• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Politico: Trump's National Security Team Blindsided by His NATO Speech

Tovarisc

Member
Fair enough.

Trump wants an ally out of Russia and doesn't want to keep making demands to EU, that they could reject. He's probably hoping it's still in effect regardless. NSC wants something more concrete I guess.

Whole Western world expected Trump to say it out loud that USA stands by Article 5 and will stand by its NATO allies if need ever rises. Now people like McMaster are cleaning up after Trump and trying to assure key allies that USA stands by Article 5 even when President never said they would.

Not good look and makes alliance look weak(er).

Keep making what demands to EU? That public embarrassing of other NATO countries by giving spending lecture during his opening speech? It isn't something Trump came up, for long time US Presidents have talked about it. Just not in this way.
 
He really isn't in a tight spot at all.

He can resign from the military and given his high profile will probably easily make high 6 figures on top of his pension.

At worst, he is trapped there for about a year, if his detailing process works similarly to most people in the military. But I expect that position has some special caveats attached since it is such a high level and unique.

Won't be lose his pension if he resigns outright?
 

Skyzard

Banned
Whole Western world expected Trump to say it out loud that USA stands by Article 5 and will stand by its NATO allies if need ever rises. Now people like McMaster are cleaning up after Trump and trying to assure key allies that USA stands by Article 5 even when President never said they would.

Not good look and makes alliance look weak(er).

Keep making what demands to EU? That public embarrassing of other NATO countries by giving spending lecture during his opening speech? It isn't something Trump came up, for long time US Presidents have talked about it. Just not in this way.

That is...even worse. I guess Merkel was more right than I thought.
 

GuyKazama

Member
He has reaffirmed his support multiple times. The Secretary General of NATO was asked about this on Face the Nation, and said NATO and Article 5 are one and the same -- reiterating that the President showed his support for NATO in the speech and in his actions.

The press doesn't like Trump and are picking apart his words looking for every nitpik, which comes across as petty. If you follow his actions he has show strong NATO support.

Here's Stoltenberg:

Stoltenberg said that defense spending has now started to increase across Europe, and that "more Allies will reach the 2% target this year or next year".

"President Trump, just suggested a 40% increase in funding for U.S. military presence in Europe. We will-- we will have a new armored brigade. We will have more training, more equipment, more infrastructure. So actions speak louder than words. And we see now actions, meaning increased U.S. presence in Europe," Stoltenberg added.

Stoltenberg appeared undeterred by Mr. Trump's at-times questionable commitment to staying in NATO, saying Mr. Trump "has in meetings with me -- publicly when I met him in the White House last month -- stated that, he is committed to NATO and his security team has also stated that very clearly."
 
He has reaffirmed his support multiple times. The Secretary General of NATO was asked about this on Face the Nation, and said NATO and Article 5 are one and the same -- reiterating that the President showed his support for NATO in the speech and in his actions.

The press doesn't like Trump and are picking apart his words looking for every nitpik, which comes across as petty. If you follow his actions he has show strong NATO support.

Here's Stoltenberg:

Yes, it's the press that makes Trump not say the things that he doesn't say. Lol, you're such a shill, but you're basically the only real Trump supporter left trying to defend this shit, so good on you I guess.
 

GuyKazama

Member
Yes, it's the press that makes Trump not say the things that he doesn't say. Lol, you're such a shill, but you're basically the only real Trump supporter left trying to defend this shit, so good on you I guess.

Trump is free to say what he wants. It is his actions that have real consequence.
 

Tovarisc

Member
Trump is free to say what he wants. It is his actions that have real consequence.

What President of USA says or doesn't say has insane amounts of weight, domestically and globally. Not openly reassuring allies that USA stands with NATO and Article 5 is big action to do.

He can say fuck he wants (just look at his twitter feed today), but those words now carry so much weight and power.
 
I get that McMaster might have reasons for not resigning... but why did he put his name on that WSJ op-ed? If he's just trying to stay in Trump's good graces in order to have a positive influence, eventually he must realize that he's not having that positive influence and that all his actions to curry favor are actually doing damage.
 

Dude Abides

Banned
Trump is free to say what he wants. It is his actions that have real consequence.

That's not really how it works. I can understand why a Trump supporter would want to downplay the idiotic stuff he says, but 90% of a president's impact is what he says.
 

HotHamBoy

Member
I dunno,

Because Trump is such a buffoon, there is a constant indecision as to whether his actions are malicious or idiotic.

Your allies are leaving you, and worse yet they don't currently trust you.

Germany and mainland Europe is armying up, so they are less reliant on your military efforts.

your diplomatic engine has been gutted and is being blindsided by people like Bannon.

You are removing yourself as the preeminent culture in the world

You are reducing the imperative to produce scientists and engineers by reducing your investment in education and social programs that allow the best and the brightest to advance if they dont come from a wealthy background.

