Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday that the United States “is going to have to reexamine” its relationship with Nato once the war against Iran has concluded.
“I think there’s no doubt, unfortunately, after this conflict is concluded, we are going to have to reexamine that relationship. We’re going to have to reexamine the value of Nato in that alliance for our country,” Rubio said to host Sean Hannity on Fox News.
The top US diplomat said he had been “one of the strongest defenders of Nato” while he was in the US Senate because he “found great value in it.”
Much of that value was in having military bases in Europe that allowed the US military “to project power into different parts of the world,” Rubio said.
“If now we have reached a point where the Nato alliance means that we can’t use those bases, that in fact we can no longer use those bases to defend America’s interests, then Nato is a one-way street,” he added.
1-randomonium on
>“If now we have reached a point where the Nato alliance means that we can’t use those bases, that in fact we can no longer use those bases to defend America’s interests, then Nato is a one-way street,” he added.
One thing that can be said for the Trump administration is that they often don’t even bother trying to couch their real goals in rhetoric about freedom and rules.
NATO was founded to defend its members, not American imperialist interests. At least that is what the other members want.
Also, if anything, after the global energy crisis, it’s American allies that ought to be reexamining the importance of NATO, particularly in the world where America is increasingly acting like a more immediate threat to their economy and security than, say, China.
BembelPainting on
“Reexamine”, that sounds oddly docile compared to the rest of statements from this administration.
Now, this either means they try to keep the presidents escapades low profile with regard to NATO or it means the exit of the US is a done deal already.
BlackCat159 on
Europe has treated Trump VERY BADLY even though he is *SOOO* NICE to them!
I guess that’s what you get for being a nice guy nowadays 😒
Eilemthxx on
At a time when NATO members are pressured to spend 5% GDP on their military with the looming threat of austerity and aggressive social spending cuts, the Trump admin is making a very good case for a lot of NATO skeptics to say the same thing. If the alliance is just going to be ″follow America into every ME hellhole and buy their equipment″, with the bonus insult to service members who died, then it’s not paying the dividends for the local populations who elect their leaders.
5 Comments
(Submission Statement)
—
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday that the United States “is going to have to reexamine” its relationship with Nato once the war against Iran has concluded.
“I think there’s no doubt, unfortunately, after this conflict is concluded, we are going to have to reexamine that relationship. We’re going to have to reexamine the value of Nato in that alliance for our country,” Rubio said to host Sean Hannity on Fox News.
The top US diplomat said he had been “one of the strongest defenders of Nato” while he was in the US Senate because he “found great value in it.”
Much of that value was in having military bases in Europe that allowed the US military “to project power into different parts of the world,” Rubio said.
“If now we have reached a point where the Nato alliance means that we can’t use those bases, that in fact we can no longer use those bases to defend America’s interests, then Nato is a one-way street,” he added.
>“If now we have reached a point where the Nato alliance means that we can’t use those bases, that in fact we can no longer use those bases to defend America’s interests, then Nato is a one-way street,” he added.
One thing that can be said for the Trump administration is that they often don’t even bother trying to couch their real goals in rhetoric about freedom and rules.
NATO was founded to defend its members, not American imperialist interests. At least that is what the other members want.
Also, if anything, after the global energy crisis, it’s American allies that ought to be reexamining the importance of NATO, particularly in the world where America is increasingly acting like a more immediate threat to their economy and security than, say, China.
“Reexamine”, that sounds oddly docile compared to the rest of statements from this administration.
Now, this either means they try to keep the presidents escapades low profile with regard to NATO or it means the exit of the US is a done deal already.
Europe has treated Trump VERY BADLY even though he is *SOOO* NICE to them!
I guess that’s what you get for being a nice guy nowadays 😒
At a time when NATO members are pressured to spend 5% GDP on their military with the looming threat of austerity and aggressive social spending cuts, the Trump admin is making a very good case for a lot of NATO skeptics to say the same thing. If the alliance is just going to be ″follow America into every ME hellhole and buy their equipment″, with the bonus insult to service members who died, then it’s not paying the dividends for the local populations who elect their leaders.