Trump and Secretary Rubio accuse Europe of freeloading. What’s the real story? 
The 77-year-old NATO alliance faces the biggest crisis in history. President Trump and Marco Rubio repeatedly express frustration over Europe’s refusal to commit naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Why Are We In NATO? Asks Rubio
“When we need them to allow our military bases, their answer is no. Then why are we in NATO? You have to ask that question. After this conflict is concluded, we are going to have to re-examine that relationship,” said Rubio.
My what a pathetic bootlicker Marco Rubio has become.
Free Ride Rebuttal
100,000 American troops in Europe = a free ride for Europeans?
- American military bases are not free Germany, Italy, Spain, and Romania pay for the infrastructure, land, utilities, and civilian personnel of US bases. Germany alone contributes over $1 billion annually to support the American military presence on its soil.
- Europe is the largest customer of the American defense industry F-35s, Patriot missiles, HIMARS, Apache Helicopters — all purchased by Europeans with real money. Every security alarm in Europe translates into contracts for Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing.
- American bases in Europe don’t only protect Europe Ramstein in Germany coordinates operations across Africa and the Middle East. Sigonella in Italy covers the Mediterranean and North Africa. Romania secures the eastern flank and the Black Sea. These are global American strategic assets — not neighborhood security for Europeans.
- Command is American, not European NATO is always led by an American Supreme Commander (SACEUR). Europe contributes troops, bases, and money — but America holds the controls. Those who control the structure are not the ones getting a free ride.
- The nuclear umbrella is not altruism American nuclear deterrence in Europe keeps the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, keeps European markets open to US corporations, and legitimizes American hegemony against Russia and China. But what would actually happen if America withdrew its troops from Europe?
- For America — immediate strategic losses Without bases in Europe, American response time to any crisis in Europe, Africa, or the Middle East grows from hours to days. Ramstein, Sigonella, and Incirlik cannot be replaced by aircraft carriers. Infrastructure built over decades disappears overnight.
- The American defense industry loses its biggest customer A Europe without the US umbrella will build its own defense industry — and fast. Airbus Military, KNDS, Leonardo, and Rheinmetall will take the contracts that Lockheed and Raytheon currently win. Billions of dollars shift from America to Europe.
- The dollar weakens Dollar hegemony is partly sustained by American global military credibility. A withdrawal from Europe signals to the world that America no longer guarantees the postwar order. Alternatives — the euro, the yuan — become more attractive as global reserve options.
- Russia wins without firing a single shot Not necessarily through immediate invasion — but through political influence, energy pressure, and the gradual destabilization of countries on the eastern frontier. The Baltic states, Poland, and Romania enter a security grey zone that no one can guarantee quickly.
- China watches and draws conclusions about Taiwan A precedent of withdrawal from Europe sends a direct signal to Beijing: American commitments are negotiable. The cost of deterrence in the Pacific rises exponentially. Withdrawal is not isolationism. It is strategic abdication. America would not be leaving Europe because it no longer has interests there. It would be leaving while ignoring that those very interests are what make it a superpower.
The “free ride” narrative doesn’t describe Europe. It describes exactly what America has in Europe.
Not a Big Fan of NATO
I am not a big fan of NATO as it exists.
For this post, I am merely looking at the claims and counter-claims.
Points 1, 2, 6, and 7 above are reasons why Trump will be the paper tiger he accuses NATO of being.
Trump’s Greenland Gall
Even more galling is Trump’s position on Greenland.
“NATO is a paper tiger. We want Greenland. They don’t want to give it to us and I said ‘Okay, bye bye.’”
Please read that again and again until the significance sinks in.
NATO as Trump’s Personal Army
Trump demanded NATO just “give” Greenland to the US.
Does that remind you of anything? It should.
In 1938, Adolf Hitler demanded the annexation of Czechoslovakia’s border region, the Sudetenland, populated by over 3 million ethnic Germans. In the September 1938 Munich Agreement, European powers (Britain and France) allowed the annexation to avoid conflict.
The next day, however, Hitler added new demands, insisting that the claims of ethnic Germans in Poland and Hungary also be satisfied.
Does that remind you of anything?
Advice, Who Needs It?
Trump started this war by ignoring the advice of allies, ignoring the advice of top military experts, and instead listened to advice of Ted Cruz, Jared Kushner, and demand from Benjamin Netanyahu.
Trump demands NATO be little more than his own personal army, called up on his demand whenever he starts a stupid war.
Trump now repeats his threats on Greenland, refuses help from Ukraine and its drone technology, and demands Europe do something to fix the mess he single-handedly created after telling Europe he did not need their help.
Q: Why would this stop at Greenland? At Iran? Anywhere?
A: It wouldn’t
From that aspect, and to reduce the EU’s reliance on US help, Europe is better off without Trump’s alleged help.
The current sad state of affairs is Europe needs to defend itself from Russia and the US.
Yes, that would be painful for Europe. But diminished weapon sales and lack of US bases in Europe would be a painful loss for the US too.
Leaving NATO Without Congress Would Be Illegal
Trump’s threat to leave NATO by executive order would be illegal.
The Defense Authorization Act prohibits sets a two-thirds vote in the Senate or a joint act of Congress to leave NATO.
Rubio Irony
Rubio championed the Defense Authorization Act when he was in the Senate.
The measure was Spearheaded by Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), in the annual National Defense Authorization Act
The bipartisan attempt to add checks and balances highlights the lengths Congress iswilling to go to protect the U.S.-NATO relationship amid ongoing Russian aggressionand after years of criticism of the military allianceduring Trump’s presidential tenure.
Rubio said in a statement: “The Senate should maintain oversight on whether or not our nation withdraws from NATO. We must ensure we are protecting our national interests and protecting the security of our democratic allies.”
