Growing up I legitimately thought the US were the head of NATO.
Gotta admit that I only recently, like a good few years ago, found out that’s not true.
The way they act is so bizarre, no matter from which angle you approach the topic.
Growing up I legitimately thought the US were the head of NATO.
Depending on what exactly you mean by “head of NATO”, they kind of are.
The Supreme Allied Commander Europe has always been an American General. So in case of an actual NATO war in Europe, the US would be in charge of coordinating joint military operations.
Right, the US couldn’t just take command of NATO and other member states’ militaries without those countries signing off on it. But they can basically use political pressure to make countries join their excursions, like what happened after 9/11 (the only time Article 5 was ever invoked). And well, the “defensive” aspect of that entire campaign is questionable …
So while they don’t have direct control, I’d still say the US is very much the “head of NATO”.
I mean the US’s most powerful geopolitical tool is a toss up between its weapons industry, its dominance in global finance and being the richest country in the world, but yeah NATO is a close third/fourth.
“President of the USA threatens to destroy the USAs most powerful geopolitical tool”
Growing up I legitimately thought the US were the head of NATO. Gotta admit that I only recently, like a good few years ago, found out that’s not true.
The way they act is so bizarre, no matter from which angle you approach the topic.
It’s not bizarre if you look at from the angle that Trump is a Russian asset
That puppet is way too skinny.
Depending on what exactly you mean by “head of NATO”, they kind of are.
The Supreme Allied Commander Europe has always been an American General. So in case of an actual NATO war in Europe, the US would be in charge of coordinating joint military operations.
I meant sort of like the US government being able to more or less directly command NATO, calling all the shots atleast.
Right, the US couldn’t just take command of NATO and other member states’ militaries without those countries signing off on it. But they can basically use political pressure to make countries join their excursions, like what happened after 9/11 (the only time Article 5 was ever invoked). And well, the “defensive” aspect of that entire campaign is questionable …
So while they don’t have direct control, I’d still say the US is very much the “head of NATO”.
I mean the US’s most powerful geopolitical tool is a toss up between its weapons industry, its dominance in global finance and being the richest country in the world, but yeah NATO is a close third/fourth.
He’s been very active in it since the first term.