On 4/2/2026 at 10:07 PM, scottiejohn said:

Tell that to Trump as all he has done this term is to alienate his now ex allies!

What he's done is shine a light on all the crap our "friends/allies" had been doing to us. You know, all the stuff everyone knows but don't want to talk about.

Someones mad at us now ? So what, let them be.

The United States can walk away from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The NATO treaty gives any member the right to withdraw having given one years notice.

US domestic law, as I understand it, does not give The President the right to do so unilaterally. He is required to either obtain the consent of both Houses of Congress, or I believe a 65 seat majority decision in The Senate. It is not a decision for the Executive branch alone.

Given the Presidents present somewhat shaky hold on both houses, a hold which is likely to disappear altogether in 6 months time perhaps it is probable that Congress is unlikely to agree to leaving NATO.

Of course it is always possible that Mr Trump, in accordance with his guiding principles of "Government by Sharpie" that he could announce the USA's immediate withdrawal by "Truth Social" (was there ever a more ironic misnomer!) one morning at 2am! That would precipitate the mother of all challenges from Congress, without doubt ending up in The Supreme Court, and probably a really entertaining psychotic reaction from Whisky Pete. It will also break the terms of the NATO treaty, probably resulting in the immediate closure of all European bases, air space and logistical resources to the US military. Aircraft grounded, ports closed. That would entirely hamstring US operations in the Middle East.

Interesting prospects.

1 hour ago, TedG said:

Yeah, you need to go to the USA to save your asses again.

You can't save Stamps TedG. Everytime a risky job comes along where special forces are needed you rel'y on the britt SAS to plan it and help you.

23 minutes ago, Slowhand225 said:

What he's done is shine a light on all the crap our "friends/allies" had been doing to us. You know, all the stuff everyone knows but don't want to talk about.

Someones mad at us now ? So what, let them be.

Enjoy the US isolation from the rest of the world!

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

At least we didn't need to pay anyone to bomb you off the fence like Churchill had the Japanese do at Pearl Harbor.

Yeah, I know that is all nonsense but hey, you started it.

So you think we should stay in NATO?

You think you didnt need us in the Falklands?

29 minutes ago, JAG said:

The United States can walk away from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The NATO treaty gives any member the right to withdraw having given one years notice.

US domestic law, as I understand it, does not give The President the right to do so unilaterally. He is required to either obtain the consent of both Houses of Congress, or I believe a 65 seat majority decision in The Senate. It is not a decision for the Executive branch alone.

Given the Presidents present somewhat shaky hold on both houses, a hold which is likely to disappear altogether in 6 months time perhaps it is probable that Congress is unlikely to agree to leaving NATO.

Of course it is always possible that Mr Trump, in accordance with his guiding principles of "Government by Sharpie" that he could announce the USA's immediate withdrawal by "Truth Social" (was there ever a more ironic misnomer!) one morning at 2am! That would precipitate the mother of all challenges from Congress, without doubt ending up in The Supreme Court, and probably a really entertaining psychotic reaction from Whisky Pete. It will also break the terms of the NATO treaty, probably resulting in the immediate closure of all European bases, air space and logistical resources to the US military. Aircraft grounded, ports closed. That would entirely hamstring US operations in the Middle East.

Interesting prospects.

How are they going to be closed until we close them? You gonna make us? LOL

3 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

Enjoy the US isolation from the rest of the world!

Uh, thats the point.

It won't be complete isolation, even you should know that.

1 minute ago, Slowhand225 said:

Uh, thats the point.

It won't be complete isolation, even you should know that.

Exactly, we will have more for countries that appreciate us like Japan. Hell, if we took the money we waste on Europe and invest it into Africa the world would be a better place...

Plus once we whip the Americas and Greenland into shape, we are rocking

4 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

Who or what has it ever saved voluntarily?

Just remember it was forced into both world wars so don't even start there!

The result is that you're not speaking German or Russian.

4 hours ago, TedG said:

Cry about this the next time the USA saves you.

But your president has already said he won't, even when asked.

Over ..

4 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

We can just become a lame duck member. Done

What are they going to do to us, can't take away our birthday so they can take a hike.

They don't have to do bugger all do they? Your president is doing a grand job of making America a global pariah.

Anyway, have a happy birthday party with your guest list of one. Unless if course his own political skin saving and hubris detains him in Tel Aviv ahead of their elections.

4 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

What he's done is shine a light on all the crap our "friends/allies" had been doing to us. You know, all the stuff everyone knows but don't want to talk about.

Someones mad at us now ? So what, let them be.

All he's done is shine a light on his ugly red arse after being shown he's no George Washington when it comes to warfare.

28 minutes ago, TedG said:

The result is that you're not speaking German or Russian.

Thanks Karoline.

3 hours ago, Yagoda said:

So you think we should stay in NATO?

