Proof? Like the names of the NATO country officers and civil servants I have had DIRECT dealings with? You are trying to imply that there is some organizational level threshold above which direct contact with NATO is possible and below which direct contact does not occur. That’s the tip-off to me that you are flailing. Like in most organizational relationships, Captains talk to Captains, engineers talk to engineers, managers talk to managers. I’ve been all three. I had some contact with people from SHAPE but if you are trying to suggest that anything less than contact with the top tier of NATO makes one’s credibility in this matter suspect, then you obviously have no clue. Furthermore, at all levels, when working with NATO information, one must be NATO briefed. After 40 years (on and off) of that you learn something about the relationship… especially when you also have relationships with non-NATO country counterparts to use as a comparison.
Add to that the common knowledge information that I provided earlier and you will (or should) conclude that you too should just stop with the challenge. NATO had a purpose at one time. Now it is neither necessary nor sufficient for any US national security needs. Whatever we need from any other country- or even from a NATO san US - can be negotiated without the US being a member.
Who said easier? YOU. WHY? Is that argument EASIER for you to refute?
Try … less expensive. And now you can add that the mutual interests of the nations have fallen considerably to the point where the EU nations of NATO are working against our best interests economically and culturally.
