What is clear, however, is that Trump — who ostensibly spent four years as president of the United States — has little clue about what NATO is or what NATO does. And when he spoke on the subject at a rally in South Carolina over the weekend, what he said was less a cogent discussion of foreign policy than it was gibberish — the kind of outrageous nonsense that flows without interruption from an empty and unreflective mind.

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, recalling an implausible conversation with an unnamed, presumably European head of state. “‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump recounted responding. “‘No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”

The former president’s message was clear: If NATO members do not pay up, then he will leave them to the mercy of a continental aggressor who has already plunged one European country into death, destruction and devastation.

Except NATO isn’t a mafia protection racket. NATO, in case anyone needs to be reminded, is a mutual defense organization, formed by treaty in 1949 as tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union hardened into conflict. “The parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” states Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

Non-paywall link

  • dariusj18@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I am assuming you mean the Iraq war, but that was not a NATO operation, it just happened to have many NATO allies providing support, not all of them.

    • noride@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      To your point, it was called the “Coalition of the willing”. Article 5 was not invoked.

          • saltesc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Kind of, but not really. NATO did operations to ensure US’s immediate security against further terrost attacks. Once the US affirmed it had it’s shit together, NATO pulled out. Any countries that stuck around for the counter-attack wars (like Afghanistan and Iraq) did so under different banners. NATO does not encroach or encourage war, it exists to prevent it and will do what’s necessary up to the point a nation is deemed safe again.

            It circles the injured sheep and fights off the wolf. Once this is done, it doesn’t then hunt down the fleeing wolf. This works very well because other animals aren’t scared of NATO controlling the lands, but the wolves are also scared of trying to attack that herd.

            Similarly, if everything went wrong for the US in Afghanistan, NATO wouldn’t help. If the US retreated and started getting attacked in its homeland, NATO would.