I discussed the setup in detail on April 1, 2026 in Trump Threatens to Leave NATO, Chastises European Allies
Trump threatens to leave NATO if allies don’t help reopen the strait. But it’s not his decision.
For details and discussion, please click the above link.
However, Trump clearly does not give a damn about legalities or the constitution.
So, let’s presume Trump leaves NATO (or tries to by executive order), and in response the EU kicks the US out of Europe. What would happen?
NATO Lose-Lose Setup
This is not a clean “America First” victory for the United States, nor is it simply a long-overdue wake-up call for “freeloading” Europe.
It is a genuine lose-lose situation with real risks on both sides of the Atlantic.
For the United States:
- Loss of critical forward operating bases (Ramstein as the central air hub for Middle East, Africa, and broader power projection; facilities in Italy, Spain, Romania, and elsewhere).
- Damage to the U.S. defense industrial base — Europe has become a major customer for F-35s, Patriots, HIMARS and other systems that help stabilize production lines and lower unit costs through scale.
- Reduced strategic leverage and longer logistics chains, which works against a clean pivot toward China/Taiwan priorities.
- Potential secondary effects on dollar dominance and Treasury demand if Europe accelerates “Buy European” policies or de-dollarization moves.
For Europe:
- Immediate gaps in intelligence, aerial refueling, strategic airlift, integrated command structures, and the U.S. nuclear umbrella.
- A massive rearmament bill. Independent estimates suggest Europe would need roughly $1 trillion over 25 years just to replace key U.S. conventional capabilities (air, naval, space, enablers), plus hundreds of billions more annually in the short term to approach credible standalone deterrence.
- A dangerous transition window of several years during which Russia (even in its weakened post-Ukraine state) or other actors could probe weaknesses via hybrid means, gray-zone actions, or nuclear coercion.
- Europe’s existing industrial strengths — including fighter production capacity ramping toward ~80–110 jets per year across Typhoon, Rafale, and Gripen lines — help with home defense but cannot instantly replicate U.S.-scale 5th-generation stealth, networking, or global enablers.
The interdependence highlighted in recent debates cuts both ways.
A sudden or even credible pullout (troop repositioning, command withdrawal, nuclear ambiguity) raises transition costs and risks for both sides while handing propaganda wins to Russia and China, who benefit from Western division.
Markets already dislike the uncertainty. The Hormuz situation has demonstrated how quickly energy and commodity volatility can spread.
War Crimes
Trump’s Self-Proclaimed Morality
On January 18, 2026 I commented We Are Now Bearing the Poisoned Fruit of Trump’s Self-Proclaimed Morality
The New York Times asked Trump in an interview if there were any limits on his global powers. Trump responded: “Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
Certain to Get More Bizarre
On January 19, 2026 I noted Trump “No Longer Feels an Obligation to Think Purely of Peace”
Trump states the obvious. But what’s it about?
This is more evidence of a decline in his mental abilities. But things are certain to get more bizarre the further along we get in Trump’s term.
Well, that was one hell of an accurate prediction.
And here we are, dependent on Trump’s own morality to conduct foreign affairs and not commit war crimes.
Regardless of who pays for it, NATO should have been abolished when the Soviet Union collapsed.
This site does not seem to be set up to prevent more then just 1 person —to be using –the exact same name ?
Mish…Could tou confirm if anyone can use anyones Existing Name as they may choose?
You should start writing for The Atlantic or Huffington Post
I hope NATO breaks up so the woke anti-European Democrats who will be running the USA as a one party state after the debacle of the Republicans under Trump will no longer be able to conspire against the rising right in Europe to prevent Europeans from becoming hated minorities in their own indigenous lands. After all, why shouldn’t European people have a homeland like the Africans, Asians, etc. do?
Hopefully the fallout from Crazy Don’s adventure ride will suck rubio and vance into obscurity
They both know they’ve sold their souls, pathetic
moved
This is what happens when a country is led by individuals who lack the judgment and competence the role demands. Many corporations require candidates to undergo psychological and cognitive assessments before they’re hired. It’s reasonable to expect that anyone seeking high public office should meet similar standards before being allowed to run.
…
The purpose for NATO ended decades ago. It’s another jobs program. End it or make it useful.
Headlines on Drudge:
Boy with friends like that who needs enemies…..
Looks like everyone is turning on the Demon running the White House.
lol, newsom. The best gift Democrats could give to republicans would be having him and his wife represent their party. Their dumb enough to do it. They proved that with headboard harris.
How are gas prices going for you?
Newsom is an imbecile and a corrupt one at that. 960 SAT for a spoiled white kid from SF?
The presidential election popular vote will be 51-49. Do you feel lucky?
When has NATO had ANYTHING AT ALL to do with Europe’s “security” (if not to ENDANGER it)..?!?
NATO is an Anglo-American creation which pursues Anglo-American interests.
In the words of NATO’s first Secretary General, a British baron: “NATO’s purpose is to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down”.
The US will leave NATO when it doesn’t serve its interests anymore or when it can’t afford it anymore (which is what I think it’s happening now).
Would that mean that the Americans will finally fuck off home? Unfortunately, no.
The bases that the Americans have in Europe are not only the NATO bases, they also have purely American bases and especially those in Germany and Italy (and Japan BTW but I will be talking about Europe only here) which were established at the end of WWII, when the US was still occupying those countries, by SECRET treaties which are still secret to this day! The Americans will definitely keep most of those.
What the US will sooner or later inevitably do is abandoning NATO as it is today (which means its end) while creating a much smaller version of it with far fewer strategic countries (most definitely Italy and the UK, most probably Poland, probably Germany and Greece, and very few others).
The (EXTREMELY) good thing that will come out of this for my homecountry, Italy, is that we will get out of the imploding EU in a relatively orderly fashion.
