Trump Zelensky today.....

[hoot1]

Yeah but people live online now. Perception tends to be reality. I know that I tend to have pretty negative feelings about online Euros whenever the US is brought up. Everyone is basically an ambassador for their country these days. I think the Europeans make the mistake of getting too wrapped up in our domestic politics. From where I sit, true or not, my perception is that they tend to love America when a Democrat is in charge and hate it when a Republican is. They are bad about playing both sides of the aisle and it causes our relationship with them to get viewed through domestic political lenses which ends up being bad for them. The Israelis aren't perfect but they are far better at playing both sides of the political establishment. Maybe a little less so with Netanyahu but much better than the Euros have been and that is a problem with Western Europe going back to at least Reagan.

(And to be fair, the Euros probably get tired of, "Well if it wasn't for us you'd all be speaking German...." and things of that nature.)

The first thing we need to understand tgat Trump and Biden are totally different Biden is very passive aggressive in that he says many aggressive things(Putin is a brutal dictator, take Trump behind the barn and beat him up etc.) but he never follows through. Putin knew that. The Afghanistan cluster f—- was a tell.


Biden was scared of escalation. So scared he didn’t meaningfully act. Ukraine had to win the war in the first months or year or it was over. Biden withheld all weapons that could be seen as offensive. Thus no HIMARS until too late. He quashed the F 16 deal. Previously he gave Nordstream Ii the green light. Biden’s sanctions were indeed a joke, they were symbolic and didn’t really hurt Putin’s oil transactions.

Pages could be written in this answer, but I don’t have time

I've long preached we should have a foreign policy which is consistent from president to president with members of the Senate from both parties such as Lugar and Nunn helping to maintain stability. The notion of a big shift from a Biden to Trump thus concerns me.

In contrast to this, along come a book which suggests my fears are unfounded. The article on the book in part states the following...

The United States has experienced striking changes in leadership in recent years. From Obama to Trump to Biden, Americans have elected presidents with vastly different political commitments and bases of support. Do such leadership changes lead to drastic changes in policy? A new book by Michaela Mattes and Ashley Leeds, Domestic Interests, Democracy, and Foreign Policy Change, suggests that democracies’ foreign policies are actually more stable than is generally assumed. This interview was recorded on Sept. 29, 2023. The transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

So, does Michella Mattes have it right? Also, will foreign policy in Trump's second term change dramatically thus making Mattes wrong?

 

[iuwclurker]

Whatever sense you get from social media, Europeans have consistently held favorable views of America, even during Trump.

Europeans are pretty much divided along the same lines we are. A large proportion conservative, large proportion liberal. Their views of America correspond to their political views. Some love Trump, some hate him.

Also, their problem with immigrants is quite a bit worse than ours.

 

[IUCrazy2]

Europeans are pretty much divided along the same lines we are. A large proportion conservative, large proportion liberal. Their views of America correspond to their political views. Some love Trump, some hate him.

Also, their problem with immigrants is quite a bit worse than ours.

I doubt that split will be a thing going forward w.r.t. Trump.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

View embedded media

I doubt that split will be a thing going forward w.r.t. Trump.

Article 5 has been invoked one time for NATO to come to the defense of a member that was attacked. That was after 9/11 to assist the US. Nearly all of the 1200 non-US military deaths in Afghanistan were from other NATO countries. The way he treats NATO is not admirable. I wonder if he’s ever thanked them . . .

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Admiral (retired) Stavridas, former supreme allied commander of NATO, is plugged in:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-03-05/europe-is-getting-ready-for-the-end-of-nato?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc0MTE3NjE2MSwiZXhwIjoxNzQxNzgwOTYxLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJTU01XSzREV1JHRzAwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiIxODJBRTAzNUY2NDc0ODkwODhEM0VCRUVGRUUzQkJFMiJ9.hFXqqaGj_lfqRD2-JGClMXhFPb6P-UrlhmrqSphowvc&leadSource=uverify%20wall

 

[BradStevens]

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-03-05/europe-is-getting-ready-for-the-end-of-nato?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc0MTE3NjE2MSwiZXhwIjoxNzQxNzgwOTYxLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJTU01XSzREV1JHRzAwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiIxODJBRTAzNUY2NDc0ODkwODhEM0VCRUVGRUUzQkJFMiJ9.hFXqqaGj_lfqRD2-JGClMXhFPb6P-UrlhmrqSphowvc&leadSource=uverify%20wall

Behind a paywall?

