Tepid Legality

@Kronykal @OrdnancePackard And Biden should have paid student loans despite a court order.

I absolutely think the Trump Admin should disregard this order and continue. Fuck em.

@EyerotGaming @bonchieredstate @neoavatara This has been Trump’s approach for 14 months. It’s not having the desired effect.

@bonchieredstate @92huskies @neoavatara Yup, and we should make that absolutely clear to them. They can change their attitude right now, or we can leave. Personally I'd much rather leave some of those countries and let them build their own militaries.

I refuse to believe you guys don't see the problem here. It's one thing for the Europeans not to provide direct support for the operation. It's another for France to deny the use of its airspace for cargo deliveries or for the UK to muddle over domestic base usage. There is no point in being in an alliance that can't provide such basic guarantees of cooperation.

@corrientecanta @bonchieredstate @neoavatara 💯 not understanding the actual issue

@92huskies @bonchieredstate @neoavatara 💯missing the point intentionally.

@NinaBeppu Even under Art V, a NATO partner isn’t obligated to do anything. Instead, each party may take “such action as it deems necessary.”

NATO collective defense obligation under Article 5 applies to help US in the event it needs help.

@upstatefederlst No, just a statutory authority. Same rule since 1787.

Once again: it cannot be true that every executive action requires the unanimous consent of the entire judicial branch.

@neoavatara Wait him out

Let's understand: if this is the case, this is actually probably the end of Pax Americana. Trump lashes out at UK and France, telling allies 'the U.S.A. won't be there to help you anymore' cnb.cx/4s95sk1

@traveling_truth @bonchieredstate @neoavatara Need to work on that analogy. European nations are home. It is the US that is occupying the basement threatening to move out.

@bonchieredstate @92huskies @neoavatara Europe is like a twenty-something failure-to-launch that won't move out of his parents' home and pretends his lassitude arises from his brave devotion to some high principle.

@akoz33 Not if you understand the scope of the NATO treaty

Europe has inadvertently destroyed the argument that the U.S. does not need sovereignty over Greenland because of NATO and a defense agreement with Denmark.

@Samsmit71780235 @LJS527 Believe it or not, sovereign nations have their own self interests. Perhaps the administration should have spent more time discussing those interests with our allies if mission success depended upon base access and overflight rights.

@92huskies @LJS527 I feel like after a month this should be worked out. Also it’s not a huge ask to use the airspace. The only reason not to do this for a close ally is to give them the middle finger

I understand my fellow conservative friends are pissed at France right now for denying air space to us. But consider for one moment that perhaps we didn't follow the proper procedures and coordination with our allies in order to fly through that air space.

@Tom730410985 @Microinteracti1 The US doesn’t have “their own bases” in Europe. Those are host-nation bases which the US uses in accordance with bilateral agreements.

You don't prevent allies from using their own bases. You Europeans as such assholes, and nothing but lazy and irrelevant. You've not invented anything since the 10th Century. We spill our blood in 2 World Wars to save you from speaking German. That won't happen again, ever. If it weren't for us your lifespan would still be 35. We invented free speech and now you lost yours and put people in prison for meme's. You gave up your right to guns, so know your invaders rape your women anytime they want and you're too spineless to stop them. You have destroyed the entire continent that we save for you twice and now you are on the leading edge of the abyss. Lagarde this week and last notified you that this year it is going to be so bad in Europe that it will be worse than anyone could ever imagine in history. We pay 62% of NATO, but those days are over. Don't go away mad, just go away we can't literally afford freeloaders who break alliances repeatedly. Maybe try Russia or China.

You get attacked, NATO comes. You attack someone without asking, you’re on your own. It’s one sentence, Marco. Read it.

@Samsmit71780235 @LJS527 The nations may be members of NATO, but the diplomatic process is not a NATO issue. Overflight rights or use of foreign bases are subject to bilateral agreements. Those channels needed to be worked in advance, just as they were for OIF.

@LJS527 I mean that seems like a bunch of BS to me. We are THE ally and the teeth behind NATO. There’s no excuse for this

@MathewDav1d @MoonGazer7413 @amuse @HistoryBoomer Peace in Western Europe for 80 years is worth it.

@amuse @HistoryBoomer To maintain over 320 bases in Europe, costs us roughly $20 billion a year. We do that in addition to the 5% of our $36T GDP that we set aside for NATO. Do the math on that, then realize that we do this every year. Then know this: All of NATO is not worth more than $500 billion.

I think a lot of folks don't realize how valuable America's alliance system has been to America. Trump has spent his 2nd term trashing it. Countries relied on us, and so were willing to do us favors. All of that is disappearing in the flames of Trump's ignorance and ego.

@PressSec V-I Day!

TUNE IN: Tomorrow night at 9PM ET, President Trump will give an Address to the Nation to provide an important update on Iran.

@LauraPowellEsq He did the same thing in the Senate Kelly case. Style choice, I suppose, to use them, but he doesn't seem to use them appropriately.

What is going on with the professionalism of the judiciary? The judge used 18 exclamation marks in his 35-page opinion. Four times, he started his refutation of an argument made by the defendants with “Please!” This is a formal legal opinion, not a casual conversation.

@ian_mckelvey Understood. Wasn’t actually expecting it. That’s the problem with ROE discussions - it’s difficult to have a conversation in the abstract. Appreciate the discussion.

@92huskies Yeah, no. Not going to be elaborating on this. Sorry.

I never supported Trump because he was “anti‑war,” because he never actually was. What he opposed wasn’t war itself, it was the way we’d been fighting them. From insane rules of engagement to nation‑building experiments and the fantasy of handing “democracy” to people who had no cultural framework for it, THAT is what he pushed back against. That’s what I push back against. If the mission is to eliminate hostile actors with precision and overwhelming tactical superiority, using limited, targeted operations, primarily through special operations forces, and then LEAVING, without trying to rebuild an entire nation, then I’m on board. That’s a strategy with clarity and purpose. And before anyone tries to label me a warmonger or claim I have “no skin in the game,” you couldn’t be more wrong. Don’t even try that shit with me.

@ian_mckelvey You’d have to be more specific on the former, and the latter is a criminal law concern.

@92huskies The ones that got my friends killed or put in Leavenworth.

@ian_mckelvey One can argue the Obama political/strategic/objectives were unwise, but ROE are meant to achieve that objective. Trump changed the objectives, so naturally ROE changed. Can’t say I’ve ever read or reviewed “insane”ROE.

@ian_mckelvey Right, and it came at the expense of increased civilian casualties. ROE reflect political objectives. There are competing interests, and objectives change. That doesn’t make the ROE “insane.”

@BigOBee456 @GrapefruitBasil @bonchieredstate @MikeRob22492309 @neoavatara Read the NATO Treaty

@92huskies @GrapefruitBasil @bonchieredstate @MikeRob22492309 @neoavatara So, why would the war in Iran be any different here? That's the question. This is under the assumption that if Iran were not stopped, it would pose a threat to the greater security of the US & NATO allies by proxy. The only reasonable conclusion is military weakness

@BigOBee456 @GrapefruitBasil @bonchieredstate @MikeRob22492309 @neoavatara The US was neutral. None of what you provide about US actions changes it wasn’t a NATO concern. Whatever support NATO member nations provided during OIF was bilateral.

@92huskies @GrapefruitBasil @bonchieredstate @MikeRob22492309 @neoavatara Firstly: the US did provide the UK with assistance during the Falkland War in terms of sanctions and military hardware (a carrier, if needed). Likewise, NATO countries supported the US logistically during the Iraq war. Not under the guise of NATO, but bc of Alliances