In the long run, once the US too completes its decline and will become a regional power, we will finally regain some sovereignty and we will hopefully join the Russian sphere of influence. Economically, politically and militarily.
Sure Vlad!
It’s President Vlad for you. Gandòn.
Yawn…………………….
Friendly advice to get rid of your boredom: try to read my posts instead of yours and others who think like you.
And as an added bonus, you will also learn something.
Iran cuts off all communication routes with US after Trump threats
lol, because they were super ready to talk before then. So easy to fool those who want to believe the lie.
– The 77-year-old NATO alliance faces the biggest crisis in history. President Trump and Marco Rubio repeatedly express frustration over Europe’s refusal to commit naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
> NATO is not now, what it was meant to be, or even close to it. Is it even needed is the real question, isn’t it? Do we really need a bunch of administrative expenses to tell us what we need to do? Decide to help others? Be good to our Ally’s? I think not, as it’s not up to pencil pushers with their hands out for money, who should be telling anyone what to do in their own Country IMO.
>> Is Europe being the true ally they claim to be, and helping us in a time of need, or could they not be bothered? Maybe we need some very detailed analysis of what NATO does truly mean Today, and that perhaps will let us know if we need NATO any longer. I personally would be pulling a portion of troops out, and bringing them home to help our Countries economy. A lot of money gets spent in Europe by Americans, and quite frankly we could use that economic help right now at home!
– 100,000 American troops in Europe = a free ride for Europeans? > That’s silly talk, as the U.S. is compensated for much of the help. There is more to it of course, but that’s the crux of the matter. It’s not about the money, nearly as much about allowing the U.S. to use bases for defense purposes, or strategy. Are they being fair doing so? Not sure, but it’s worth of discussion on both sides, and how it’s to play out moving forward would be nice to know.
– The American defense industry loses its biggest customer. > Why do we have to lose them entirely? We have customers all over the World, and don’t even have the ability to give them all what they want now. Maybe we ask for a decade of orders up front, and we schedule it where and when it will fit in best for manufacturing reasons? Maybe as they are made, they are shipped to Europe in safe storage and to be used when required? Things could be done differently to make the process better, quicker, cheaper, and not a nuisance, but rather a planned out need and desired amounts of X, Y & Z?
– Airbus Military, KNDS, Leonardo, and Rheinmetall will take the contracts that Lockheed and Raytheon currently win. Billions of dollars shift from America to Europe. > Great, now they can use it to build up there defenses, and we can then pull many of our troops home. Wouldn’t that be sweet! American families together in America. We can assist as needed still, but they have the heavy load now, and we would be only help I’d required. They don’t lose the support, but now have to defend themselves more appropriately and without so many soldiers from America, if any are actually required. They will have to grow their personal to full strength, but they should regardless of the outcome, I would suggest. Might want to get more energy independent as well, while they are at it.
– Dollar hegemony is partly sustained by American global military credibility. A withdrawal from Europe signals to the world that America no longer guarantees the postwar order. Alternatives the euro, the yuan become more attractive as global reserve options. > Our troops have to be actually in Europe why? What can they do there, that Europe can’t do for itself, and for that matter what are we doing there, that can’t be done from the U.S. if necessary?
– Russia wins without firing a single shot Not necessarily through immediate invasion — but through political influence, energy pressure, and the gradual destabilization of countries on the eastern frontier. The Baltic states, Poland, and Romania enter a security grey zone that no one can guarantee quickly. > We can work a lot closer with Poland, and should imo. We should be able to work out something in that area to suffice, and not adding military or vases, but commitments of sorts, and the sharing of training with Troops and such as well. We don’t need a presence, or do we?
– China watches and draws conclusions about Taiwan A precedent of withdrawal from Europe sends a direct signal to Beijing: American commitments are negotiable. The cost of deterrence in the Pacific rises exponentially. Withdrawal is not isolationism. It is strategic abdication. America would not be leaving Europe because it no longer has interests there. It would be leaving while ignoring that those very interests are what make it a superpower. > We would not entirely leave right away, and it’s going to allow Europe more independence in the end.. The conclusions you mention are not facts, but anticipations correct? Not necessarily going to happen or even be a conclusion. We need some clarification for sure, on what’s going on now, and expected into the future. No reason this cannot be all worked out, over time, which we have.
– I am not a big fan of NATO as it exists. > I agree as it exist, and it needs to be changed in some ways, to be clarified for all concerned. Not tossed out, but brought up to today standards on how it should be applied, and implemented, and even when and why, excluding an emergency declaration.
– Even more galling is Trump’s position on Greenland. > He is still talking about it? Let it go! It’s a strategic location and always has been, so why all the talk now? We know it, our enemies know it, and that’s about it, other than Big Mouth apparently yapping again about it…
– Advice, Who Needs It? > Trump, to STFU for a couple of weeks, and everything would probably work itself out on its own. He is his biggest advocate, and also his biggest roadblock at the same time, at times…
– The current sad state of affairs is Europe needs to defend itself from Russia and the US. > That may be stretching it a tad, but point taken. Russia can’t handle another war right now, so there is that, and definitely wouldn’t want one with the U.S. and especially now, as they have been a tad weakened. It could almost guarantee nuclear options becoming the topic of discussion, and nobody on our entire Earth, should want to see that, for any reason! If Europe took better care of themselves, we wouldn’t even be talking about this.
Hoping and praying that this Taco Tuesday is really TACO Tuesday
TACOcaine Tuesday is what we really need
an old Soviet joke: ENJOY!
A man goes to a newspaper stand every day, buys a copy of Pravda, glances at the front cover, curses, and throws it away.
After a few weeks of this the seller just has to ask what’s going on. “Why do you always look at the cover, but never inside?”
“I’m looking for an obituary.”
