You start this article by criticising Trump for pointing out the failings of the EU, then continue on to point out the failings of the EU yourself! Someone needs to inform the EU of it's failing's and Trump is the only man with the balls to do it. Trump tells it as it is, he doesn't just smile and shake hands like many of the past so called leaders.

"...our most trusted and faithful allies..." haven't been paying their way for decades. You can't have it both ways. If you want the US involved in the defence of Europe, then the NATO clowns have to start carrying their fair share of the burden and stop relying on US taxpayers to do it for them.

So where does that leave you with "...Trump's betrayal..."? It's not a betrayal to kick NATO in the arse for their manifest failures.

This bloke must have missed History 101 to say of European countries, "These are the 70-year-old allies that stood by us through thick and thin, never wavered, demonstrated utter loyalty". What utter rubbish.

How many American lives has it taken to bring an end to war between the idiots of Europe, & who is sliding into dependence on Russian gas to warm their toes & keep their lights on? It certainly isn't Trump.

These anti Trump idiots will say, & possibly even almost convince even themselves of the truth of any garbage in their hatred & fear of being drained from the nice soggy swamp they have been wallowing in for years.

My once respect for academics has slipped below that I extend to used car salesmen as they have leapt on the global warming gravy train. Now they can see that Trump will not only knock the wheels off their train, but plans to rip up the rails, so it won't run again.

Surely even our lefties must start to see this hate for the dangerous rubbish it is.

When Trump slums it in his small Washington home (The White House) compared to his much larger home* in Trump Tower. Trump phones Melania:

Trump - "Hiya Tuts, I'm worried"

Melania - "Yes Boss?"

Trump - "You know how Putin and I share the same Russian whores. I think I'm cross infected!"

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residences_of_Donald_Trump#Trump_Tower_penthouse

If Putin had of wanted to drive a wedge through western allies, then his puppet D. trump (Putin's man in the oval office?) has, I believe, started in fine fashion! And could've hardly done a better job!?
Alan B.

"He treated them as if they were junior business partners who failed to pay their dues while reaping much of the profits."

But they are junior business partners who failed to pay their dues while reaping much of the profits.

I think that if I was a USian the thing that'd piss me off more than anything else is the way the Europeans gloat over their superior welfare spending as compared to the US while knowing that that higher spending is only possible because the US is subsidising their defence spending.

The US certainly reaped the benefits from the wars that devastated Europe, ie. WWI and WWII.

Mainly European blood earns mainly US money.

You'll note the US only sent troops to Europe in WWI and WWII once US Presidents safely knew the US was on the winning side.

European blood boosts the US terms of trade/financial position.

Trump, the low-life huckster, knows this.

"You'll note the US only sent troops to Europe in WWI and WWII once US Presidents safely knew the US was on the winning side."

So Hitler's declaration of war had nothing to do with it? Or maybe Roosevelt was colluding with Hitler...it seems all the rage.

You'll note the US only sent troops to Europe in WWI and WWII once US Presidents safely knew the US was on the winning side.

Allies like Britain (including Australia) France and Russia did most of the dying in Europe while US businesses like Ford* built much for the enemy, the Germans.

Now Trump promotes his own business interests while also being a part-time President.

Now Trump, in Trump's relations with Putin (who controls large Russian business interests) is having it both ways, by Trump having close personal relations with America's enemy, Russia.

* http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1445822/Ford-used-slave-labour-in-Nazi-German-plants.html

I think the author is very confused between Trump's so called 'betrayal by the EU of their own people just like Canada.

You think runner?

Why that must be a novel new experience? Don't worry about the smoke. It's probably emanating from previously unused cerebral circuits? Persist it'll stop hurting soon!

You'll have a nice day now y'hear.
Alan B.

Trump is the president of the US voted as such by their democratic process with his presidency accused of Russian manipulation.
Just how many times, and in how many countries, has the US manipulated the democratic process to their favour?
How many countries has the US supported despots and dictators abusing their societies, to this day?
Plantagenent is right, the US enter a fray when they believe the majority of dying has been done and the other side has expended it's financial resources.
Make no mistake, the US is in it for itself and Australia is merely a dog's body asked to occasionally support an irrational vote at the UN making us look like gutless wimps supporting an international bully.
The US is helping protect the EU, what a load of codswhallop, the US through it's bases is there to help keep the EU in line. Previously it was in individual countries and then it became a little harder when the EU was borne. NATO provides the last illusionary conduit of control which is failing because of it's involvement outside the EU supporting the aftermath of failed US wars such as in Afghanistan.
NATO was there for the so called protection of the EU not as a reserve army of the US.
Had NATO not have to support the US in it's wars of opportunity they wouldn't be falling short of funding and it's this reason the EU countries are not forthcoming with their supposed share.

continued............The US is famous for moving the lines and doing so often
As to the wars, the US supplied both sides in both conflicts and couldn't give a rat's about who was dying and for what reason, business is business.
When Germany ran out of money the US jumped on the side that would protect it's interests in the long term especially when the control of the Arabian peninsula (oil) came into focus.
Now Trump is waving the same BS flag about Russian oil warming the Germans. He'd like it to be US oil.
The Australians?.....well the Australians have always been used as so much kitty litter....praised by doing their work well, but used as kitty litter just the same.