Your best people are being publicly asked to move to other continents and they are by and large considering it.

You are decreasing the capability for the middle classes to have wealth and are moving to some sort of serfdom.

Your police force is starting to look like a military state, we have hundreds of videos of the cops killing civilians and not even remotely being forced to pay for their crimes.

I dunno man, this looks like it will take years to sort out and possibly decades before America moves back into that role within the world stage and even then, because of the failings within your democratic system a buffoon like trump has outlined in such a public and embarrassing way you would need to demonstrate that any amendments to the system are:

a) Non partisan
b) Binding
c) Totally in the best interests of the country and its peoples

Right now, as a Brit I am looking at America and I don't see it as the leader of the free world which makes Brexit all the more galling.

pouchheld,small,x1000.jpg
 
Trump is free to say what he wants. It is his actions that have real consequence.
The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was stared because Saddam misunderstood a conversation with the American ambassador, leading him to believe the US would stay out of the conflict. At high levels of government every single thing said, or not said, can have massive consequences.
 
He has reaffirmed his support multiple times. The Secretary General of NATO was asked about this on Face the Nation, and said NATO and Article 5 are one and the same -- reiterating that the President showed his support for NATO in the speech and in his actions.

The press doesn't like Trump and are picking apart his words looking for every nitpik, which comes across as petty. If you follow his actions he has show strong NATO support.

Here's Stoltenberg:

Crocodile tears for trump.
 

tuxfool

Banned
That's a fundamental misunderstanding.

Is it an actual misunderstanding on your part, or simply an example of what a Trump defender has to do when navigating political discussion?

What Trump supporters say doesn't really matter. Both of those options are possible with the exact same outcome.
 

Link

The Autumn Wind
That's a fundamental misunderstanding.

Is it an actual misunderstanding on your part, or simply an example of what a Trump defender has to do when navigating political discussion?
It's not a misunderstanding, it's being blatantly disingenuous. Which is pretty much a requirement for supporting and/or defending Trump.
 

Lunar15

Member
So when does McMaster just say fuck it and lead a military coup?

I'm joking... but also when? America needs to be put under a Marshall Plan.
 

KingV

Member
Won't be lose his pension if he resigns outright?

There are procedures to resign but if he follows them he's in the clear. Typically it's like you just write a letter saying "i intend to resign/retire from the military in this date" and there is some minimum amount of notice you have to give, like 6-12 months and that is based partially on your orders.

Even if he is fired from the post he will likely keep his retirement. At his level, very little would actually put his retirement fully at risk. Even if he was separated for cause (like violating some military law) he would likely keep his retirement, though they might reduce the rank at which he received it.

Flynn was fired from his job for basically incompetence as well as actively working against the Presidents policies and was still allowed by the military to retire normally.

Either way, lying for the President is not really a lawful order. You can't be ordered to lie to cover up wrongdoing. Arguably, he is defending Trump of his own volition.
 
There are procedures to resign but if he follows them he's in the clear. Typically it's like you just write a letter saying "i intend to resign/retire from the military in this date" and there is some minimum amount of notice you have to give, like 6-12 months and that is based partially on your orders.

Even if he is fired from the post he will likely keep his retirement. At his level, very little would actually put his retirement fully at risk. Even if he was separated for cause (like violating some military law) he would likely keep his retirement, though they might reduce the rank at which he received it.

Flynn was fired from his job for basically incompetence as well as actively working against the Presidents policies and was still allowed by the military to retire normally.

Either way, lying for the President is not really a lawful order. You can't be ordered to lie to cover up wrongdoing. Arguably, he is defending Trump of his own volition.

Ah, okay, thanks for clearing that up. Definitely makes me see McMaster in a much lower light then.
 
Yeah he can resign and keep his retirement if he wants to more than likely. Him staying on tells me he's perfectly ok with what's going on.
 
The press doesn't like Trump and are picking apart his words looking for every nitpik, which comes across as petty. If you follow his actions he has show strong NATO support.

This annoys me to no end.

The entire world doesn't like Trump. Anyone with a decent head on their shoulders doesn't like Trump.
 

Tommy DJ

Member
Trump is free to say what he wants. It is his actions that have real consequence.

If I was the head of your local police department and said on Twitter that you might be a pedophile, I better hope you accept any vigilante justice.

After all, I'm free to say what I want.
 

Funky Papa

FUNK-Y-PPA-4
So what is going to be the next bitch move in the event of the EU fixing its shit and reinforcing the Battlegroups structure to make an intra-NATO of sorts that results in the creation of an internal, multinational force with its own policies and purposes beyond the alliance?

I'm sure the implications fly several kilometres above president Trump's hairdo, but even turdlings like Bannon and Miller have to realise that America's interests won't be served that way at all.
 

Iksenpets

Banned
Trump is free to say what he wants. It is his actions that have real consequence.