“An obituary? But those are in the back!”
“Oh no, the obituary I’m looking for will be on the front page.”
Iran cutting off all communication as a result of Trump threats
https://www.firstpost.com/world/iran-cuts-all-diplomatic-channels-with-us-ahead-of-trumps-strait-of-hormuz-deadline-13997645.html
There can be no legitimate discussion with this murderous idiot.
Repression against war opposition in Israel
https://forward.com/news/817210/israel-iran-anti-war-protests/
Warmongers are in control of the US and Israel. They will tolerate no democracy.
Found on internet:
“It’s going to be an interesting day for sure when the typical American suddenly realizes that when Al Jubail is burned down, the supply chain of lubricants will collapse. And when the lubricants collapse, then trucks don’t run and forklifts don’t fork. And when forklifts don’t fork and trucks don’t truck, there’s not going to be much food that appears on grocery store shelves.
And at that moment all those who have been mindlessly cheering for war on Iran will seize up and begin to ask themselves, “What have I done?”
You’ve fucked yourself is what you’ve done. You’ve ALREADY fucked yourself, because these events are being set into motion right now, but you just don’t know how badly you’ve fucked yourself because the fucking is delayed by global logistics and shipping timelines.
It won’t be long, however, before the self-fucking arrives, and people who know absolutely nothing about lubricants, grease, transportation, engine oil, supply chain logistics and the Al Jubail industrial city will suddenly discover just how fucked they really are.”
https://x.com/HealthRanger/status/2041383261306294562
Self-fucking without lubrication? That sounds rough.
MAGAs are experts at that.
Wrong. The cheerleaders will never own up responsibility and will blame the libs, who weren’t owned enough.
That’s what I was thinking. Fox News will tell them its all Biden’s fault and the knuckle-dragging morons will believe them.
Trump now threatening to jail reporters who published the leaked story about the American pilot hiding in Iran, unless they reveal the leaker
Gov. Desantis has signed legislation that gives him new authority to designate domestic terrorist organizations and allows colleges to expel students involved in those groups.
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/789132-gov-desantis-signs-domestic-terrorist-bill-that-democrats-fear-will-lead-to-crackdown-on-college-liberals/
The Free State of Florida. Where everyone is free to do exactly as DeSantis says!
Don’t worry, the reporter in question is Jewish….nothing will happen
Israel journalist Amit Segal – who has close high-level links to the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – claimed Monday on his Telegram channel that he was the first to publish information on the second pilot. However, it is unlikely Trump was referring to an Israeli journalist. The first to report the story in the US were the NYT, CBS, and CNN.
We will get these little dead C-130 bounces in the equities market, but there will be no dead platoon bounces. War gets real when they come home in a flag draped casket and no amount of flag waving changes that.
The US has such weak leadership now – it’s almost heartbreaking to watch.
America has no friends or allies who could help advise them, how to get out of this mess.
This administration doesn’t take advice so friends wouldn’t help anyway.
You forget we have strong ISRAELI leadership.
Iran: “Bomb me harder Daddy”
Epstein and the war rolled into one joke. Well done Mr. Penny!
Brilliant representation of the right’s casual disregard for anyone not voting with them.
The Chief Pedophile of the United States should be in a straitjacket in a padded cell but the mentally challenged electorate saw fit to make him the world’s most powerful man. How’s that working out for you?
As we said it would
In the meantime, China is watching the United States deplete its ammunition and missile stockpiles. The United States will have very little left with which to defend Taiwan if China decides to advance. And China can just give the same reasoning in advancing into Taiwan that Trump gave on attacking Iran.
If the United States responded to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, it would suffer a severe military defeat. The Chinese have hundreds of thousands of missiles and drones. The United States would not be able to get carriers within range.
It is interesting to think about countries that let foreign countries occupy them with foreign soldiers. Israel is little, but they don’t allow that.
Oh, yes they do. Look up Site 512 and be enlightened.
Hint: Space Force FTW
Once again, the comment system censors websites on some list somewhere.
Trump’s threat today…
A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World. 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, will finally end. God Bless the Great People of Iran!
The return of Hitler right before your eyes. The soul tainted MAGA supporters will have to answer for their death, destruction and evil.
Trump lied about almost everything. I don’t get your venom at people who believed his lies. Nor did they have a choice: Kamala was equally dishonest and incompetent out in the open.
The Epstein class manipulated us into only those 2 “choises.” Trump and his Epstein class are the villains.
You didn’t learn that from the first administration or the endless stories about his corruption and bankruptcies over the last 30 years?
There’s no excusing it now, you have blood on your hands.
What would be different under Harris?
Full disclosure: I voted Green last time.
For starters, I don’t think we’d be bombing Iran but everyone that voted for Trump will keep telling themselves that the same thing would have happened. I don’t recall Biden bombing Iran.
Second, we wouldn’t have had stupid tariffs crippling the economy, farmers wouldn’t be going bankrupt or needing bailouts and Europe and rest of world wouldn’t be hating us right now.
is that enough or you need more?
They need infinitely more, as they have proven time and time again
How about not believing bullshit, whatever the source, instead of being a fanboy.
We saw what a disaster Trump was the first time. In fact, many of us knew he would be just like this before he won in ‘16. Your claim about Harris is so lame. She never was president. Only a vice president. You have no idea what she would have done. You’re making it up to justify your support for Nazi’s, white Christian nationalists and the KKK. Clearly you live in a fantasy world and it suits you just fine.
How was Kamala equally dishonest and incompetent? Anything, or did you just make that up?
If you don’t know, I doubt that anyone could tell you.
The left told the right what Trump would do in his second term, much more accurately than what Trump told the right he would do. And yet the right will still say the left is the source of all the USA’s woes.
Wait! What?!?!? He’s going to bomb Israel?
