President Trump released the 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) of the US, released by the White House on December 4th, 2025, marks a potentially profound shift in US foreign policy. He has criticized Europe and insisted on ending the perception and preventing the reality, of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance. This 33-page document specifically embraces an ‘America First’ doctrine, rejecting global hegemony and ideological Neocon crusades that are always in favor of war and world dominance. The Neocons constantly claim Putin wants to invade Europe so we have to expand NATO to their border to prevent him from doing so as if Russia was still communist from the old cold war days.
Trump is shifting the focus to a more pragmatic, transactional realism focused on protecting core national interests rather than Neocon desire to conquer the world. In 2023, Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), two dangerous Neocons, authored legislation requiring that any presidential decision to exit NATO must have either two-thirds Senate approval or be authorized through an act of Congress. These Neocons pushed this legislation and the got it to pass stuffed in the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, which President Joe Biden signed into law probably with an autopen fed into the machine by Antony Blinken or Victoria Nuland.
I would argue that Trump can sidestep these Neocons citing presidential authority over foreign policy. Congress can try, but the Constitution does not clearly give Congress the power to force a president to remain in a treaty such as NATO. This is one of the biggest unresolved constitutional gaps in U.S. foreign-relations law. Article II gives the president power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate (two-thirds vote). It says nothing about who has the power to terminate treaties.
Presidents Have Terminated Treaties Unilaterally
If we look at history and precedent, presidents of both parties have withdrawn from treaties without prior congressional approval, including:
- 1854 – Franklin Pierce withdrew from the U.S.–Swiss treaty
- 1899 – McKinley ended parts of the U.S.–China treaty
- 1979 – Carter unilaterally withdrew from the U.S.–Taiwan defense treaty
- 2002 – George W. Bush exited the ABM Treaty
- 2020 – Donald Trump withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty
Congress never successfully blocked any of these actions. Consequently, this long-standing practice builds a strong historical precedent (though not formally adjudicated). Therefore, this Neocon act introduced by Tim Kaine and Marco Rubio, which in their mind would send everyone else’s children to die for their personal hatred and glory, is by no means “airtight,” and would expose the bloodthirsty Neocons for what they really are since this law sets up a direct constitutional conflict with Congress if a president does try to withdraw as I have recommended.
Our American children are at risk just as they were coming home in body-bags from Vietnam when President Johnson lied to the American people admitted we were never attacked and Robert McNamara who admitted before he died that they were wrong and thought Russia was involved confirming they were not and it was “just a civil war.” I just had a meeting with a vet from the Iraq War who lost his leg all for another lie – weapons of mass destruction that never existed.
These Neocons are consumed with power and hatred and that is a lethal combination. They have usurped US foreign policy for personal glory and hatred. This has been a strategic coup by unelected Neocons who have created endless wars for personal vendettas. Approximately 35% of the current publicly held U.S. national debt can be attributed to the direct costs of past wars and the interest accrued on that borrowed war spending. The average American is paying for the Neocon warmongering with higher mortgage rates because this war expenditure continually expands and will never be paid off. These Neocons have undermined the living standards of the people all for their personal hatreds and glory to rule the world.
Trump should declare he was pulling out of NATO; I would force Congress into a legal position and launch an investigation of any Senator or Representative to ensure that they are not profiting in any way from the war expenditures they are advocating.
The Supreme Court has generally held that institutional conflicts between the branches are political questions best resolved through the political process rather than through judicial intervention. But we are dealing with Neocons here who have engaged in a covert coup of American foreign policy, which to me is treason. Perhaps we need Treason Trials like Roman Emperors Tiberius and Caligula to get our country back from the brink.
In court, you have to have what is called “standing” to bring a case. I cannot bring a case against you for not paying your child’s college bills. Only your child would have “standing” to bring the action provided you did not guarantee the college. Here, the only party with standing would be Congress itself, but it is not clear that the Republicans in Congress would support such a suit. If they did, they you know who should be hauled out of Capital Hill in chains.
It would take Congress which has the strongest standing to sue over a presidential withdrawal from NATO. Perhaps you could argue Americans who own property in NATO countries might be able to claim standing. This type of claim is less certain.
Even if the Supreme Court took up the case, it’s not clear who would win because the constitutional question is murky. Congress has never mounted a direct legal challenge to a president withdrawing from a treaty. Article II gives the president power to make treaties with the consent of Congress but it does NOT give the power to Congress to even negotiate a treaty.
Article 5 under the NATO treaty is fundamentally voluntary in its implementation. This is a critical and often misunderstood point. The Wording of Article 5 Itself states:
“…each of them will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force…”
The crucial phrase is “such action as it deems necessary.” This grants each member nation the sovereign right to decide what form its assistance will take. There is no prescribed, automatic obligation to declare war or deploy troops. Rubio thinks that it would not be voluntary and has no problem sleeping a night knowing your son or daughter will die for his personal hatred. All my friend from high school who died for Vietnam all for lies. As McNamara said, it was just a civil war and that is Ukraine which we instigated thanks to Victoria Nuland, John. McCain, and Antony Blinken.
Meanwhile, Trump can also undermine NATO without formally leaving, even if he chooses not to follow my recommendation and get out. He could refuse U.S. support by withholding ambassadors or keeping troops from participating in military exercises. While several lawmakers in February called for new legislative measures to guard against these risks, nothing serious has materialized since. Again, any lawmaker who sells out our country for war should be removed from any government position whatsoever.