This has already been picked apart by everyone else in here, but Jesus Christ this is the exact opposite of the truth. Defensive alliances work as a deterrent because your enemies believe that you will meet your commitments under them. Any statement that signals anything less than full commitment to that weakens the alliance because it gives your enemies some amount of belief that they could attack the alliance and get away with it without provoking a response.

And of course Stoltenberg goes out there and says "oh yes of course Trump reaffirmed his support" because he's having to make up for the doubt Trump has sewn. The same logic that Trump is violating when he refuses to endorse Article 5 requires that the allies all pretend that Trump hasn't actually done anything and that the alliance is fine, because it's their best bad option to minimize doubt around the alliance once Trump has created it.

And the people who have been trying to get Trump to see reason on this like McMaster and Mattis have to go out and say Trump fully supports it for similar reasons, but none of it matters because they're not the ones who could order a response to an attack. Only Trump can do that, and all the reassurances in the world are worthless unless they're coming from his mouth, publicly, clearly, and without equivocation.
 

Astral Dog

Member
i have to say despite all they have done at least one of few positives has been how educative seeing this administration getting blown up from the inside and out has been 👓📰
 

4Tran

Member
So what is going to be the next bitch move in the event of the EU fixing its shit and reinforcing the Battlegroups structure to make an intra-NATO of sorts that results in the creation of an internal, multinational force with its own policies and purposes beyond the alliance?

I'm sure the implications fly several kilometres above president Trump's hairdo, but even turdlings like Bannon and Miller have to realise that America's interests won't be served that way at all.
I don't think that the reaction is possible to predict. Trump and his inner circle either don't know or don't care that the US is overwhelmingly the biggest beneficiary of the NATO alliance and that what they're doing amounts to self sabotage. It's one thing to predict how players will act in their own self interest because it's possible to weigh risks and rewards, but with self sabotage, all of the regular metrics no longer apply.
 
So what is going to be the next bitch move in the event of the EU fixing its shit and reinforcing the Battlegroups structure to make an intra-NATO of sorts that results in the creation of an internal, multinational force with its own policies and purposes beyond the alliance?

I'm sure the implications fly several kilometres above president Trump's hairdo, but even turdlings like Bannon and Miller have to realise that America's interests won't be served that way at all.

Bannon and Miller don't care about America's interest. We are months into this and they have been doing nothing but harming America's interest. Bannon wanted out of Paris and Miller is just a lackey.
 

jelly

Member
So what is going to be the next bitch move in the event of the EU fixing its shit and reinforcing the Battlegroups structure to make an intra-NATO of sorts that results in the creation of an internal, multinational force with its own policies and purposes beyond the alliance?

I'm sure the implications fly several kilometres above president Trump's hairdo, but even turdlings like Bannon and Miller have to realise that America's interests won't be served that way at all.

They will panic when some Generals say American influence has waned and they aren't buying American stuff. Oh, that's how it works...
 

bionic77

Member
Remember when Americans used to say that we were the leaders of the free world?

Now we are a fucking punchline.

Jesus still can't believe how fast this is happening. Its only June!
 
This has already been picked apart by everyone else in here, but Jesus Christ this is the exact opposite of the truth. Defensive alliances work as a deterrent because your enemies believe that you will meet your commitments under them. Any statement that signals anything less than full commitment to that weakens the alliance because it gives your enemies some amount of belief that they could attack the alliance and get away with it without provoking a response.

And of course Stoltenberg goes out there and says "oh yes of course Trump reaffirmed his support" because he's having to make up for the doubt Trump has sewn. The same logic that Trump is violating when he refuses to endorse Article 5 requires that the allies all pretend that Trump hasn't actually done anything and that the alliance is fine, because it's their best bad option to minimize doubt around the alliance once Trump has created it.

And the people who have been trying to get Trump to see reason on this like McMaster and Mattis have to go out and say Trump fully supports it for similar reasons, but none of it matters because they're not the ones who could order a response to an attack. Only Trump can do that, and all the reassurances in the world are worthless unless they're coming from his mouth, publicly, clearly, and without equivocation.

Jesus, Biden had to go assure NATO that we stand behind it and Article 5 during the campaign because of orange colonoscopy made manifest. But there is no convincing or reaching a Trump supporter. Their heads are so far up their own ass they can hear their food being digested.
 

Funky Papa

FUNK-Y-PPA-4
They will panic when some Generals say American influence has waned and they aren't buying American stuff. Oh, that's how it works...

Bannon and Miller don't care about America's interest. We are months into this and they have been doing nothing but harming America's interest. Bannon wanted out of Paris and Miller is just a lackey.

The absurd thing is that the people at Heritage knew. Oh, they knew. They knew and they were so afraid that they were promoting the idea of an united European military being against America's interests and going as far as to push against a closer Union.