The alliances built by generations of American statesmen are being destroyed by Trump and his sycophants in front of our eyes. It is indeed amazing that the stock and bond markets don’t (want to) notice what is happening.
The same “statesmen” that got us into WW2 and built up the Soviets in the process? The statesmen who got us into Vietnam, created the mass surveillance state and perpetual trade deficits?
First, the apparent value in US military systems diminishes with the presence of “kill switches” and performance throttles. Also, the US dependence on Chinese rare earths and tungsten make delivery of complete units difficult.
Second, what we are seeing in this war is that massive battle platforms (such as carriers) can be neutralized with relatively inexpensive missiles and drones and as a result are confined to the edges of the battle space.
Third, high-tech air defense defense works, for a while, until the AD missiles run out. 3% of Iran’s missiles/drones got through in the first few weeks, now 27% are getting through
Fourth, high-tech air defenses are expensive, and all parts of the system need to be protected–Iran has successfully disabled significant amounts of the early warning radar systems associated with air defense
Fifth, newer thermal and acoustic “radar” systems are in use, so planes have little sense of radar locking onto their planes. Loitering drones are also being used to hit slower moving planes.
Sixth, anything that flies is vulnerable
Seventh, the US using mostly “stand-off” munitions from outside Iran means that close-in support of a campaign is perceived by the US as being too risky and expensive.
People in the market for weapons systems are watching and learning.
Again, it amazes me how little response the US stock market is having to the tremendous uncertainty that this war brings to global markets.
Supplies of critical materials are falling fast as the disruption of Middle Eastern production facilities continues. There is no endpoint on the horizon on the warfronts. There are finite limits to the supply of weaponry, finite limits to oil, gas, plastics, helium, sulphur, ammonia, urea, potash. The notion that these disruptions will not spike global inflation, spike material shortages and disrupt all sorts of production seems underpriced in terms of potential market volatility.
China has stopped shipping Yttrium, which is used as a coating that keeps jet engines from melting. There is no substitute. Some sources say the US only has two weeks of supply left, some two months. I know that for sure I do not know the answer.
The defense stocks remain strong and US, Argentina’s and Canadian oil companies continue to look underpriced relative to potential profits from what is obviously a longer disruption than has been presented by the administration.
WTI backwardation is extreme! Yikes!
This means puts are mis-priced right now and selling at a deep discount. The markets are always fine until they aren’t. The crash is often rapid and deep.
Got PUTS?
US corporations are looking forward to massive inflation and the profits they bring. That’s bullish for the shareholder class, and who give a flying f*** about anyone else?
It is so weird. Some are saying they are petrified. Deer in the headlights syndrome.So…less volatility at the moment. A lot of talk about finding the best bet in the worst situation. I also feel like they are telling everyone to remain calm for fear of a collapse before the big guys can get their money out. Be calm and carry on! It’s definitely adding another layer of worry, because it’s clearly not acting like it should.
There are many examples of peacetime “defensive military alliances” not only failing to prevent war but causing a war once started to be much larger than it would be without the alliance. Part of the reason is that it gives the smaller, weaker powers an incentive to conduct a more aggressive and less compromising foreign policy knowing that a much larger power has their back. Small disputes grow into major wars. The Peloponnesian War and WW1 are good examples.
In the case if NATO, it not only precipitated the Cuban Missile Crisis, it prolonged it to the point where it nearly spiraled out of control. After the Soviets launched Sputnik, it was assumed that the USSR had or was close to having an ICBM capability. This severely weakened the credibility of the US nuclear umbrella that supported NATO. As a stopgap measure, the US proposed basing the shorter range Jupiter missiles in Turkey and Italy. This was (reasonably) seen by the Soviets as a first strike weapon and was a primary reason for the basing of Soviet short range missiles in Cuba (which itself suggested the Soviets did not have a large ICBM capability).
Once the Soviet missiles in Cuba were discovered, several options were proposed to get them removed. All relied to some extent on military force. One, however, suggested trading the missiles in Cuba for those in Turkey. This was initially rejected as not only appeasement of aggression but because it would also weaken the NATO alliance since we would have to negotiate with Turkey before withdrawing the missiles. This would obviously take time and possibly lead to a division in the alliance. The missile exchange was eventually chosen to resolve the crisis but it was a very close call.
Incidentally, Castro wanted the Soviets to launch a first strike nuclear attack on the US in the event of a US invasion.
No such thing as a defensive alliance.
What’s the difference between a defensive an offensive gun?
What the one calls deterrence, the other side calls a threat and a provocation.
If you and your neighbor both have a rifle, would you feel threatened if he starts driving a bullet proof humvee or parks a tank in the yard?
If you are expending effort to make yourself impervious to counter attack, the other side legitimately draws the conclusion that you may have aggressive plans and that they are now in a far more vulnerable position.
Despite all the insistence on defense and deterrence, people refuse to think through the basic terms.
Power is not predicated on intention or behavior, but on capability.
A defensive gun stays at your house. An offensive gun gets pointed at your neighbor in his house.
This morning:
WTI – $115
Brent – $110
If Trump makes things go KABOOM today, I expect those numbers (and profits) to go up.
– The 77-year-old NATO alliance faces the biggest crisis in history. President Trump and Marco Rubio repeatedly express frustration over Europe’s refusal to commit naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. > NATO is not now, what it was meant to be, or even close to it. NATO was created because of the Soviet Union in 1949. With its primary mission being, to stop the potential Russia expansion into Europe and beyond.
– “When we need them to allow our military bases, their answer is no. Then why are we in NATO? > Excellent Question and one that require immediate attention. We are not getting anywhere near the help we have given Europe time and time again. Is Europe being the true ally and helping us in a time of need, or could they not be bothered? Maybe we need some very detailed analysis of what NATO does truly mean, and that will let us know if we need NATO any longer. I personally would be pulling out a portion of troops out, and bringing them home to help our Countries economy. A lot of money gets spent in Europe by Americans, and quite frankly we could use that economic help right now at home!