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Behind a paywall?

Weird. It works for me and I don't pay. Here are the first few paragraphs (don't want to break the rules too much):

If Trump pulled the US out of the alliance, the European allies would no longer follow Washington’s lead on foreign policy.

This is a column I never dreamed I’d be writing, as a former supreme allied commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But sadly, given all the skeptical and increasingly divisive rhetoric about the venerable alliance emanating from Washington and Europe in the early days of the second Donald Trump administration, it is time to think about what the world would look like geopolitically if the US pulled out.

Are we indeed in the last days of NATO? What would replace it, if anything? Or, if it survived, what would NATO look like without the US?

Pulling America out of NATO would be a mistake of epic proportions — but there are influential politicians in the Republican Party who are seriously advocating doing so, or at least musing about the possibility. As Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma said recently: “NATO has not always been playing in our best interest. And when it’s not America’s best interest anymore, we should relook at things.” Last June, 46 House Republicans voted for an amendment defunding NATO.

Vice President JD Vance was scornful about the alliance in his scathing speech at the Munich Security Conference last month. And of course, last week’s surreal public shouting match in the Oval Office between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, catalyzed by Vance, doesn’t inspire much confidence in future NATO cooperation.
The decision by the US to vote against a UN resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, joining with Russia and North Korea, was a shocking demonstration of the transatlantic alliance’s failing cohesion.

On the European side, doubt about the US commitment is increasing. French President Emmanuel Macron has been talking about the need for independent European defense forces — “strategic autonomy” — for years. He and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer held an emergency meeting of European leaders over the weekend to discuss a separate initiative to end the war in Ukraine.
Germany’s chancellor-in-waiting, Frederick Merz, has been equally blunt. “We must prepare for the possibility that Donald Trump will no longer uphold NATO’s mutual defense commitment unconditionally," Merz told a German broadcaster. “It is crucial that Europeans make the greatest possible efforts to ensure that we are at least capable of defending the European continent on our own.”
And there was Zelenskiy’s understandable call for a “united European military,” code for “we can’t count on the US anymore,” something he was pushing even before the tongue-lashing he received from Trump last week.

Yet despite all the rhetoric, the value proposition of NATO to the US remains high. Overall defense spending by Europe, spurred by the threat of Russia’s aggression and Trump’s pressure, is finally hitting the alliance goal of 2% of GDP. NATO is seriously discussing increasing that to at least 3.5%, the level of spending by the US.

Collectively, Europe has the second largest defense budget in the world, bigger than either China or Russia. Large, capable defense companies in Europe — Airbus SE, BAE Systems PLC, Saab AB, Thales SA, Naval Group SA, Rolls-Royce PLC, Rheinmetall AG, Fincantieri SpA and others — produce immense amounts of high-quality equipment. They are going to be ramping up and receiving huge contracts — largely at the expense of US defense firms and workers.

And for all our frustration with the Europeans, the US will ultimately want them to help us face the ever-increasing Chinese threat in the Pacific. Their contributions in cybersecurity, intelligence and space operations are key; and they are crucial for Arctic operations, where six of the nations facing Russia across the North Pole are NATO members.

Above all, of course, the European allies share our fundamental values of democracy, liberty and human rights. They fought and died alongside us in Afghanistan, and deployed under my command to Libya, the Balkans, Iraq, and on counterpiracy operations off East Africa.

