and Russia have had conflicts in the past, e.g. before and during WWII.

The US wants a strong capable NATO. Able to work together effectively if, e.g. WWIII or another mayor war broke out. Requiring a combat ready, effective, coordinated alliance. That all in that coalition would pull their own weight. Be effective and not be a "weak link" in the change.

Now some as we said here and even at Munich recently. Some didn't like they were told to get their 💩 wired tight. The US needs strong allies. Not draggers.

You don't bully your allies. It tends to make them question why they're your allies. Especially when you try to force them to increase defense spending.

As was posted here, it is clear they don't get it. The US may have been questioning why we are allies with those who are not pulling their weight. As I had said this before …

Bullying ? Suck it up, embrace the suck … this is a primarily a military alliance. This is not the EU. Show you are good allies and get combat ready … Don't be a weak link. Like in many military schools, etc. if you ain't good enough you don't get qualified.

If you can't make it … you wash out. You don't get qualified. Maybe some of the USA's allies should take a look in the mirror. And if you are not in NATO, you can and moan all you like. But you're opinion really does not count. You have no dogs of war in this fight …

Goibinu, was not Fox. Nor the half truths and no truths of many MSM sources. Since you don't read or listen to sources, including Fox, which do not reinforce your world views, how would you know? 🤔

They say "you are what you eat", or drink.

You are what you read and don't read, in your case. But I expect no less.

Oh! That was an exact transcript. Also I watched it and saw the ovation. 🙂

Probably not on television at the local I take it? "The View" maybe on instead? You really should read it.

Example: So many rely on "Apple News"

Subject: Wall Street Apes on X: "WOAH 🚨 Investigator says she's found the reason so many people believe the Left's narratives 140 million people use Apple News every month, they researched 600 featured articles on Apple News, ALL OF THEM WERE LEFT LEANING 96 CONSECUTIVE DAYS with no conservative stories "So t.co/vVYqdsP4lM / X


link

"We deserve better, because if the Russia does push further west, we'll be the poor bastards doing the dying first." 🤔

Like Ireland in WW2?

"Neutrality Strategy: Ireland maintained a neutral stance to assert independence and avoid the destruction experienced by other nations. This was influenced by the recent Irish War of Independence and a desire to stay out of British conflicts."

Well maybe you can sit in the Pub and share weather forecasts with the others fighting. 😏

Legion, Legion, Legion, you keep accusing me, and other Europeans, of being ignorant arses. You should be aware that optic is a two way street. You, in particular, are not as well informed about Europe as you think you are. You have no clue about how Trump is viewed here by many with a visceral level of hatred. Others see him as a buffoon, more still see him as both.

Goibinu, Goibinu, Goibinu… it's clear that many Europeans strongly dislike Trump. But optics really are a two-way street.

From this side of the Atlantic, there's growing frustration with European leadership — not necessarily with Europeans themselves, but definitely with policies and priorities. Many Americans see Europe criticizing the U.S. while relying heavily on U.S. defense guarantees, underinvesting in its own military capabilities for years, buying Russian energy (supposedly Europe's top adversary), expanding trade with China (the US' top strategic adversary), and then expecting Washington to "solve" security crises like Ukraine. We see European leaders fulminating about the US correcting the structural trade system between us and marvel at the gall they have for being angry they can no longer take advantage of us anymore. We see they over the top furious reponse, war talk and rush to send token troops to Greenland over Trump's hyperbole… while European boots stay FAR away from Ukrainian ground.

You may view Trump harshly. Many Americans view parts of Europe just as harshly right now. Neither side has a monopoly on moral clarity — or blind spots.

Stop to speak in the name of "Europe" and "Europeans" this country doesn't exist, bis repetita, no more than goblins, elves, unicorns it is again a proof of US ignorance about such topic
even this Rubio illustrates that very well, after his touristic speech full of clichés, the guy goes to Hungary to support the worst pro-putinian regime in this side of Atlantic instead of support the most pro-NATOamericanized members such as Great Britain Germany…

LOL! Saying "Europe isn't a country" isn't some killer point — it's justcope. Nobody thinks Europe is a single nation-state. But the EU is very real. It has common trade policy, regulatory power, coordinated sanctions, and collective political weight that directly impacts the U.S -- and aspirations to be in charge of a continent-wide superpower jammed together with Swedes and Spaniards, Greeks and Germans, and Poles and Portuguese all part of some federal states of Europe…led by the same unelected leaders who presume speak for you now from Brussels, I guess??

So when people say "Europe" in this context, it's commonly understood that they're talking about that bloc — not unicorns.

And the whole "Americans don't understand geography" jab just sidesteps the actual debate. The U.S. helped build the entire post-WWII order and led the West through the Cold War. NATO and the broader transatlantic system didn't just materialize out of thin air. You can criticize U.S. policy all you want, but pretending America is clueless about European structures and the world doesn't hold up.

At this point, the "American ignorance" line feels less like a serious argument and more like a coping mechanism — a way to avoid talking about defense spending, trade imbalances, energy choices, and strategic priorities. If you want to argue those, fine. But at least argue the real issues.

Europe is not a "bloc", no more than the NATO, and their armies are not States National Guards, nor the Komisar Von Der Leyen an authority with something to say about sovereign national military policy of each member
"we", and I am not, contrary to you and yours compatriots, able to speak on behalf of "America" or "Europe", we don't care at all of your US military protection and your US nuclear shield we don't wish it, we don't want it, we don't need it, keep it for you or yours beloved partners who cherish NATO converted into new Western Warsaw Pact with a predator and vassals, Trump is not my "father" and is not an ally at all
in this forum there are guys who came to ask me why we asked the US Intervention in Ukraine (?) or to spend more money for my defence instead of being protected by the US (!) it is fourth dimension to read that, so don't try to tell me they're ables of finely distinguishing between Western Bantustan and Oriental Papua when you read that, we are not responsible for what do or think 26 others sovereign govts! I was not summoned to elect Merz or Orban, I dont know these guys, I am not even speaking their languages, they come from another galaxy for me, if you understand this, then you can say that you understand something about "Europe" and "European". There are no Europeans here, at least not me, there are British Irish Germans Italians etc…that's all