– 100,000 American troops in Europe = a free ride for Europeans? > That’s silly talk, as the U.S. is compensated for much of the help. There is more to it of course, but that’s the crux of the matter. It’s not about the money, nearly as much about allowing the U.S. to use bases for defense purposes, or strategy. Are they being fair doing so? Not sure, but it’s worth of discussion on both sides, and how it’s to play out moving forward would be nice to know.
– The American defense industry loses its biggest customer. > Why do we have to lose them entirely? We have customers all over the World, and don’t even have the ability to give them all what they want now. Maybe we ask for a decade of orders up front, and we schedule it where and when it will fit in best for manufacturing reasons? Maybe as they are made, they are shipped to Europe in safe storage and to be used when required? Things could be done differently to make the process better, quicker, cheaper, and not a nuisance, but rather a planned out need and desired amounts of X, Y & Z?
– Airbus Military, KNDS, Leonardo, and Rheinmetall will take the contracts that Lockheed and Raytheon currently win. Billions of dollars shift from America to Europe. > Great, now they can use it to build up there defenses, and we can then pull many of our troops home. Wouldn’t that be sweet! American families together in America. We can assist as needed still, but they have the heavy load now, and we would be only help I’d required. They don’t lose the support, but now have to defend themselves more appropriately and without so many soldiers from America. They will have to grow there personal to full strength, but they should regardless of the outcome I suggest.
– Dollar hegemony is partly sustained by American global military credibility. A withdrawal from Europe signals to the world that America no longer guarantees the postwar order. Alternatives the euro, the yuan become more attractive as global reserve options. > Why we do big orders with deliveries over time. Why we keep a percentage (35%-50%?) of some amount still in Europe. We are not leaving or giving up on Europe, but making things work better with them, and some clarification of expectations moving forward. No more surprise announcements like recently.
– Russia wins without firing a single shot Not necessarily through immediate invasion but through political influence, energy pressure, and the gradual destabilization of countries on the eastern frontier. The Baltic states, Poland, and Romania enter a security grey zone that no one can guarantee quickly. > We can work a lot closer with Poland, and should imo. We should be able to work out something in that area to suffice.
– China watches and draws conclusions about Taiwan A precedent of withdrawal from Europe sends a direct signal to Beijing: American commitments are negotiable. The cost of deterrence in the Pacific rises exponentially. Withdrawal is not isolationism. It is strategic abdication. America would not be leaving Europe because it no longer has interests there. It would be leaving while ignoring that those very interests are what make it a superpower. > We would not entirely leave. The conclusions you mention are not facts, but anticipations correct? Not necessarily going to happen or even be a conclusion. Again, we need some very defined conclusions way before anything is done. We need some clarification as well, on what’s going on now, and into the future. No reason this cannot be worked out.
Not a Big Fan of NATO
– I am not a big fan of NATO as it exists. > I agree as it exist, and it needs to be changed in some ways, to be clarified for all concerned. Not tossed out, but brought up to today standards on how it should be applied, and implemented, and even when and why, excluding an emergency declaration.
– Even more galling is Trump’s position on Greenland. > He is still talking about it? Let it go! It’s a strategic location and always has been, so why all the talk now? We know it, our enemies know it, and that’s about it, other than Big Mouth apparently yapping again about it…
– Advice, Who Needs It? > Trump, to STFU for a couple of weeks, and everything would probably work itself out on its own. He is his biggest advocate, and also his biggest roadblock at the same time at times…
– The current sad state of affairs is Europe needs to defend itself from Russia and the US. > That may be stretching it a tad, but point taken. Russia can’t handle another war right now, so there is that, and definitely wouldn’t want one with the U.S. and especially now, as they have been a tad weakened. It could almost guarantee nuclear options becoming the topic of discussion, and nobody on our entire Earth, should want to see that, for any reason!
”The dollar weakens Dollar hegemony is partly sustained by American global military credibility. A withdrawal from Europe signals to the world that America no longer guarantees the postwar order. Alternatives — the euro, the yuan — become more attractive as global reserve options.”
Mish, this reasoning seems to contradict arguments you have made for years about the great difficulty in replacing the dollar as a world reserve currency due to the great size of US capital markets, the transparency of these markets and the enforcement of contract law. I don’t recall you ever mentioning US military power in your previous arguments. In fact, you suggested that it was ridiculous that US military power was used to enforce the pricing of oil in dollars as the reason for our spate of wars in the middle east.
I suppose you could argue that US military spending overseas is one of the pumps needed to supply dollars to international users to sustain the use of the dollar as the leading currency for international transactions along with foreign aid and trade deficits per the Triffin Dilemma. But given the harm this has caused to the US domestic economy from having the dollar as tge world’s reserve currency along with the potential abuse of power it gives the US government, why is this a good thing?
And since when are the over production of military weapons whether for use by our military to enforce Pax Americana or as revenue from exports to NATO an economic good? Do trade deficits suddenly matter?
Europe and the US are parting ways in many different forms already.
There are other things happening but those are key activities for now. A prudent investor need only think about the long term implications for S&P 500 companies and the companies listed above and their growth outlook moving forward.
Ending NATO relationship will likely impact defense firms in the US as well.
Of course, their Achilles heel is their dependence on oil so they need to figure that out fast.
This is where a post by Mish can lead to tremendous profits if you’re paying attention.
To paraphrase: if the US exits NATO, they’d have a harder time interfering throughout the world.
Your terms are acceptable to me.
WTF does us choosing to attack Iran with Israel have to do with NATO??