But if we follow the instincts of some on the US political right and formally withdraw from the alliance, pulling our nearly 100,000 troops out of Europe (which will be costly, because much of their garrison costs are born by the allies), or “defund NATO,” the organization will collapse. US warships based in Europe, a huge operational geographic advantage for the Navy, would return to US ports. Squadrons of fighters, transports and surveillance planes would also withdraw.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Admiral (retired) Stavridas, former supreme allied commander of NATO, is plugged in:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-03-05/europe-is-getting-ready-for-the-end-of-nato?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc0MTE3NjE2MSwiZXhwIjoxNzQxNzgwOTYxLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJTU01XSzREV1JHRzAwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiIxODJBRTAzNUY2NDc0ODkwODhEM0VCRUVGRUUzQkJFMiJ9.hFXqqaGj_lfqRD2-JGClMXhFPb6P-UrlhmrqSphowvc&leadSource=uverify%20wall

I was just coming to mention his Smerconish visit this morning, he was very impressive

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/08/world/video/smr-post-nato-world-imminent

 

[iuwclurker]

How do you make America great again by shrinking its influence?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I've long preached we should have a foreign policy which is consistent from president to president with members of the Senate from both parties such as Lugar and Nunn helping to maintain stability. The notion of a big shift from a Biden to Trump thus concerns me.

In contrast to this, along come a book which suggests my fears are unfounded. The article on the book in part states the following...

The United States has experienced striking changes in leadership in recent years. From Obama to Trump to Biden, Americans have elected presidents with vastly different political commitments and bases of support. Do such leadership changes lead to drastic changes in policy? A new book by Michaela Mattes and Ashley Leeds, Domestic Interests, Democracy, and Foreign Policy Change, suggests that democracies’ foreign policies are actually more stable than is generally assumed. This interview was recorded on Sept. 29, 2023. The transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

So, does Michella Mattes have it right? Also, will foreign policy in Trump's second term change dramatically thus making Mattes wrong?

I hope Trump brings back a sensible foreign policy. We need to remember that Obama and Biden substantially empowered Putin while they and their sycophants blame Trump for being a Russian ally

Obama terminated our defense missile agreement in poland
Obama assured the Russians he would have more flexibility in his second term
Obama and Biden strengthened Iran, one of Putin’s most important allies
Biden ended sanctions on Nordstream II while ensuring that we would not be a player in European energy.
Biden showed deliberate indifference to Putin’s invasion preparations hoping not to provoke Putin.
Europe was also asleep at the switch and Biden did zilch to awaken them
Biden slow walked Ukrainian arms and the Europeans did nothing to counter that

Now Trump wants to end this and people complain about Trump bring Putin’s BF

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

The difference between Biden and Trump - and this difference probably accounts for where both of them went/go wrong - is that Biden tried to center everything around keeping the Western alliance in tact, while Trump actively, aggressively doesn't give three shits about the Western alliance.

You wear spurs on the back of your Crocs don't you.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Weird. It works for me and I don't pay. Here are the first few paragraphs (don't want to break the rules too much):

If Trump pulled the US out of the alliance, the European allies would no longer follow Washington’s lead on foreign policy.

This is a column I never dreamed I’d be writing, as a former supreme allied commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But sadly, given all the skeptical and increasingly divisive rhetoric about the venerable alliance emanating from Washington and Europe in the early days of the second Donald Trump administration, it is time to think about what the world would look like geopolitically if the US pulled out.

Are we indeed in the last days of NATO? What would replace it, if anything? Or, if it survived, what would NATO look like without the US?

Pulling America out of NATO would be a mistake of epic proportions — but there are influential politicians in the Republican Party who are seriously advocating doing so, or at least musing about the possibility. As Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma said recently: “NATO has not always been playing in our best interest. And when it’s not America’s best interest anymore, we should relook at things.” Last June, 46 House Republicans voted for an amendment defunding NATO.

Vice President JD Vance was scornful about the alliance in his scathing speech at the Munich Security Conference last month. And of course, last week’s surreal public shouting match in the Oval Office between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, catalyzed by Vance, doesn’t inspire much confidence in future NATO cooperation.
The decision by the US to vote against a UN resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, joining with Russia and North Korea, was a shocking demonstration of the transatlantic alliance’s failing cohesion.