“Following Trump’s threats in his first term, the Congress — recognizing the vital importance of NATO — acted on a bipartisan basis to prevent any future presidents from unilaterally withdrawing,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement. He is another Neocon. NATO is not important to America. “While Trump may resort to his old tricks, we’ll continue working to shore up NATO and stand ready to fight back against any attempts to undermine the strength of this alliance.”
Kaine, one of the authors of the NATO guardrail, slammed Trump’s rhetoric on the alliance and argued the U.S. “is safest when we link arms with our allies.” He is an idiot that peace is NEVER achieved with force. He also said: “Donald Trump’s disparaging comments about NATO are disturbing, and my hope is that the legislation we passed will ensure the United States continues to participate in this crucial alliance.”
We should stand aside, let Europe destroy itself for the third time, and then pick up the pieces but no Marshall Plan this time. I would promote legislation that prohibits any legislator from voting for war unless they have a family member that are willing to hand a gun and say here, go kill a bunch a people. They have no problem sending other people’s children to war while exempting their own.
October 13, 1960
The Third Kennedy-Nixon Presidential Debate
It has been the Neocon agenda or having bases everywhere that has undermined the economy in the face of constant US overreach as a failure that weakened America. President Kennedy said that in his campaign debate with Nixon in 1960. It was the building of basdes everywhere that increased the dollars and that brought down Bretton Woods and the gold standard all for the Neocon agenda. Kennedy’s remarks set off a gold panic in 1960 as people feared the US would contract and no longer fund the defense of Europe. Kennedy said:
“The difficulty, of course, is that we do have heavy obligations abroad, that we therefore have to maintain not only a favorable balance of trade but also send a good deal of our dollars overseas to pay our troops, maintain our bases, and sustain other economies.”
I laid out in the peace proposal that the real enemy would be the EU – not Russia. That has proven to be correct. There was even a secret meeting where Macron and Merz instructed Zelensky no peace. There is way too much money at stake in addition to all the billions flowing into the pockets of Ukrainian and EU politicians, no peace means the EU gets to keep the over $300 billion in Euroclear. If you actually look closely, you will see that the EU has violated international law for about 80% of that money belongs to private Russians, not state assets. This is all about keeping American sending billions with no accountability that EU lawmakers get their shares.
Any American legislator who votes to keep sending money to Ukraine and NATO should reveal all net wealth personally and their family including second degree. War is the MOST profitable war to enter office broke, and leave a multi-millionaire. Trump’s approach is all about ushering in a “new golden age” for the United States, which the Democrats keep trying to prevent simply because it is Trump – not that the policies are good, bad, or indifferent. Politics is no longer about the country or the people, it is to embarrass the opponent regardless of the issue just to win.
Trump’s 33-page document organizes US strategy around three pillars: Homeland defense, the Western Hemisphere, and economic renewal. Secondary focuses include selective partnerships in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.
Here are the major shifts in strategy compared to the previous strategies of not just Biden/Neocons, but also Trump’s first term:
- From global cop to regional hegemon: Unlike Biden’s 2022 NSS (which emphasized alliances and great-power competition) or Trump’s 2017 version (which named China and Russia as revisionists), this document ends America’s “forever burdens” abroad. It prioritizes the Americas over Eurasia, framing Europe and the Middle East as deprioritized theaters.
- Ideological retreat: Democracy promotion is explicitly abandoned – “we seek peaceful commercial relations without imposing democratic change” (tell that to the Venezuelans). Authoritarians are not judged, and the EU is called “anti-democratic.”
- Confrontational ally relations: Europe faces scathing criticism for migration, free speech curbs, and risks of “civilizational erasure” (e.g., demographic shifts making nations “unrecognizable in 20 years”). The US vows to support the “patriotic” European parties resisting this, drawing Kremlin-like rhetoric accusations from EU leaders.
- China policy: Acknowledges failed engagement; seeks “mutually advantageous” ties but with deterrence (e.g., Taiwan as a priority). No full decoupling, but restrictions on tech/dependencies.
- Multipolar acceptance: Invites regional powers to manage their spheres (e.g., Japan in East Asia, Arab-Israeli bloc in the Gulf), signaling US restraint to avoid direct confrontations.
We are looking at a seismic shift in America’s approach to NATO. As I have said, NATO should be shut down for its sole purpose in like a Mafia protection racket. It is not there to promote peace, it keeps getting money only by constantly claiming that Russia wants to conquer Europe. It has even tried to expand into Asia to create war with China agains to keep its money flowing in endlessly. NATO is a ruthless retirement home for Neocons.
The US MUST abandon Ukraine!!!!! It is far too corrupt and ONLY when the billions stop flowing into the pockets of the elite Ukrainians will this war ever come to an end. The propaganda of the NATO and the EU to keep this corruption and money flowing has been to instill fear in Europeans to convince them that Russia as an existential threat. Managing European relations with Russia will require significant US diplomatic engagement. The EU is not prepared for peace because it needs that $300 billion just to stay alive until 2027 at best.
December 2025 is a Double Directional Change and then by February we have a Panic Cycle. From January on, the dire economic conditio0n within the EU will continue to force their had to push for war with Russia and they will most likely stage a false flag.
