Gates blasts NATO, questions future of alliance

[xchrom]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GATES_NATO_DOOMED?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-06-10-05-30-38

BRUSSELS (AP) -- America's military alliance with Europe - the cornerstone of U.S. security policy for six decades - faces a "dim, if not dismal" future, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday in a blunt valedictory address.

In his final policy speech as Pentagon chief, Gates questioned the viability of NATO, saying its members' penny-pinching and lack of political will could hasten the end of U.S. support. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed in 1949 as a U.S.-led bulwark against Soviet aggression, but in the post-Cold War era it has struggled to find a purpose.

"Future U.S. political leaders - those for whom the Cold War was not the formative experience that it was for me - may not consider the return on America's investment in NATO worth the cost," he told a European think tank on the final day of an 11-day overseas journey.

Gates has made no secret of his frustration with NATO bureaucracy and the huge restrictions many European governments placed on their military participation in the Afghanistan war. He ruffled NATO feathers early in his tenure with a direct challenge to contribute more front-line troops that yielded few contributions.

[xchrom]

1. kick

[davepc]

2. Clinton should of pulled us out.

By 1994 it was clear that Soviet hordes were never again going to pose a threat to Western Europe and the Alliances whole reason for existing was moot.

The EU has reaped the benefits of not having to pay realistic defense costs because they expect the US to carry the load, and we do, to our detriment.

[Hippo_Tron]

9. In their defense, the only time Article 5 has been invoked was on behalf of the United States

But indeed we have more than paid for it.

[bvar22]

3. NATO is now a Wholly Owned Subsidiary ...

...of the IMF and Global Energy Corporations.
NATO is the Enforcement Arm.

"The worst enemy of humanity is U.S. capitalism. That is what provokes uprisings like our own, a rebellion against a system, against a neoliberal model, which is the representation of a savage capitalism. If the entire world doesn't acknowledge this reality, that nation states are not providing even minimally for health, education and nourishment, then each day the most fundamental human rights are being violated."
----Bolivian Reform President Evo Morales

FDR said much the same thing in 1944 with his Economic Bill of Rights.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will stand up for working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone


"By their WORKS you will know them."

[EFerrari]

7. Check it out: the vultures are already planning a post-Gaddafi boom.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4878964&mesg_id=4879678

[inna]

4. wow. that's pretty interesting (and i'm pretty sure, unprecedented).

I wonder what is really going on behind the scenes and what it is exactly that the Europeans "lack political will" for.

In case someone didn't notice, they've been warmongering like crazy lately, especially Sarcozy (that odious little Bush-wanna-be).

In fact, they (the French and the British, specifically) were complaining that the U.S. is not contributing enough (to the latest imperialistic campaign)!


I'm really curious what it is that Gates wants them to do that they don't have "political will" for. ( - Iran, anyone? :tinfoilhat: )


:nuke:

[BOG PERSON]

5. am i to understand that "operation odyssey dawn" isn't going too well? n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. Hopefully, it's future is dismal and it's existence doomed.

[inna]

12. yes! and so, hopefully, is the future of out-of-control American militarism/imperialism.

unfortunately, it is not likely to happen in the near future; on contrary, it is likely to become only more extreme.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. If history is a guidepost it could go either way.

Relatively peacefully like the Soviet Union and Britain or in a bloodbath like the Nazis or Hapsburgs.

At some point we'll just run out of money and our creditors won't loan us any to continue the death spiral.

[krabigirl]

14. So sick of endless war.

[inna]

15. me too, me too. Let's DO something about it!

[gratuitous]

8. Yes, what we need is MORE military spending

That's the ticket to security and prosperity! Because nothing guarantees a country's long-term stability like massive military expenditures. Of course, those have to be justified somehow to the hoi polloi, so we have the guerre du jour to shoot off a bunch of armaments (makes pretty pictures on the teevee!) and send all those freshly-scrubbed young faces off to do some killing and dying. Just tell the people it's all for their own good, and liberty, and freedom, and justice and stuff, and they'll wave their little foreign-made flags until they're in tatters.

Why don't those stoopid Yurpeans get it?

[Hippo_Tron]

10. I think what Gates is impying is that it's easy to not spend on your own defense...

When somebody else is providing it for you.

[gratuitous]

11. I tend to agree

But it's akin to "Hey guys, don't you want to join me out on this branch I'm busy sawing off?" Seems rather churlish of Gates to be in a position to correct or at least ameliorate a colossal error/blunder/mistake the United States is making, and yet continue to insist that our allies join us in our suicidal activities.