On the European side, doubt about the US commitment is increasing. French President Emmanuel Macron has been talking about the need for independent European defense forces — “strategic autonomy” — for years. He and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer held an emergency meeting of European leaders over the weekend to discuss a separate initiative to end the war in Ukraine.
Germany’s chancellor-in-waiting, Frederick Merz, has been equally blunt. “We must prepare for the possibility that Donald Trump will no longer uphold NATO’s mutual defense commitment unconditionally," Merz told a German broadcaster. “It is crucial that Europeans make the greatest possible efforts to ensure that we are at least capable of defending the European continent on our own.”
And there was Zelenskiy’s understandable call for a “united European military,” code for “we can’t count on the US anymore,” something he was pushing even before the tongue-lashing he received from Trump last week.

Yet despite all the rhetoric, the value proposition of NATO to the US remains high. Overall defense spending by Europe, spurred by the threat of Russia’s aggression and Trump’s pressure, is finally hitting the alliance goal of 2% of GDP. NATO is seriously discussing increasing that to at least 3.5%, the level of spending by the US.

Collectively, Europe has the second largest defense budget in the world, bigger than either China or Russia. Large, capable defense companies in Europe — Airbus SE, BAE Systems PLC, Saab AB, Thales SA, Naval Group SA, Rolls-Royce PLC, Rheinmetall AG, Fincantieri SpA and others — produce immense amounts of high-quality equipment. They are going to be ramping up and receiving huge contracts — largely at the expense of US defense firms and workers.

And for all our frustration with the Europeans, the US will ultimately want them to help us face the ever-increasing Chinese threat in the Pacific. Their contributions in cybersecurity, intelligence and space operations are key; and they are crucial for Arctic operations, where six of the nations facing Russia across the North Pole are NATO members.

Above all, of course, the European allies share our fundamental values of democracy, liberty and human rights. They fought and died alongside us in Afghanistan, and deployed under my command to Libya, the Balkans, Iraq, and on counterpiracy operations off East Africa.

But if we follow the instincts of some on the US political right and formally withdraw from the alliance, pulling our nearly 100,000 troops out of Europe (which will be costly, because much of their garrison costs are born by the allies), or “defund NATO,” the organization will collapse. US warships based in Europe, a huge operational geographic advantage for the Navy, would return to US ports. Squadrons of fighters, transports and surveillance planes would also withdraw.

Europe needs to quit blaming the US for its growing weaknesses. It probably can’t help its awful demographics. Europe need to make more babies. But there is more they can help.

That said, Europe decided to spend more on old gage, health care, immigrants while cutting military thinking Uncle Sam is a bottomless pit of military aid

Euooe decided to pursue its hamfisted green energy policies.

Euooe decided to throw in with the Russians for long term energy needs

Europe ‘s policies increase the cost of labor, interest, and energy, the three building blocks of basic economic growth.

And Europe is quashing free expression, a long term insidious problem.

Vance only pointed out these problems.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

I hope Trump brings back a sensible foreign policy. We need to remember that Obama and Biden substantially empowered Putin while they and their sycophants blame Trump for being a Russian ally

Obama terminated our defense missile agreement in poland
Obama assured the Russians he would have more flexibility in his second term
Obama and Biden strengthened Iran, one of Putin’s most important allies
Biden ended sanctions on Nordstream II while ensuring that we would not be a player in European energy.
Biden showed deliberate indifference to Putin’s invasion preparations hoping not to provoke Putin.
Europe was also asleep at the switch and Biden did zilch to awaken them
Biden slow walked Ukrainian arms and the Europeans did nothing to counter that

Now Trump wants to end this and people complain about Trump bring Putin’s BF

All of what you say I agree with. However past grievances shouldn't mean a Russian Victory. I stand with Ukraine.

