Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,404
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 36:
Line 36: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→NATO and the Obama administration
Article 5 of the NATO charter demands that "an attack against one is an attack against all." Any member can invoke Article 5. During the [[Obama administration]], the Obama regime was funding [[Kurdish]] fighters in [[Syria]], who in turn were staging cross-border attacks against [[Turkey]] with their American-funded weapons and training. Turkey, a member of NATO, could have invoked Article 5 to require all members of NATO to come to its aid.<ref>https://www.dw.com/en/how-natos-article-5-could-work-in-the-case-of-turkey/a-17983762</ref> Under such a circumstance, the United States would have been required to destroy its own ally, the Kurds, whom it armed and equipped, or alternatively, all NATO members could have been required to fight the Kurds main strategic ally and backer, the United States.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/03/31/erdogan-blasts-white-house-support-kurds/</ref>
Article 5 of the NATO charter demands that "an attack against one is an attack against all." Any member can invoke Article 5. During the [[Obama administration]], the Obama regime was funding [[Kurdish]] fighters in [[Syria]], who in turn were staging cross-border attacks against [[Turkey]] with their American-funded weapons and training. Turkey, a member of NATO, could have invoked Article 5 to require all members of NATO to come to its aid.<ref>https://www.dw.com/en/how-natos-article-5-could-work-in-the-case-of-turkey/a-17983762</ref> Under such a circumstance, the United States would have been required to destroy its own ally, the Kurds, whom it armed and equipped, or alternatively, all NATO members could have been required to fight the Kurds main strategic ally and backer, the United States.<ref>https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/03/31/erdogan-blasts-white-house-support-kurds/</ref>
== Growing trend of Americans favoring a more isolationist foreign policy ==
Consider the 2022 ''The Hill'' opinion article ''Republicans are the new isolationists; will US retreat from world stage?'':
{{Cquote|The world is facing the most serious threat of nuclear confrontation since the Cuban missile crisis 60 years ago. At the same time, we’re seeing a growing isolationist movement in the U.S. The Republican Party has been taken over by Donald Trump and his army of right-wing populists.
The [[GOP]] is becoming an isolationist party. It is no longer the party that embraces the bold foreign policy of [[Ronald Reagan]] or the Bushes. By more than two to one, Republicans endorse the view that “We should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems here at home.” Only 30 percent of Republicans believe “It is best for the future of our country to be active in world affairs.”<ref>[https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/3670801-republicans-are-the-new-isolationists-will-us-retreat-from-world-stage/ Republicans are the new isolationists; will US retreat from world stage?]</ref>}}
Also: "Their initial data, collected by students conducting individual interviews, surprised Mutz: It found that American adults ages 18-30 tend to favor isolationist foreign policy, regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum, when compared with Baby Boomers, aged 60+"...“At least for the last half of the 20th century, Americans 60 and older were more isolationist than younger adults,” says Mutz, the Samuel Stouffer Professor of Communication and Political Science and director of the Institute for the Study of Citizens and Politics at Penn. “But now things have reversed." - [https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/news/penn-students-research-which-americans-are-most-isolationist-and-it-may-not-be-who-you-think#:~:text=Their%20initial%20data%2C%20collected%20by,Baby%20Boomers%2C%20aged%2060%2B. Penn Students Research Which Americans Are Most Isolationist — and It May Not Be Who You Think]
A 2023 article in the ''[[The Hill]]'' stated:
{{Cquote|A few weeks ago, Rep. [[Matt Gaetz]] introduced an amendment to a defense funding bill prohibiting all military aid to Ukraine. 93 House Republicans voted in favor of the amendment...
Nonetheless, with former President Trump leading the way, an isolationist faction of the Republican party in the House has doubled down on its “just say no” strategy. In July, Trump maintained that if elected again he would instantly bring the conflict to an end:“I would tell Zelensky, no more. You got to make a deal. I would tell Putin, if you don’t make a deal, we’re going to give him a lot … I will have the deal done in one day. One day.” When Vladimir Putin praised this statement, Trump replied, “Well, I like that he said that. Because that means what I’m saying is right.”
The former president also ordered Republicans in Congress to oppose all aid to Ukraine “until the FBI, DOJ, and IRS hand over every scrap of evidence they have on the Biden Crime Family’s corrupt business dealings.” Any lawmaker who does not go along, Trump added, should expect a primary challenge in 2024.<ref>[https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4268543-the-tyranny-of-the-gop-isolationist-minority/ The tyranny of the GOP isolationist minority], The Hill, 2023</ref>}}
As the American [[baby boom]]ers die off and lose power, the USA might become more isolationist.
==Asia==
==Asia==