Very true Special Delivery

Trump takes US allies for granted: Australia, UK, Europe. Trump knows little and cares little about the values of alliances in "making America great again".

Instead Trump respects Putin, a tough guy mafioso, like Trump. Men who rely on their political positions to boost their personal wealth.

Hence about PUTIN's PERSONAL WEALTH http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin#Personal_wealth :

"According to the Panama Papers leak, close trustees of Putin own offshore companies worth US$2 billion in total. The German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung regards the possibility of Putin's family profiting from this money as plausible."

"According to the paper, the US$2 billion had been "secretly shuffled through banks and shadow companies linked to Putin's associates", and Bank Rossiya, previously identified by the U.S. State Department as being treated by Putin as his personal bank account"

God the hatred of the left is palpable.

Trump would be a traitor if he did not put the interests of the US first & foremost in every dealing he has with any foreign country.

It would be a good result for the rest of the world, especially the UK & Oz if Trump caused the EU to collapse. It has done nothing for anyone but it's elites, & is even more swampy than the US or Oz. Given the right support he might even drain the European swamp, & ours.

Gratitude is a difficult cross to bear isn't it. Our lefties are incapable of bearing it evidently. Perhaps they can't stand the sure knowledge that without the US we would be speaking Japanese, while doing our work as coolies in the fields of Oz.

Yes it suited the yanks to fight the war "over here", in the Pacific & Europe, but they were here, the UK was not.

The much admired Churchill had no interest in Oz, except to use our men to protect the middle east India & Malaya. His words were "Forget Australia, we'll take it back later". The UK always looked after it's colonies, well it did for the most profitable.

Wake up dills.

When someone doesn't agree with you cry 'left' as if the word left is supposed to be some sort of catch cry for dismissal of what is said or proposed.
Who gives a flying fukk as to what the yanks chose to do because what they chose was always in self interest and they came into the war when they virtually forced the Japanese into a position of zero choice.
They knew full well Pearl Harbour was going to happen, that's why the only ships in the harbour were rust buckets.
Australia was busy kissing UK backside and leaving themselves exposed.
You look after your own family first, not trying to score brownie points with those that screwed you during the first WW.
The US used the Australians with the same contempt in WW2, Vietnam and to this day.
When Australians get up off their backside instead of continually practicing subservience to those with muscle but no smarts they may be a little more respected in the region.
China has a long memory and the picture of the US gunboat down the Yangtze enforcing trade is as clear today as it was then, and they're simply waiting to see which way Australia jumps.
It may befit Australia to use the word 'No' occasionally.

"You'll note the US only sent troops to Europe in WWI and WWII once US Presidents safely knew the US was on the winning side. "

That's just a-historic claptrap.

The US entered the war in Dec 1941. At that time, France was utterly defeated, Britain barely hanging on and effectively bankrupt, Rommel was rampaging across Africa, Hitler a few months earlier had taken Yugoslavia and Greece, and the German army was on the outskirts of Moscow and Leningrad. In the east the US fleet was effectively gone and Japan was about to spend 6 months conquering S-E Asia.

To say that at that point they decided to enter the war on the winning side is ignorant rubbish. Firstly the decision was made for them and secondly few thought that Britain was the winning side. Most, including the Russian high command, assumed European Russia would fall the next spring and Russia would need to retreat to the other side of the Urals. The US initial aim was simply to save Britain and try to retain a foothold in Europe.

As I said, claptrap.But when you're in irrational anti-US mode, facts don't really matter.

"When Germany ran out of money the US jumped on the side that would protect it's interests in the long term especially when the control of the Arabian peninsula (oil) came into focus."

More rubbish:

1. Germany hadn't run out of money in 1941. That was Britain, who, in direct counter-opposition to this claim, the US supported.

2. While oil had been discovered in Arabia by 1941, the extent was still unknown and there was very little production.

3. The US was completely self-sufficient in oil in 1941 and was the major supplier to the world. So Arabia was of no particular interest to the US and certainly not something they'd fight for.

But again, who needs facts when in its-all-America's-fault mode.

Oh and the claims about WW1 are equally rubbish.

Rubbish in the Pacific too SD.

The yanks moved in to PNG, & without their logistics & numbers we were gone there. Without the battle of the coral sea, the japs would have taken Moresby with little trouble. Our efforts at Kokoda were incredible, but would not alone have saved PNG.