 

[IUINSB]

I hope Trump brings back a sensible foreign policy. We need to remember that Obama and Biden substantially empowered Putin while they and their sycophants blame Trump for being a Russian ally

Obama terminated our defense missile agreement in poland
Obama assured the Russians he would have more flexibility in his second term
Obama and Biden strengthened Iran, one of Putin’s most important allies
Biden ended sanctions on Nordstream II while ensuring that we would not be a player in European energy.
Biden showed deliberate indifference to Putin’s invasion preparations hoping not to provoke Putin.
Europe was also asleep at the switch and Biden did zilch to awaken them
Biden slow walked Ukrainian arms and the Europeans did nothing to counter that

Now Trump wants to end this and people complain about Trump bring Putin’s BF

Yes, yes, yes. Obama and Biden, without a doubt, forced Russia to invade. Trump has no other choice than to give Putin everything he wants

 

[Spartans9312]

I hope Trump brings back a sensible foreign policy. We need to remember that Obama and Biden substantially empowered Putin while they and their sycophants blame Trump for being a Russian ally

Obama terminated our defense missile agreement in poland
Obama assured the Russians he would have more flexibility in his second term
Obama and Biden strengthened Iran, one of Putin’s most important allies
Biden ended sanctions on Nordstream II while ensuring that we would not be a player in European energy.
Biden showed deliberate indifference to Putin’s invasion preparations hoping not to provoke Putin.
Europe was also asleep at the switch and Biden did zilch to awaken them
Biden slow walked Ukrainian arms and the Europeans did nothing to counter that

Now Trump wants to end this and people complain about Trump bring Putin’s BF

Trump’s plan for peace? Do not give Ukraine resources. Let Russia bomb them into giving up. Then he can claim “success”. Call it the best plan ever. No one has ever seen a plan so beautiful

 

[rivals01]

Today's Democrats would hate John F. Kennedy and his talks of peace with terrible Soviet Russia.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

Today's Democrats would hate John F. Kennedy and his talks of peace with terrible Soviet Russia.

Only a few decades apart.

Lincoln would be a democrat if he saw maga in action

 

[DANC]

Not a safeguard against Russia going nuke, a safeguard against another bite of the apple. If Ukraine had nukes, do you think Russia would have attacked?

Almost no one says they trust Putin to keep any agreement. Even Mas hasn't said that. So what options are there? A nuclear armed Ukraine would stop Putin, as Poland is considering for themselves.

I'm just saying Ukraine doesn't need nukes because Putin isn't going to get into a nuclear war over Ukraine.

I have no idea if Russia would have attacked if Ukraine had nukes. Didn't Hamas attack Israel, with the help of Iran, when the world is pretty sure Israel has nukes.

MAD is a powerful deterent, but it hasn't stopped regional wars from breaking out anyway. Do you think Ukraine would have used nukes by now if they had them?

 

[DANC]

I've long preached we should have a foreign policy which is consistent from president to president with members of the Senate from both parties such as Lugar and Nunn helping to maintain stability. The notion of a big shift from a Biden to Trump thus concerns me.

In contrast to this, along come a book which suggests my fears are unfounded. The article on the book in part states the following...

The United States has experienced striking changes in leadership in recent years. From Obama to Trump to Biden, Americans have elected presidents with vastly different political commitments and bases of support. Do such leadership changes lead to drastic changes in policy? A new book by Michaela Mattes and Ashley Leeds, Domestic Interests, Democracy, and Foreign Policy Change, suggests that democracies’ foreign policies are actually more stable than is generally assumed. This interview was recorded on Sept. 29, 2023. The transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

So, does Michella Mattes have it right? Also, will foreign policy in Trump's second term change dramatically thus making Mattes wrong?

Yeah, all kinds of policies change when different people change elections.

That's what happens with democratic elections.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Today's Democrats would hate John F. Kennedy and his talks of peace with terrible Soviet Russia.

Except every president has tried it, CZo was just knocking Obama above for trying it. Since Putin has been in power he had taken advantage of all. What suddenly makes Putin trustworthy?

