Nato chief says Donald Trump comments 'undermine all of our security'
Nato chief says Donald Trump comments 'undermine all of our security'
The presidential hopeful suggests the US will not protect allies failing to meet defence spending targets.
As a European, I wish a hearty "fuck you" to Trump, and anyone dumb enough to support him.
As an American, same
Trump is obviously an agent of Putin, he is not even hiding it any more. Putin probably has videos of Trump abusing minors on Epstein island or something similarly compromising.
No it’s worse than this. If it were based upon compromising info, Trump would be an UNWILLING participant. He is so invested in the Russian oligarchy money laundering for decades that he is a WILLING participant. He BELIEVES they are on the same team.
These two aren't even mutually exclusive. An idiot like Trump, upon getting blackmailed, could probably convince himself that the other guy would never release his secrets because they're such good friends.
And it's entirely possible Russia has promised to be his plan B if his plans fail.
Yes, the actual P-(edo) tapes
And plenty of financial money laundering kompromat too
Trump is a threat. Neutralize the threat.
Unfortunately, he is a product of the American way, remove him from the equation and some other narcissistic, imbecile will eventually walk the same walk.
Unfortunately, trump is just a symptom of a much bigger problem.
Sounds like a good way to winnow the gene pool a bit.
Yeah but they probably won't get themselves organized in time for the upcoming election. The CIA supposedly have a heart attack gun, and I'm just saying no one would be that surprised if that's the way he went.
GOP in 2016 We need Trump because the rest of the world is laughing at us.
GOP in 2024 Who cares what the rest of the world thinks about us?
Tbh I think the world was already laughing in 2016. Even back then Trump was an absolutely ridiculous candidate. The real joke, though, is that even after his disastrous tenure as president and despite all of his criminal dealings, Trump is running again (and will probably even win the election). That would be funny if it were just about what this fact says about the American electorate. But unfortunately, the USA is still the strongest military power in the world. So it's not too funny for the rest of the world to have to worry about how to deal with an orange psychopath with a gigantic arsenal of weapons and enormous economic power. I therefore assume that at least the democratic rest of the world has stopped laughing by now.
“You gotta lay your bills” says the guy who hasn’t paid his bills in decades.
Why hasn’t Trump been labeled a terrorist and been sanctioned?
I guess its because roughly 40% of americans would still vote for him
That's nice of him to say. What's he going to do about it? So sick of all these spineless, yellow-bellied wimps saying how bad Trump is, and doing precisely fuck all. GROW A FUCKING BACKBONE, ALREADY, YOU COWARDS!
That's nice of you to say. What do you suggest he does about it? I'm so sick of these spineless, yellow-bellied Internet commenters saying that something should be done about it and suggesting precisely fuck all. OFFER A SOLUTION, ALREADY, YOU COWARDS!
Edit: Mocking tone aside, I'm serious, what can Jens realistically do? Kick the USA out of NATO? That's Trump's goal anyways. The issues with Trump are an internal American issue that can't be fixed by Norwegian politicians unfortunately.
Also I just don't see an American getting in trouble over what can be considered a freedom of speech issue. It could also set a dangerous precedent that fascists could use to prosecute their political opponents.
What do you expect NATO to do? A drone strike??
Really? Trump mentioning that most nato members do not meet the required defense spending undermines nato.
Yeah I'm sure that was what undermined nato and not the fact that America is the only threatening part of nato and the rest of the members haven't been contributing shit. I don't like trump but it's clear that nato needs a kick up the ass.
You know how this isn’t 2015 right? People are no longer fooled by you guys creating accounts to concern troll.
It's gotten real damn bad in the last week
lol. Yeah I’m surprised he didn’t lead with “I used to be a Democrat…”
"Everyone who pushes back is troll". Ok since this is such obvious trolling you should be able to give a good reason as to why comments from a presidential candidate undermines a 31 country military alliance more than 27 countries in (2017) and 21 countries in (2023) not meeting the minimum contribution requirements.
Please keep in mind that the nato member in this article who made the comments about trump does believe that the us will remain a committed nato ally regardless of election outcome.
That's not what he said though
If you have to misrepresent what was said in order to feel ok about it, maybe you shouldn't feel ok about it.