NATO is a treaty with specific terms, not an agreement to go along with whatever military misadventure a member chooses to initiate.
Trump has insulted our NATO allies well before this. He tried to pressure and bully Denmark on Greenland even though Denmark had helped us in Iraq and Afghanistan. He insulted UK troops, saying in Iraq and Afghanistan they had easy roles when they lost 500 soldiers and saw thousands injured. And now he expects them to put their people in harms way for his idiotic war of choice??
I would like to see the US pull out of NATO for the reasons described in the article. It weakens the US dramatically, which makes it much less likely the US will use military force against weak countries in the future. For the same reason, we should pull out of Japan and S. Korea. We have shown that we no longer possess the intellectual capacity to be the world’s hegemon.
Great 10-point summary from Mish.
My guess is that Trump is in reality blaming Europe for not agreeing to his Ukraine-Russia peace plan.
This has put constrains on US military assets and tied hands of European countries because they can say Look we are still busy with the war your country has caused to happen. The truth is that Europe didn’t do anything in 2021 to stop the war to happen.
Ukraine war is existential for EU and for City of London. If Ukraine goes belly up then there will be big shifts in Europe. On the other hand Iranian war is just another energy crisis from European point of view which doesn’t put current power structure in Europe at risk.
Please tell me that Iran does understand that they could agree to everything Trump demands and they are still going to get bombed back to the stone-age. Bibi & Co. will decide when this is over…and we are currently nowhere near that endpoint.
3-4 days= Check3-4 weeks= Check3-4 months <– You are here
3-4 Years
3-4 Decades
Iran understands. They have to hold out to the mid-terms when the dems take over and impeach Trump on war crimes. Then they get to turn him over to the ICC and prison.
A friend suggested we turn him over to the parents of the Iranian school girls murdered in that bombing.
That might work in lieu of reparations.
Sounds good.
Iran thinks in terms of millennia, not days or years. Check the date they were founded.
I think this is Trump just negotiating. The US will not pull out of NATO. Trump just wants recognition that he and the US are a key contributor and he wants others to foot more of the bill.
NATO is a defensive organization that is supposed to act cooperatively if one member is attacked. The US attacked another country in the midst of diplomatic negotiations and without consulting NATO. The US is not under attack, its borders have not been compromised and it is apparently not even at war. Not sure where NATO even fits into the mess Trump has made.
The US might look for support from its allies and it might have received that support if Trump hadn’t insulted everyone else’s military and then said he didn’t need them.
Not even Trump can suck and blow at the same time and when you try, you look like an idiot.
The US has “most hated nation” status so it also has the most to lose if there is a gap in world wide security.
NATO stopped being a defensive alliance 30 years ago. Ask Libya.
Ask Serbia.
The US has no allies anymore.
The U.S. have never had allies, just willing patsies.
As of 2026, the President does not have the unilateral legal authority to leave NATO. In late 2023, Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2024. This law includes a specific provision (Section 1250A) designed to prevent any president from unilaterally exiting the alliance. Under this law, the President cannot withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty unless they have a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Methinks the Supreme Court would probably decide if this were challenged.
Taco Chungus lied again:
While confirming the intent to arm the uprising that began in late 2025, Trump claimed the operation failed because the Kurds, who were used as the delivery channel, “kept the weapons” for themselves instead of passing them to the demonstrators.
This blunt disclosure not only provides the Iranian government with direct evidence of US interference but also publicly blames the US’s Kurdish allies for the missing arms.
In response to Trump’s comments, Amjad Hussein Panahi, head of communications for Komala of the Toilers of Kurdistan, stated, “We assure you we haven’t received a single bullet or weapon from any country or place, and we’re not aware of the existence of such a thing; what we have is our own.”
Mohammed Nazif Qaderi, a senior official from the opposition Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI), called the reports “baseless,” saying, “We haven’t received any weapons. The weapons we have are from 47 years ago, and we obtained them on the Islamic Republic’s battlefield, and we bought some from the market.”
You voted and recommended everyone else did in 2016. I was here and remember. How could you not see this?
The Devil Wears Prada?
Farewell, America.
Why does Europe need to protect itself from Russia?
Please produce some actual evidence that Russia has designs on Europe.
One of the largest militaries is on your easter border, ruled by a man proven to be aggressive to neighbouring countries (Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia already affected, Baltic states under threat, shadow war already going on in Europe).
That threat alone would warrant to build a sufficient defensive force. Even if Russia has no intent of attacking Europe today, why would you assume that cannot change in the near future? Not having a strong defense in place would be foolish.
They have nukes. The Russian military is very weak. Beef broth with no beef. Every Euro wasted on military defense hurts Europe. Do they want to be like us? A country hollowed out by exceedingly wasteful and perpetual government spending on a two-front defense with one front front drunk on Vodka since the 1940s and the other straight up not wanting, in any way shape or form, a war with us or anybody else? All because some stupid rightwing preachers after WW2 fooled the West’s politicians into an insane overreaction to the “Godless” commies?
Let’s not forget that Russia invaded Ukraine because Ukraine elected some folks that wanted to join NATO and put US troops on Russia’s border.
No. The LDNR wanted independence in 2014 already, civil war ensued.
When Russia recognized the LDNR, they moved in peace-keepers under a mutual defense pact.
Ukraine attacked those peace-keepers instead of coming to the table to talk. This was in the days leading up to Feb 24, 2022.
Putin based every step on his actions on the UN Charter and international law — he is a lawyer.
Russia spent eight years trying to get Ukraine to adhere to Minsk-2 (after Ukraine broke the original Minsk Accord).
Merkel, Hollande and Poroshenko all admitted that Minsk-2 was a sham, that Ukraine never had any intention to keep any of its promises and Germany and France were encouraging them not to.
