If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
R.i.p. Nato
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Something most likely will replace NATO, but I think we're seeing the end of NATO. For one thing, with the real threat being from terrorism, Russia should be included in any agreement for protection. The US is going to be focused on creating a new Europe out of the Middle East I believe. Iraq is just the beginning. Turkey has no reason to stay in NATO. And there's nothing in it for the US to stay in Europe. NATO members have the right not to get involved with Iraq, but they don't have the right not to aide a member who needs their help in protecting them from a war on their border and an ethnic group within...like is the case with Turkey. I can see the US creating some mutual protection force between Afghanistan, Iraq and Turkey.
0
Comments
Turkey -- NATO's only Muslim member and a probable launch pad for any U.S.-led attack because of its shared border with Iraq -- has now formally asked the alliance for help and invoked Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
It is believed to be the first time an alliance member has used Article 4, which allows a member nation to call for emergency consultations if it feels its "territorial integrity, political independence or security" is threatened.
I am sure the French (and everyone else for that matter) are asking the same question of the British...
NATO is not about to disband in any way shape or form, you can bank on that.
As for the current disagreements over Patriot Missile deployment in Turkey, well... that is a viable and legitimate debate taking place within the organisation. Article 5 refers only to solidarity of the members in the event of an attack upon one of its members. Since noone has attacked Turkey (least of all the Iraqis) that consideration cannot even be raised in this current political debate.
If there's an attack on Turkey, "we'd be the first there...something like that they said.
So, maybe there would be a NATO without the US since we seem to be spliting the alliance in two. Plus, I don't see the benefit to America of NATO. In fact, I see the benefit to a stronger alliance with Russia because of their oil.
Who wouldn't have got used in Kosovo, and who wouldn't be getting used in Iraq...
Problem is that the Europeans aren't as united as we would like to think.
I'll bet they are. No-one wants to have to use their armed forces and apparently only the Brits seem willing (or foolish) enough to stand up and be counted...
2nd, Germany, which relies on businesses serving America's 100,000 man army in Germany has the most to lose in a proposal. In Kuwait, the US has a base manned, usually by a very small crew who protect the supplies and equipment stored there. That's what the US sees as it's future in Europe. It may open a new base in Romania to replace its reliance on Germany.
Hey, with the EU and anti-American friends and all, maybe Germany can get it's growth down to 0%. It's already broken EU's guidelines for debt.
I think the problem is that even within Europe, Germany and France are losing their influence. Only little Belgium has gone along with them. They're isolated within NATO, the EU and Europe.
I didn't realise self-interest was a particularly holy cause!
The majority is with the UK and US. But I still think the US will pull back from NATO. All of which the left wing should like. I just read today that the unions in France are Communist led. No wonder they disrupt the economy so much there.
By all calculations, that leaves the real "majority" with a position quite deifferent from what you claim.
5 out of 15 isnt a majority unless perhaps you live in some alternate dimension.
Sorry mate, did you see Clandestines maths a few posts up?
Either way you've got your three lone rangers, all this delaying the inevitable is starting too cause uneccessary damage to everyone, it needs sorting and fast.
The NATO matter involves the timing for placing Patriot Missile batteries in Turkey. The US wants it done immediately, basically signalling a rush to war regardless of all other considerations currently in play, whilst the three detracting NATO members do not agree with the urgency preferring not to give carte blanche to those who so desperately want war as soon as possible.
So in other words, the world is squabbling over issues which aren't of a massive amount of importance. War is inevitable, why the hell can't the French and whoever else currently arsing about just accept that and get on with it, instead we have this childish drama played out with nothing to gain. We could of gone in and virtually sorted this out by now, but oh no, were months down the line and currently fast approaching a self destruct exercise. Its embarrasing for all concerned.
Thats not even an issue, there is going to be a war, why are people still trying to suggest otherwise, have people lost a grip on reality or what ?
New opinion polls released today show that a staggering 90% of the Spanish people are against the war. I don't know what the figures are in other countries but I would imagine the anti-war group dominates in all nations concerned.
So when you think of isolation, think about Dubya, poodle Blair, Hitler-in-disguise Prime Ministers Berlusconni and Aznar and the right wing Prime Minister of the Australia versus pretty much the rest of the world.
Who is isolated now? Who is (rightly or wrongly) experiencing the biggest backlash against one's nation by others ever seen?
Larger issue: NATO is deadlocked and when it comes to the war on terror, that's American lives France and Germany are gambling with through delays.