They asked for no help in Guadalcanal, the toughest & most close run fight in the Pacific, other than a couple of ships from the battle of the coral sea.

After we gave a little help in Bougainville & a lot in PNG, the yanks moved on, & did not want us in the Philippians or later.

Our considerable losses in our offensives in Bougainville & Borneo were down to our tin soldier army leadership, wanting some battles to direct, where none were necessary, or even useful. Those garrisons were to be left to whither away like Rabaul.

Best do a bit of reading mate, it is pretty recent history.

Alon Ben Meir

Japan was at war with a plan it presented to the Japanese People called,
“The greater Asia Plan for the Prosperity of all of Asia”,
It was said to the people that Japan was going to take control of Asia for the benefit of all of Asia. This was the propaganda sold to the Japanese people,. Japan however was more interested in invading and taking Asia, for the prosperity of Japan.

So in the late 1930s, before world war 2;began the Japanese had invaded China to seize the wealthy Manchuria Gold Mine and the Manchuria railline which allowed the transferring of the gold to Japan. They killed millions of Chinese people in the process, as many as Hitler killed and more, it is very seldom ever taught in western schools though, they prefer to only focus on Hitler.

The Americans appalled, by the slaughter, tried to stop the Japanese by refusing to sell them anymore fuel for their tanks and war machines.

This is why America is blamed for Japan attacking Australia, the left wing back then twisted the story, to make America the villain and Japan the innocent party, even refusing to load Australian ships taking supplies to our soldiers up in the islands fighting the Japanese.
The same way the left today doesn’t let the truth get in the way of their anti American ideaology.

I think based on Japan’s “expansionist Greater Asia plan,” Australia would always have been a tempting target for them to invade.
When you blame America for Japanese aggression you are showing you don’t know the history.
And following your theory about best friends like the EU not paying, I suppose then you are happy to pay the bills for all your friends.

It’s just baseless anti American nonsense, I notice you are still happpy and say they should keep on giving what was it. $3billion in aid to Africa.

'The Americans appalled, by the slaughter'..... give me a break?
Wot! obviously they've been desensitized since, with the aimless killing of the Palestinians and their ongoing veto vote at the UN....blood not red enough?.
What happened to the mighty US military machine in Korea that dragged in half the world into a futile war...commanded by the Yanks and VietNam....another fiasco for the rubber the French were quite happy to leave. They had to pick Grenada to attempt to garner a 'win' to save face. Iraq was a walk in the park only because the Iraqis thought they were going to be better off....big mistake for them, and still ongoing, just as Afghanistan was a precursor to Iraq with bin Laden being the fake reason for military incursion. Libya, another example of stupidity along with the current support for the military regime in Egypt.
This is about business...US business is selling death and some of the EU countries such as France and UK are not above wanting to share in the distribution of misery.
The Chinese are like mother Teresa in comparison, so spare me the prattle.
Reality says the Yanks have never scored well although they did manage to drop a couple of nuclear bombs on two non military, and the only Catholic cities in Japan. Now that was a heart stoppa!
But hey! don't let me stop you from asking the Yanks or Trump where on their posterior they would like to place your lips while Trump's soninlaw Kushner and buddy Greenblatt, are doing a real estate evaluation of the Palestinian territories.

Hi Special Delivery

In support of yours and my arguments here's what two major strategic thinkers via the CONSERVATIVE Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) comment today http://www.defenceconnect.com.au/key-enablers/2618-us-instability-means-time-for-australian-plan-b-says-think-tank :

"US instability means time for Australian Plan B, says think tank"

"Two key policy leaders with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) have identified the growing need for Australian defence policy planners and the supporting industry to embrace a strategic Plan B in the face of continuing US uncertainty towards the alliance and global rules-based order.

Both Peter Jennings and Paul Dibb are quick to highlight the growing uncertainty stemming from the increasingly erratic nature of the US President Donald Trump.

The bizzare Twitter wars, increasing trade disputes with China and the European Union, growing fondness of Russian strongman Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, combined with Trump's chastising of NATO allies for not pulling their financial and strategic weight in the face of increasing Russian aggression and mounting assertiveness by China in south-east Asia are all serving to unnerve Australian strategic thinkers who have, for the better part of half a century, encouraged dependence on the US and its capability to 'reach out and touch' potential threats to Australia's interests

For Jennings, this developing situation raises a particularly important question: "What's the plan for Australia's defence, if it turns out that Trump's America First approach is here to stay and alliances fall into mistrustful neglect?..."

Well Special D,

After having your original historically ignorant and outlandish claims discredited you, without the slightest attempt at defending these claims, simply move on to more historically ignorant and outlandish claims.

Its hardly worth showing how bad these claims are since you aren't up to defending them anyway. So I'll just point out their rubbish..again.

