Litwin
Diamond Member
Unfortunately, it seems our postmodernists no longer want to do the heavy lifting. The principle of collective defense—enshrined in Article 5 of the NATO treaty—once stood as an unshakable pillar of Western security. But today, it doesn’t carry the same automatic force it did 40 years ago.
This shift is no longer theoretical—it’s political. U.S. figures like Josh Hawley, Matt Gaetz, and Rand Paul have questioned the wisdom of binding defense obligations. Hawley opposed NATO expansion, arguing it distracts from commie han- China. Gaetz has pushed to end U.S. aid to Ukraine, casting doubt on NATO’s relevance. Paul, ever the non-interventionist, resists automatic military commitments.
Their skepticism reflects a broader trend: strategic ambiguity is replacing solidarity. Article 5 still exists, but its power now depends on political will—not shared conviction
This shift is no longer theoretical—it’s political. U.S. figures like Josh Hawley, Matt Gaetz, and Rand Paul have questioned the wisdom of binding defense obligations. Hawley opposed NATO expansion, arguing it distracts from commie han- China. Gaetz has pushed to end U.S. aid to Ukraine, casting doubt on NATO’s relevance. Paul, ever the non-interventionist, resists automatic military commitments.
Their skepticism reflects a broader trend: strategic ambiguity is replacing solidarity. Article 5 still exists, but its power now depends on political will—not shared conviction
Moscow TV: "We will divide Poland and devour it." If the Moscow empire attacks Poland, will the USA stand side by side with the Poles? It's a simple yes-or-no question.
Always give a
bully what they want, so they will stop bullying? Who in their right mind believes that? Giving a
bully what they want only convinces the bully that bullying works and they bully some more.
Always give a