You think you didnt need us in the Falklands?

Neither the Falklands, nor a modern Attack on Pearl Harbor would be covered by Article 5, because of wording the United States added. America armed Argentina, a country that threw the opposition out of helicopters over the Atlantic. That was a government the Americans thought worthy of their support. The support the UK got didn't come from the Whitehouse, it came from the US political opposition (a young Joe Biden). Haig tried to defend the Argentinians, and tried to pretend the US was neutral in a dispute between a deomcracy and a brutal military dictatorship that invaded British territory. The help that came from the US was begrudging (a few sidewinders). I suspect it wasn't really needed. The help that was useful was the way France sabotaged the Exocets.

The Americans like to pretend that once the shuttle diplomacy had failed that they were firmly on board with the British, and all was well again. But it wasn't. They were still thinking about saving the Argentinian dictators.

As the British advanced on the capital of the Falklands, the Americans were scared the Argentinians would be routed by the British. Reagan called Thatcher pleading with her to call a ceasefire, presumably to allow an orderly withdrawal of the Argentinian military, and saving Argentinan Junta face.

31st May 1982, call between Reagan and Thatcher. Reagan is trying to persuade Thatcher to stop the troops. It starts off cordial enough, but by the end, Reagan is reduced to mumbled words as Thatcher asserts herself in no uncertain terms.

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1981-88v13/d315

As it was, Thatcher's decision to push to Stanley, and reduce the Argentinian military to a bedraggled and defeated mob was probably the best thing to happen to Argentina, as the dictators were gone, and Argentina became a democracy, albeit a fragile one as they negotiated tough economic circumstances. But better than the death squads.

It will be bad for the United States to leave NATO. America needs trade, because its own industry cannot support internal demand. It needs trade, and it needs people. Without either, it whithers. Trade in an unstable world becomes impossible. America engineered the end of Pax Britannica because it wanted Pax Americana. Fine, because British values are broadly the same as American values. But now American no longer wants Pax Americana. It seeming wants to exert power through Dominatio Americana per Metum. Moving to that policy will destroy America, both literally but also metaphorically. Ruling through fear is much more expensive than the alternative.

As the Bee Gees reminded us, "it's only words..."

The members of NATO are hypocrites. We’ve helped Europe anytime they asked. We even provided funding for the Ukraine war against our better judgement. We never asked NATO for help at all! The first time in history the U.S. asks to use the bases we set up in these countries for their protection, they deny us entry? Trump in correct in telling them to go pound sand and withdraw from NATO. Let’s see how they fare without our support both militarily and financially!

4 hours ago, JAG said:

The United States can walk away from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The NATO treaty gives any member the right to withdraw having given one years notice.

US domestic law, as I understand it, does not give The President the right to do so unilaterally. He is required to either obtain the consent of both Houses of Congress, or I believe a 65 seat majority decision in The Senate. It is not a decision for the Executive branch alone.

Given the Presidents present somewhat shaky hold on both houses, a hold which is likely to disappear altogether in 6 months time perhaps it is probable that Congress is unlikely to agree to leaving NATO.

Of course it is always possible that Mr Trump, in accordance with his guiding principles of "Government by Sharpie" that he could announce the USA's immediate withdrawal by "Truth Social" (was there ever a more ironic misnomer!) one morning at 2am! That would precipitate the mother of all challenges from Congress, without doubt ending up in The Supreme Court, and probably a really entertaining psychotic reaction from Whisky Pete. It will also break the terms of the NATO treaty, probably resulting in the immediate closure of all European bases, air space and logistical resources to the US military. Aircraft grounded, ports closed. That would entirely hamstring US operations in the Middle East.

Interesting prospects.

US Forces in the UK are there through SOFA and the Visiting Forces Act. If the US left NATO, SOFA would cease with immediate effect. The Visiting Forces Act will still be in place because the UK hosts militaries from around the world, outside of NATO. Its likely you won't actually see US forces leaving. The US still has a need for RAF Fairford, Mildenhall and Diego Garcia. Bilateral arrangements will be made like there are for Japan and Korea. In a legal sense, nothing would change. But the agreements will need negotiating, and the UK might decide to be more aggressive in that negotiating. But, depending on the nature of how the US leaves NATO, eg bad blood, Parliamentary pressure may push the UK into quite strong behavious, eg demanding an evacuation of US bases along a timetable of the UK's choosing, not the US's, so that it might recover sovereignty of its bases. The US has been in the UK so long, it likely would not be able evacuate all equipment. It might attempt to render equipment unusable, but we saw in Iraq, how much the US was forced to abandon intact.