You don’t see the stupidity of your argument do you? “One of the largest militaries” can’t contain Ukraine but it’s a threat to Europe? Please explain.
You forget that Georgia/USA started a war in 2008 and the Ukraine/USA in 2014. No war has been going on in Moldova since the break up of the Soviet Union.
You’re going to see the usual cries from those with no eyes. This so called threat is from a country that can’t even control little old third world Ukraine after 4 long years of trying. The dummies are happy to keep paying while their heads are firmly buried in the sand. The problem is bigger than that though – I have to pay as well. Like the UK, Russia is a hasbeen and no threat to any advanced economy.
NATO is a relic of a Military which was formed to keep Europe protected from Russia from past decades ago . But Russia is now smaller than it’s former size in Europe. Even after the Soviet Union collapsed NATO has responded by adding even more Nations to NATO and now they are right up against the Russian Border. NATO is a massive drag on the purse strings of European and American taxpayers and it keeps deliberately creating Political problems to justify it’s existence. Russia attacked Ukraine only after constant NATO provocations for decades already. What a waste of citizens $Billions of tax dollars on NATO but it keeps gobbling up even more funding. NATO should rename themselves LEECH to better reflect their real function.
https://ondisc.nd.edu/news-media/news/the-addition-of-nato-members-over-time-1949-2023/
Why did they need to be protected from the Soviet Union?
It was the Nazis and 17 other countries that joined in to attack the Soviet Union.
The US joined the war when it was almost over in a race to get to Berlin, and has stayed ever since. Just in time to get the spoils of war, occupying Europe.
The whole post WW2 era has two founding pillars or myths.
The “good” warThe Holocaust (starting in the late fifties)Perhaps it’s time to entertain the notion that it was not exclusively Mr Hitler who created history.
Even if there was reason to be protected from the Soviet Union 80 years ago, they don’t need to be protected from Russia now. Mish writes that Russia wins “not necessarily through immediate invasion”. There’s zero risk of Russia invading Europe. Why would they want it? All problems, no resources. And Russia has all the land and resources they need.
100% correct. I believe Putin himself said that even attempting to conquer western Ukraine would be swallowing a porcupine – never mind taking on NATO! When you hear that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was “unprovoked,” take note that this person/news source is a neocon propagandist.
Action led by President Donald Trump has contributed to what “looks like Putin’s dream plan,” a key NATO ally’s leader has warned.
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-moves-putin-dream-plan-key-nato-ally-11773678
No.
Putin’s dream plan was a peace treaty.
A European security architecture based on “indivisible security”.
Indivisible security means that the security of one party cannot be at the expense of another. If your neighbor puts a tank in the back end with the turret pointing at your bedroom window, you would feel threatened, no?
That’s exactly why countries like the Baltic states, Poland, Finland and Sweden feel threatened. And why they joined NATO.
Finland and Sweden abrogated long-standing treaties that Russia did not violate. Now they are hosting American bases.
Russians have expanded their military by an order of magnitude, meaning these countries are facing increased threats and targeting, not less. Hosting Americans turns you into a target.
Poland hosts American missile bases from which Americans can attack Moscow !
The Russians think America should leave Eastern Europe, as was promised in 1991. They have seen 3 decades of NATO creeping further east, hosting Americans, building military infrastructure, encircling them, refusing to even talk, refusing to declare where their border falls, engaged in demonization and economic strangulation, and (in the nineties) rape and plunder.
Mr Wedej obviously does not know very much about Russia. What happened in Minneapolis recently with the ICE invasion, happens every day, times hundreds, in Russia…every day.
When a small group of Chechen rebels attacked a theater the Russian security forces killed 130 of the patrons to that event to kill the terrorists.
Wedej has not seen (or elected not to remember) the hundreds of videos of interaction of the Russian security forces with ordinary Russian people that have infringed on the law in one manner or another…they are absolutely ruthless.
Of the nearly 3M prisoners of war (most of which were captured in the last year of WW-II) 1/3 died in captivity… At Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, of the maximum population of 780 persons, only 8 or 9 died there, AND the US was ridiculed for those losses. What a difference being in the USA is…
Russia is a ruthless society that most Americans have no concept of.
Trump likes Russia for that particular idiosyncrasy and wishes to impose that under his rule.
Do your research and do your math before you post on mishtalk.
Sure. Russia is authoritarian. But the point stands. The war in Ukraine is because the US tried to use NATO as its forward base in Eastern Europe even after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact. This is widely acknowledged at this point – even by the head of NATO in public statements. This is analogous to how the US uses its alliance with Israel as a forward base in the middle east, thereby antagonizing the Gulf States (who chose vassalage) and Iran (who refuses to submit and has been subjected to attacks, destabilization, isolation). We would do better in the US by minding our own business and using defense only for…well…defensive purposes, not empire-building.
Every day they are bombing Russian energy production.
You do realize that all the targeting is US based ISR, co-ordinated from Wiesbaden by the American military?
You are delusional.
None of these numbers are established facts.
The US has far more executions each year than Russia.
The per capital prison population in the US is many times higher.
The Allies starved German POWs by the hundreds of thousands.
The small group of Chechens was part of a CIA instigated civil war that was going on at the time.
Here’s some more brilliant strategy from Trump and Hegseth (by Bloomberg):
The US military campaign against Iran will commit nearly its entire inventory of stealthy JASSM-ER cruise missiles, drawing them from stockpiles devoted to other regions.
After the moves, only about 425 JASSM-ER out of a prewar inventory of 2,300 will remain available for the rest of the globe.
The idiocy of these two is already legendary. Hegseth might be the least intelligent and most insecure person to serve in any of the Trump administrations. And that is saying something.
Info graphic on relative defense spending
https://x.com/VFinnishProbs/status/2039814862386368962/photo/1