Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NATO is Europe's national defense, plain and simple, while it is useless for protecting US soil. It has been so since 1949, and still is. USA provides about 2/3 of NATO readiness and capabilities. No other country comes close.
No, NATO is a multinational defence alliance. The European national defence is in the hands of the member states' militaries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10
Europe (with "Europe" I mean its elites, since people follow them like the sheep) has been trying to create this superstate -- EU, for over 120 years. Its pilot project -- Yugoslavia -- was a disaster. But they never learn. Now they want to do this for the whole Continent.
The Kingdom of Yugoslavia was found in 1918, the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952. The EU had nothing to do with Yugoslavia.
It stands to reason considering that NATO mainly defends American interests, not Europeans.
That's irrelevant -- the argument is that NATO provides national defense to Europe nations.
In other words, European NATO members do not need to spend much on national defense, because this alliance guarantees national defense to all its members -- an attack on one member obligates all other members to come to the defense of that nation. So no other NATO country can attack any other member. In Europe, you can't even swat a fly without NATO's permission, let alone display militaristic attitudes. They will shut you down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariete
No, NATO is a multinational defence alliance. The European national defence is in the hands of the member states' militaries.
I think you miss the nature of NATO -- NATO guarantees its members full protection from outside occupiers, and guarantees each member that no other member will attack that member.
Military forces of European members of NATO are very minimal, and only fit for flyover parade. Forces of each country are woefully prepared for any invasion.
The real defender of these nations is NATO. Germany has what -- 2 battalions?
NATO has been and still is a huge deterrent to any military attack -- hence no wars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariete
The Kingdom of Yugoslavia was found in 1918, the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952. The EU had nothing to do with Yugoslavia.
Follow the bouncing ball. I stated that European elites have been working on EU since 120 years ago, at least. This is a fact.
In Versailles in 1918, they tried to amalgamate different countries into one superstate -- Yugoslavia. It ended up a human disaster for the populations involved.
EU is the same blueprint -- cobble together different nations, of different customs and cultures, under a centralized federacy, which rules over the provinces with more and more arrogance, and unaccountably.
Leftists love centralization, tyranny. It's very instinctive. Tyranny is a primitive form of Govt. There is nothing new, progressive, or cutting edge about it. EU as a governing concept is as old as dirt.
What's new, progressive, and cutting edge is self-determination, self-governance, and delegation of powers to a central authority in a very limited way.
This is what civil societies do. Barbaric / tyrannical / primitive societies cannot trust themselves to rule themselves. That's why they forgo of their powers and transfer them to a central distant authority.
That's irrelevant -- the argument is that NATO provides national defense to Europe nations.
Yet, the only country that has ever seen the necessity to invoke article 5 was the US. Seems like the US needs NATO for their national defense as well.
Yet, the only country that has ever seen the necessity to invoke article 5 was the US. Seems like the US needs NATO for their national defense as well.
Not at all. The truth is that US has used NATO for public relations cover. OTOH, European countries need NATO for real national defense. NATO membership is their main vehicle. That's why European countries spend very little on military, and instead spend the money on social programs.
To be sure, USA has not back-boned NATO for altruistic reasons, however a superpower US it is.
Bottom line, as US will spend less on military, Europe will need to spend more, while it can't really afford. So, yes, US pull-back will make things worse for EU.
United States is 1.3 million service-members in military. Germany has 50k. France has 100k. GB has 150k.
Europe spends peanuts. This is beautiful as long as somebody else (US) is willing to foot the bill. American voices are getting louder on letting Europe shoulder more of the burden. Both Trump and Bernie were pretty clear. Day will come soon enough that Europe will not be able to rely on America anymore. Nothing lasts forever.
A few years ago I noticed discussion of U.S. retrenchment. Regarding deployments of U.S. military during peace time.
It has been commented that these peace time deployments are very expensive for U.S. tax payers. Specifically, deployments to Europe years after the end of the Cold War.
United States is 1.3 million service-members in military. Germany has 50k. France has 100k. GB has 150k.
Europe spends peanuts. This is beautiful as long as somebody else (US) is willing to foot the bill. American voices are getting louder on letting Europe shoulder more of the burden. Both Trump and Bernie were pretty clear. Day will come soon enough that Europe will not be able to rely on America anymore. Nothing lasts forever.
How can you say that the US pays the bill when France, Britain and Germany are in the top 10 military speders globally?
It stands to reason considering that NATO mainly defends American interests, not Europeans.
If that's truly the case, then countries can opt out and NATO should be disbanded.
But you're talking nonsense, as European countries are eager to be part of NATO, and in fact NATO is far more important for Europe's strategic defense than that of the U.S.
But you're talking nonsense, as European countries are eager to be part of NATO, and in fact NATO is far more important for Europe's strategic defense than that of the U.S.
If NATO wouldn't serve US interests, it would've been dissolved in 1990. But it didn't, and all member states are happy to be there. Including the US.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