In the case of a negotiated new agreement, there will be significant changes inn how the US operates. Currently, UK law governs US personnel outside the bases. Inside the bases, British law does not apply. There are a hell of a lot of waivers, where the US basically has immunity. That would not be the case in a new basing agreement. While there might still be the same balance in premacy, there will likely be a lot less waivers. Basically more US servicemen will end up in UK courts.

27 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

It will be bad for the United States to leave NATO.

So you dont want us to leave NATO. European I reckon/

10 minutes ago, Jon Jones said:

The members of NATO are hypocrites. We’ve helped Europe anytime they asked. We even provided funding for the Ukraine war against our better judgement. We never asked NATO for help at all! The first time in history the U.S. asks to use the bases we set up in these countries for their protection, they deny us entry? Trump in correct in telling them to go pound sand and withdraw from NATO. Let’s see how they fare without our support both militarily and financially!

Sorry, none of that is true. Go away and read a book. First Time in History? <deleted>.

You responded to Ukrainian requests for help.

The US has repeatedly for the last 80 years used the bases for non NATO missions

No one has denied entry to a single US serviceman

The bases were not set up by the US. RAF Fairford, for instance, is an RAF base.

The use of the base is governed through SOFA. That's your first bit of homework.

38 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

As the Bee Gees reminded us, "it's only words..."

Has he had a stroke, or someone hacked his account? I thought it was kicking off on Monday?

31 minutes ago, Jon Jones said:

The members of NATO are hypocrites. We’ve helped Europe anytime they asked. We even provided funding for the Ukraine war against our better judgement. We never asked NATO for help at all! The first time in history the U.S. asks to use the bases we set up in these countries for their protection, they deny us entry? Trump in correct in telling them to go pound sand and withdraw from NATO. Let’s see how they fare without our support both militarily and financially!

You asked help from NATO after Sept 11th and you got it.

A lot of soldiers from various NATO countries died in that conflict.

37 minutes ago, Jon Jones said:

We never asked NATO for help at all!

See above

Article 5, after 9-11.

Google it.

9 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

Has he had a stroke, or someone hacked his account? I thought it was kicking off on Monday?

His latest tweet brain fart sets "Power Plant & Bridge Day" as 8 PM Tuesday, EST, which is pre-dawn Wednesday downtown Teheran, so some there may need to adjust their jogging schedule.

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

But your president has already said he won't, even when asked.

Over ..

Thats you problem, not ours. No Blood For Europe!

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

But your president has already said he won't, even when asked.

Over ..

Good, I open Russia rolls over Europe.

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

Thanks Karoline.

You're welcome, Nancy.

4 hours ago, Yagoda said:

So you dont want us to leave NATO. European I reckon/

Bad how? What benefit does NATO provide the U.S.? Not paying their fair share. Taking advantage of us for years. Not supporting us with bases that WE built for THEIR protection. Please explain?

42 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

he can't, he needs Congress approval and he will not get it, although he thinks and acts like a dictator there are things he can not do without congress, the people will have the last word

15 minutes ago, Jon Jones said:

Bad how? What benefit does NATO provide the U.S.? Not paying their fair share. Taking advantage of us for years. Not supporting us with bases that WE built for THEIR protection. Please explain?

The countries in NATO buy a lot of weapons from the USA. Your armanents industry would take quite a hit if we divorced and stopped buying from you.

The USA would lose 31 bases scattered throughout Europe.

Sure would make the journeys longer when you have to move troops and planes all the way from the USA next time you want to bomb the hell out of some country.

Of course you have the bases in the Gulf States but you could get kicked out of there if this Iran shambles ever closes.

Finally, a lot of intelligence, training and exercises are shared between NATO partners, leading to a more formidable force than if the USA went alone.

As a reminder , Trump's war in Iran, illegal as it never passed Congress, is nothing to do with NATO, an organisation founded for defence of its territory, not adventurist imperialist aggression as undertaken by Trump.

9 minutes ago, bannork said:

The countries in NATO buy a lot of weapons from the USA. Your armanents industry would take quite a hit if we divorced and stopped buying from you.

Our economy would survive. We wouldnt be throwing money away in europe. Keep in mind how many European defense makers like BAE make a fat buck off the taxpayers. You dont want it?

13 minutes ago, bannork said:

The USA would lose 31 bases scattered throughout Europe.

More like 100 and 84000 troops.

14 minutes ago, bannork said:

Sure would make the journeys longer when you have to move troops and planes all the way from the USA next time you want to bomb the hell out of some country.

Of course you have the bases in the Gulf States but you could get kicked out of there if this Iran shambles ever closes.

Its OK and They wont. Itss closer to the action anyway, who cares how far away Europe is.

36 minutes ago, bannork said:

Finally, a lot of intelligence, training and exercises are shared between NATO partners, leading to a more formidable force than if the USA went alone.

Well I dont think that Israel allows sensitive sharing any more. Rightfully so considering the sympathies in Europe for the enemy of civilization