Russia! Russia!! Russia!!!

[Speaker to Animals]

The only troops doing any fighting in the South, were the British, Canadians, and Australians, thank god those Australians are in NATO... oh, wait...

This.

The only thing that matters to us is the Anglo world. Add in maybe France. If Japan ever militarizes again, they can join the club. But, right now, the people we depend upon are our cousins in Anglo nations. Those are the closest we have to true allies because they are blood.

Invade Poland and I might think you are a shithead. Invade Australia and you are getting nuked.

[Smitty-48]

The whole thing was run by CENTCOM, ISAF didn't have any infrastructure, NATO was not running the show, NATO was not contributing anything other than plug-ins, CENTCOM was running the show, ISAF was providing troops to CENTCOM, most of the European countries refused to fight, and the British, Canadians, and Australians were left holding the bag by our "stalwart NATO allies".

Fuck NATO, all it does now, is stab us in the back.

[Speaker to Animals]

The whole thing was run by CENTCOM, ISAF didn't have any infrastructure, NATO was not running the show, NATO was not contributing anything other than plug-ins, CENTCOM was running the show, ISAF was providing troops to CENTCOM, most of the European countries refused to fight, and the British, Canadians, and Australians were left holding the bag by our "stalwart NATO allies".

I think it helped set the groundwork for an Anglo alliance to replace NATO, though.

Truth be told, I really wonder if France wouldn't rather align with Russia. Germany is a lost cause. The rest of Europe is a joke.

Most of the world hates Anglos, anyway. We are the peak of civilization.

Every Anglo nation contributes more than most other nations, regardless of the Anglo nation's size. Creating an Anglo alliance would be like cutting all the fat off of NATO, expanding into a global operation, that is far more capable and intimidating. It also would get us out of the continental power business. We are a Sea Power people.

[Smitty-48]

The Canadian Minister of Defence, was literally reduced to begging the Europeans to send troops to the South to fight, they shrugged and told him to go fuck himself, that was the moment that NATO died in Canada.

[Speaker to Animals]

The Canadian Minister of Defence, was literally reduced to begging the Europeans to send troops to the South to fight, they shrugged and told him to go fuck himself, that was the moment that NATO died in Canada.

That's bullshit right there. It's as if they have no honor on the European continent these days.

[Okeefenokee]

Because we never got anything done before NATO, amiright?

No. Not you, Western Europe.

For example if you had let's say in 2011 in Afghanistan 90 000 troops, you had 37 000 NATO troops there also. That's 29%.
That 37 000 is a lot better than just 13 700 troops (the UK & French contingent).

If NATO hadn't been there, we never could have invaded Iraq, being tied down in Afghanistan, and all.

[Smitty-48]

If the Russians invaded the Baltic States, I would reactivate 4 Brigade and send them to Poland, but same deal as CENTAG; only as part of a US Corps, reporting up the chain of command to the American General, NATO is neither here nor there, we'll ride with the Americans, but ISAF; never again.

[Okeefenokee]

ISAF = I suck at fighting.

For those who don't know.

[Smitty-48]

Frankly, if you tried to take NATO to war now, it would fracture anyways, when I say the US should shift to EUCOM and bilateral teaming with coalition of the willing partners of consequence, such as Poland, that's just realpolitik, might as well just plan for how it would actually be, should push come to shove, rather than rely on a notionally unified NATO which does not actually exist.

Vladimir Putin doesn't have to render NATO irrelevant, as that's already the case, and was the case, before he ever showed up on the scene.

In the end, Donald Trump has it right, there's no sense having a NATO, giving 28 countries a de facto veto, when only five of them contribute anything of consequence to the allaince.

[ssu]

Frankly, if you tried to take NATO to war now, it would fracture anyways, when I say the US should shift to EUCOM and bilateral teaming with coalition of the willing partners of consequence, such as Poland, that's just realpolitik, might as well just plan for how it would actually be, should push come to shove, rather than rely on a notionally unified NATO which does not actually exist.

Vladimir Putin doesn't have to render NATO irrelevant, as that's already the case, and was the case, before he ever showed up on the scene.

In the end, Donald Trump has it right, there's no sense having a NATO, giving 28 countries a de facto veto, when only five of them contribute anything of consequence to the allaince.

No need to be fatalistic. It's not such a dire situation.

NATO needs leadership and the only one capable of doing that is the US. If the US doesn't feel a need for it, then the Europeans will scramble to make some kind of WEU arrangement, where the pillars will be UK, France & Germany. And that has a bit of a credibility gap against Putin and his 1st Guards Tank Army. At which point likely Europe chooses appeasement with Russia, and then the relations with the US start to get cold... or simply unimportant.

And for the US to show leadership, it has to come from the US president. No bipartisan Congressional delegation cannot do it or department chiefs.