Found the person living in an alternate reality.
Wake me up if you actually wanted to have a good faith discussion otherwise take your ignorance of geopolitics elsewhere.
While I highly doubt you have anything interesting or realistic to say on this issue my comments are in good faith if you want to discuss where we disagree. I've replied to a few other comments if you want to read over them for more explanation of my reasoning.
No, it's the other part, with the meaning, he would throw them to russia. Leaving that part out would have been better.
You are taking the the quote out of context. Yes he said exactly what was in the quote but the seriousness portrayed by this article was not there.
Do you honestly think the US and nato would let Russia invade a nato country? Because even the head of Nato doesn't think that would happen and the article mentions that. The only person saying that would happen is Biden and he is only saying it because it's great for his election run.
The article mentions the clear "hardball" approach that trump is taking to try and force nato members to pull their weight. Everyone in this comment section seems to be ignoring that and ignoring the comments from the head of Nato and taking trumps words as a binding contract. It's already clear from trumps existence that he says unhinged shit, I don't think we have any disagreements there. The disagreement I have with this article is the hypocrisy of saying Nato is undermined by trumps comments when majority of the members are freeloading with no intentions of meeting the requirements. The majority of nato members being useless has become such an issue that presidential candidates are running on the issue.
Really? Trump mentioning that most nato members do not meet the required defense spending undermines nato.
As a member of a NATO military that doesn't meet the targets for spending, I agree this doesn't undermine NATO, it's just the truth that we need to start pulling more weight monetarily.
BUT that's not the point and you missed key details about what he said that absolutely DOES undermine NATO, such as:
"I said: 'You didn't pay? You're delinquent?'... 'No I would not protect you, in fact I would encourage them to do whatever they want. You gotta pay.'"
So you're showing that you either didn't read the article, didn't understand the article or are being willfully ignorant of the article.
As a member of a NATO military that doesn’t meet the targets for spending, I agree this doesn’t undermine NATO, it’s just the truth that we need to start pulling more weight monetarily.
You dont think Nato members not ever meeting spending targets undermines NATO? Europe would be able to protect themselves if they met the targets and the US would be a bonus to NATO not a requirement.
BUT that’s not the point and you missed key details about what he said that absolutely DOES undermine NATO, such as: “I said: ‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’… ‘No I would not protect you, in fact I would encourage them to do whatever they want. You gotta pay.’”
I think that comment does far less damage to NATO than the members who do not meet minimum requirements. The US has been trying to get Nato to contribute to their own security for a long time. Trumps plan to get this done has been to threaten Nato members with removal of US security. This seems to have worked better than other methods tried. Trump is not saying this to encourage russia to attack Nato, trump is saying this to force Nato members to meet their obligations.
I do not understand how you can look a nation asking the US to defend them for free and the US saying no and think that the US is one putting them at risk. They put themself at risk because they choose to spend no money on defense obligations.
Trump is for peace in Ukraine! Democrats are warheads and genocide helpers. Nobody needs.
NATO empowered nazis in western europe. If our politics were not manipulated by the United States I am not sure we'd be allies.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Donald Trump's suggestion the US would not protect Nato allies failing to spend enough on defence "undermines all of our security", the Western military alliance's chief has said.
Addressing crowds during a rally in South Carolina on Saturday, Mr Trump said he had made his comments about Russia during a previous meeting of leaders of Nato countries.
In a statement on Sunday, Mr Stoltenberg emphasised the alliance remains "ready and able" to defend its members and any attack "will be met with a united and forceful response".
Following Mr Stoltenberg's comments, US President Joe Biden said: "Donald Trump's admission that he intends to give Putin a green light for more war and violence, to continue his brutal assault against a free Ukraine, and to expand his aggression to the people of Poland and the Baltic states, [is] appalling and dangerous."
Mr Trump has long been critical of Nato and what he sees as an excessive financial burden on the United States to guarantee the defence of 30 other nations.
However, Republicans in Congress have since the turn of the year blocked all new funding - demanding tough measures to restrict migration into the US on its southern border, and then refusing the amended bill when it was presented earlier this week.
The original article contains 832 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!