 

[DANC]

Today's Democrats would hate John F. Kennedy and his talks of peace with terrible Soviet Russia.

Was that before or after he almost pushed the button?

I know you're being sarcastic, but the Soviet Union was terrible.

 

[DANC]

Only a few decades apart.

Lincoln would be a democrat if he saw maga in action

You Democrats love to claim Lincoln as your own.

Too bad you're so pathetically wrong.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

I was just coming to mention his Smerconish visit this morning, he was very impressive

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/08/world/video/smr-post-nato-world-imminent

He’s on the show every week.

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

You Democrats love to claim Lincoln as your own.

Too bad you're so pathetically wrong.

You love to ignore that practically everyone switched political parties since civil war. South is now largely Republican and NE is largely democrat. Want to look how that compares to during civil war?

 

[DANC]

You love to ignore that practically everyone switched political parties since civil war. South is now largely Republican and NE is largely democrat. Want to look how that compares to during civil war?

You're wrong, as usual. Democrats tried to block all the civil rights legislation in the 60s, but the Republicans voted to make them law.

Last time I looked, there were plenty of Northern states that voted Republican.

You keep repeating these worn out disproved talking points, like you haven't learned anything from the destruction of the Democrat Party.

 

[Rockport Zebra]

Yeah, all kinds of policies change when different people change elections.

That's what happens with democratic elections.

So, we all like Ukraine but Trump can be Trump. I don't think that works.

 

[DANC]

So, we all like Ukraine but Trump can be Trump. I don't think that works.

The idea that we want policies to remain the same even thought persons of different Parties are elected is kind of odd, don't you think?

Trump was elected, whether you like him or his policy or not. He's President. Presidents are gonne President.

If it's official US policy to back Ukraine militarily, why didn't Obama do it?

 

[HurryingHoosiers]

You're wrong, as usual. Democrats tried to block all the civil rights legislation in the 60s, but the Republicans voted to make them law.

Last time I looked, there were plenty of Northern states that voted Republican.

You keep repeating these worn out disproved talking points, like you haven't learned anything from the destruction of the Democrat Party.

You're wrong as usual you mean

 

[DANC]

You're wrong as usual you mean

Ouch. Sick burn.

 

[rivals01]

Except every president has tried it, CZo was just knocking Obama above for trying it. Since Putin has been in power he had taken advantage of all. What suddenly makes Putin trustworthy?

Putin is not trustworthy.
American politicians are not trustworthy.

 

[Lucy01]

Ouch. Sick burn.

Shame on you Danc.

 

[hoot1]

I hope Trump brings back a sensible foreign policy. We need to remember that Obama and Biden substantially empowered Putin while they and their sycophants blame Trump for being a Russian ally

Obama terminated our defense missile agreement in poland
Obama assured the Russians he would have more flexibility in his second term
Obama and Biden strengthened Iran, one of Putin’s most important allies
Biden ended sanctions on Nordstream II while ensuring that we would not be a player in European energy.
Biden showed deliberate indifference to Putin’s invasion preparations hoping not to provoke Putin.
Europe was also asleep at the switch and Biden did zilch to awaken them
Biden slow walked Ukrainian arms and the Europeans did nothing to counter that

Now Trump wants to end this and people complain about Trump bring Putin’s BF

CoH, always appreciate your responses to my posts.

Question: Why would a negotiator say one side has all the cards?

 

[iuwclurker]

CoH, always appreciate your responses to my posts.

Question: Why would a negotiator say one side has all the cards?

Didn’t you mean to ask:

Why would a mediator of negotiations say…?

 

[hoot1]

Didn’t you mean to ask:

Why would a mediator of negotiations say…?

Lurker, thanks.

I miss Janet who use to edit my writings. She always knew what I was trying to communicate.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Trump casts doubt on NATO solidarity, despite it aiding the US after Sept. 11

President Trump expressed uncertainty that NATO would come to the United States’ defense if the country were attacked, though the alliance did just that after Sept. 11.

apnews.com