N.A.T.O. -- Future Of

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by thebatoneffect, Jan 27, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/26/world/asia/26cnd-afghan.html?ref=world


    So is he bluffing or deadly serious?
    What do ye think?
  2. The Frog and ze Kraut will not fight King George's war, just too much political capital on the line to do so.
    Georgei Boy is a failed leader and he will go totally insane, for thoes that the Gods wish to destroy they first send Mad.
    He will bluff, bluster and threaten for he knows he has failed, Pappy told him not to do it, but like the spoiled child he carried on. His his wailings will reach all, the blame will be placed on thoes too wise, to join his military adventures.
    His Legacy is ALL.
  3. Not Allied To Orate? (i.e. Stop talking, start doing).

    The Charles de Gaulle crisis (typical frog attitude to politics) will always undermine the organisation; the fact that no more countries will help us in the south does little to allay the criticism of NATO.
  4. They wont fight anyone's war.
  5. Just the odd one or two against each other.
  6. As expected the Dwarfs said to the Snowhite that they are not eager to be cannon folder.
  7. sorry sergey, it is gibberish what you have just said.
  8. I think you mean "No Action Talk Only"

  9. There does need to be a serious thought about the future of NATO. Action in Afghanistan is not an option, as 9/11 was declared as a Clause 5 attack under the NATO Treaty: "an attack on one is an attack on all." For countries now to weasal out of what is needed is appaling.

    We now need NATO to split into 2 parts.

    Part 1: USA, Canada, UK, Holland and possibly France from NATO, and open to Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea and a few others. Would need a new name. These countries would be used for war-fighting and peacemaking operations.

    Part 2: The rest of NATO countries, possibly merge with the WEU organisation. Used for low-scale peacekeeping, but door kept open for joining the other organisation in the future.
  10. Why would a part 2 country want to join a part 1?
  11. Lanky,

    Action in Afghanistan is an option. Please read Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty in full:

    It is the first line of the Article that allowed NATO to cop out of helping us to regain the Falklands - it wasn't in the geographical area specified!

    Now, as regards September 2001, who actually attacked the USA? Was it the state of Afghanistan? Was it the Taleban, the government of Afghanistan?

    The current combat activities in Afghanistan have NOTHING to do with September 2001, they have everything to do with US hubris and failed nation building! Moreover, it has nothing to do with maintaining the security in the North Atlantic area - see the actual words of the Article above.

    al-Qaida did indeed launch a ghastly terrorist action in September 2001, but they are not the state of Afghanistan and they are not the Taleban. Sadly, the US has virtually given up trying to resolve that problem!
  12. Lanky,
    No matter what G.Bush and others might wish us to believe 9/11 was a crime not an act of war fom one nation state to an other.
    If it had been an act of war from a nation state, like a first strike in war like Pearl Harbour there would have been some sort of follow through.
    There hasn't been.
    NATO didn't join in with Britains battle with the I.R.A. did it?
  13. Semper. What is NATO? It looks as a union of the Snowhite (from the White house) and some European dwarfs. Let's agree that in comparison with huge American military machine other countries looks as dwarfs.

    Not so long ago some dwarfs previouly lived in the Bear's house decided to join the union led by the Snowhite. But they were mainly interested in diamond mining (the Dwarfs have own business). As for epical battles with evil oriental magicians then they are less enthusiastical.

    Now the Snowhite (though sometimes She is not white-skinned) demands that her team should supply her with cannon fodder against ... God know whom.

    All members of the union (may be except Tommy) are not sure about it. So likely the Snowhite will fight with evil forces mainly alone.
  14. But... the attack was in North America. And at the time the European NATO leaders said that Clause 5 applied...
  15. I thought that all members of NATO invoked clause 5 of the charter after the attacks on Sep 11. Whilst they have deployed, they obviously are content to stay in the quieter areas of the country.

    But the future of NATO ? Seems to me like its the same as the future of the UN. Doomed to fail. You will never get a consensus as each country has its own agenda. 2 or 3 might agree but rarely more than that - especially when it means fighting and spending.

    There's nothing to do with NATO going on in Helmand.