Hilariously plantagenet thinks he can support his previous historically erroneous claims by making claims about the future. Do I need to explain why faulty claims about the past aren't
validated by speculative claims about the future.

Plantagenet,

'Australian Plan B' is add a few more football matches to the the already overblown calendar so that that the public can avoid thinking about what the govt is not doing, whether it be Liberal or Labour.
Leaders with pallonies don't exist in Australia, just the usual faces, waiting their turn at the trough, making the usual noises which amount to the usual low grade performance of smoke and mirrors.
The Romans were right, give the masses entertainment so they can forget their lot, only in this case it's pseudo warriors in conflict for the masses to indulge the fantasies of spectators.
Worry not, at this rate the Christians and Lions are not far off.
Australians, as regards to Australian politics, have no intention of changing anything. They are not instigators or idealists....just followers of yassa yassa massah.
We could learn something about gumption from the indigenous, instead of seeing how far we can stretch our lips.
Show me your friends and I'll tell you who you are, is as true today as yesterday and our vote at the UN on the Palestinian question made Australia a sycophant extraordinaire in the eyes of the world.
Even the Yanks were shocked, but then I guess Turnbull has to make sure they'd let him back into his apartment in New York

Haze, you're full of it, you actually think that if you say so it's true.
Talk about delusional, try reading a little economic history behind the political prattle of the victor of the times.
All you do is yap yap on selective nothings which neither enlighten or enhance the truth of the matter.
Carthage lives on, in the fools of the day who have nothing better than to prance around like a Jingo, trying to claim any high road that isn't occupied.
The only thing speculative is your poor performance in trying to profess knowledge that has any substance, like I said, yap! yap!to the clap trap.

SD,

Invective isn't the same as evidence.

You made claims about 1941 which I demonstrated to be utter rubbish.

Your options were to offer other evidence that supported your claims or to throw a tantrum over being outed as historically ignorant.

That you did the latter says all that needs to be said.

haze, you demonstrated that you walk with the pygmys, I made no mention of 1941 but if you're talking about Pearl Harbour, and what aspect of Pearl Harbour I don't know. I maintained that the Japanese were manipulated into a situation that war became the only option in the 10 years previous. The Yanks took advantage of the Japanese culture and gave them no way out.
You want us to believe the Yanks had no idea as to what the Japanese were up to in the years previous to Pearl Harbour. Give me a break!
Didn't mention it in your Marvel comic books? ahh well guess Capt America forgot to mention it

" I made no mention of 1941 "

You were talking about how the US entered the war and offered a couple of reasons as to why they entered on the allies side. Reasons such as Germany running out of money and US ambitions to control Arabian oil.

When do you think the US entered the war? I'm pretty sure it was 1941!

Sorry, I thought I was conversing with someone who had a passing understanding of the history. Clearly I was wrong.

Plan B. Come on fellers, we are as guilty as the EU of not carrying our share of the weight of defence costs.

The only way we could even start to be able to defend ourselves alone would be a full nuclear defence force. We would have to make conquering us more costly than what is to be gained from doing it. Defending ourselves, & winning against anyone in the major league is just a pipe dream.

To have even that capacity we would have to drop NDIS, Gonski, Foreign Aid, Age pensions, unemployment & disability benefits, & a couple dozen of useless government quangos.

Even then it would take us a decade to build the necessary people, assuming the yanks sold us the equipment a cut rates.

Right now we couldn't fight our way out of a wet paper bag, & current plan B just might allow us to make a hole we could see out of, if that.

Admittedly Plan B wouldn't be easy but there is the Israeli precedent in building up conventional and nuclear forces.

Poorer, smaller (than Australia) Israel, could afford full nuclear capabilities as it was/is prepared to use them under the "Never Again" Doctrine aka Samson Option. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option#Deterrence_doctrine

Even against Russian forces in the Middle East, that in the war years 1967-1973 were supporting Arab client states surrounding Israel.

Emeritus Professor Paul Dibb warned July 26, 2018 http://navalinstitute.com.au/new-security-reality-demands-new-australian-policy/

"Events could now become much more serious, much more quickly. More thought should be given to planning for the expansion of the ADF and its capacity to engage in sustained high-intensity conflict in our own defence — in a way that we haven’t had to consider for several generations."

PETE COMMENT

"high-intensity conflict" can encompass an all out conventional war and can also mean nuclear war.

See Australia's need to consider a nuclear capability http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/get-ready-china-why-australia-needs-nuclear-weapons-14416

Plantagenet we can't even man the landing craft carried by Canberra & Adelaide.

How long do you think it would take to train up, & then keep enlisted, a real defence force.

If we started seriously right now, we might be ready for WWIV. We have no chance of being ready for WW111.

Hi Hasbeen

I'm continuing the nuclear debate in this Comment http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19872#351495 on Noel's latest nuclear article (of 1 August 2018).

Cheers

Pete