“The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense,” Mr. Gates said."
I hope that Europe is listening. The NY Times agrees.
Sec Gates is expressing some blunt reality.
During the Bush years, we were told that the Europeans didn't like Pres Bush's approach. (Why didn't The NY Times write that editorial back then?)
During the Obama years, the Europeans may love Pres BO but nobody is sending troops either.
In Afghanistan, which is a NATO mission, there are 100,000 US troops, about 10,000 from the UK and 2,500 from Canada.
Like Pres Bush, Pres BO has run into the reality that many countries do not allow their troops to fight.
In Libya, we hear that countries are already running out of bombs.
Do the Europeans think that the US public is going to support getting the US more involved in Libya?
I don't think so!
Since WW2, the US has carried the burden of defending Europe.
We kept USSR tanks from moving toward Western Europe by having a large military presence in Germany and bases all over the Mediterranean.
The US Navy has guaranteed the oil flow by protecting the Strait of Hormouz from Iran domination.
I don't think that the US public wants to carry this burden anymore, specially if we have to fight NATO wars without the NATO countries carrying their fair share.
Check out the Friday show:
Listen to internet radio with Silvio Canto Jr on Blog Talk Radio
Tags: NATO 2011 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!