End its support of ”ever closer union" in the EU. It is no longer in the interests of the U.S. for Europe to continue down its path of political and economic integration. The excessive drive by European political elites to integrate deeper has led to many of the political and economic problems faced today in Europe. The U.S. should stop calling for further EU integration and instead pursue policies toward Europe that place a premium on national sovereignty, economic freedom, transparency, and democratic accountability.

Ensure that NATO retains its primacy over, and the right of first refusal for, all Europe-related defense matters. NATO has been the cornerstone of transatlantic security for 64 years. Now is not the time to replace NATO with new security structures that will only compete with, not complement, the alliance. Ensuring that NATO maintains its lead role in European defense policy will also ensure that America has the amount of influence relevant to the level of resources the U.S. has committed to Europe.

Make clear that the U.S. does not back deeper EU defense integration. U.S. policymakers must see the CSDP for what it is: a paper tiger that has not delivered increased military capability for the U.S. or for NATO. Although the U.S. has supported deeper EU defense integration, it has not resulted in any greater military capability in Europe. Instead, the U.S. must focus on re-energizing NATO as Europe's premier defense alliance.

Regularly demonstrate American dissatisfaction with Europe's military spending. Since the end of the Cold War, defense spending in Europe has drastically decreased. Only four of the 28 members of NATO meet the required defense spending requirement of 2 percent of GDP. While there is nothing American leaders can say that will compel Europeans to spend more on defense, saying nothing at all offers implicit approval.

Work with pro-NATO EU members, such as the U.K. and Czech Republic, to advance a pro-NATO agenda in Europe. There are members of the EU who are skeptical regarding the EU's defense policy ambitions. The U.S. should work with these NATO allies to advance a ”NATO first" agenda.

Voice opposition to the creation of an EU Army. Although there is not currently an EU Army, the creation of one is clearly the goal of many in Europe. It is not in the interest of the U.S. or NATO to have a European Army under the control of unelected European bureaucrats.

...

Conclusion

American support for deeper EU defense integration will not only be a disappointment for those who believe it will lead to greater military capability; it will prove to be dangerous to the NATO alliance. As the EU develops a more integrated defense capability, America's influence in European defense matters that it currently has through NATO will be reduced.
UK is about to push itself out of the picture, Trump has the Visegrad Club second guessing his support and the EU finds itself at a point where it will probably have to introduce huge reforms. There has never been a better moment to kickstart a proper European army and the grown ups around Trump must be sweating bullets right now.
 

a.wd

Member
The absurd thing is that the people at Heritage knew. Oh, they knew. They knew and they were so afraid that they were promoting the idea of an united European military being against America's interests and going as far as to push against a closer Union.


UK is about to push itself out of the picture, Trump has the Visegrad Club second guessing his support and the EU finds itself at a point where it will probably have to introduce huge reforms. There has never been a better moment to kickstart a proper European army and the grown ups around Trump must be sweating bullets right now.

This is exactly what I was saying, America through trumps actions has abdicated the role of world leader and that means no more military bases cosily in peoples countries, american interests all of a sudden becoming Europes interests, and the primary drive in America is military not diplomacy, how the heck do you think this is going to turn out?

Putin has got to be sitting there laughing his cock off right now, he has destabilised America to such a degree that Europe is no longer going to be reliant on it, they will lose a shedload of business and imports will become higher.

Not trying to doom monger, but it looks bad.
 

4Tran

Member
This is exactly what I was saying, America through trumps actions has abdicated the role of world leader and that means no more military bases cosily in peoples countries, american interests all of a sudden becoming Europes interests, and the primary drive in America is military not diplomacy, how the heck do you think this is going to turn out?
The odd thing is that the US' military supremacy is built upon its large alliance network, of which NATO is the most important component. By backing away from NATO, the US is voluntarily giving up a lot of the advantages of the alliance network for zero gain, and it serves to weaken American military capabilities. It looks like sheer insanity in action.
 
Aw gee golly whickers guys, we worked extra double hard making President Trump this big list of "Treasonous Things Not to Do" and the next day we came in and he'd marked off a bunch of them with checkmarks next to them! I'm starting to think this lovable goof will never get it together!
 

KingV

Member
Ah, okay, thanks for clearing that up. Definitely makes me see McMaster in a much lower light then.

I think that's the way to see it. IMO, he's showing his true colors as a brown nosing scumbag. Whatever reputation he had about speaking truth to power is now in the toilet, IMO.

There's some small chance that he's trying to do good things behind the scenes, but at best he's a useful pawn to normalize incompetence and gross negligence.
 
Why is McMaster still on this sinking ship???

He's forced to by Law.

If the President asks a Active-Duty military officer to take a cabinet position, he has to as if he's following direct orders from a superior.

Only a retired officer can refuse a request by the President.
 
Top Bottom