Future of Nato and the UN?
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:19am
Anyone got any analytical observations or opinions that extend beyond partisianship?
StarDestroyer.Net BBS
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
Future of Nato and the UN?
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12645
Page 1 of 2
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:30am
I just want to say that NATO's refusal to help Turkey if it is invaded by Iraq is bullshit.
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:32am
Thank the French and Germans for that. I seriously think this stands a good chance of breaking NATO and the UN.ArmorPierce wrote:I just want to say that NATO's refusal to help Turkey if it is invaded by Iraq is bullshit.
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:33am
leave the u.n. behind.
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:34am
It doesn't even make sense. Why would you not help a NATO member that is invaded by a foriegn aggressor. Turkey would probably be able to hold its own anyways (with the help of American weapons) but still, that is stupid.
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:37am
Just the French and German's selling out their allies.ArmorPierce wrote:It doesn't even make sense. Why would you not help a NATO member that is invaded by a foriegn aggressor. Turkey would probably be able to hold its own anyways (with the help of American weapons) but still, that is stupid.
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:37am
I guess because the French and Germans are acting like real assholes Nothing more, nothing less. 
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:46am
This entire situation reeks of the death of the NATO Alliance. This was only a request for the preparation of a contingency plan for the defense of a NATO Signatory State, which is the entire point of NATO in the first damn place! The Turk's have every right to be livid over this issue, they have faithfully upheld their end of the deal for 50+ years , and now Schroeder and Chirac piss all over them for it. I hope the Turks tell them all to go to hell , and back out of the Alliance. The current division between the US, Britian, France and Germany truly stands to throw the entire scheme of Western Alliance and solidarity right out the lock.....
Posted: 2003-02-11 12:53am
It's almost starting to look like there's going to be some major shifts in alliances over the next few years. The Continent may end up isolated from Britain and the USA. Turkey would probably join with Britain and the USA, given the backstab they received from Germany and France. Russia seems to be a wildcard, given Putin's attempts to appease both sides, which traditionally has the effect of pissing off everyone. China will try to be everybody's friend, and nobody will really trust them (after Tianenmen, would you?). In all honesty, the UN and NATO may hold together, but both will grow increasingly factionalized if they do survive, and no longer live up to their intents even to the minor extent they have done so. IMHO, both are dead organizations, and we just haven't smelled the rot yet.
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:01am
NATO is pretty much dead in it's current form. Both France and Germany are trapped by their own politics, a big part of which is the Euro. Euro countries aren't allowed to run up a deficit past a certain point, and that severely limits the government's power to spend. Between military and social expendatures, they'll cut military funding rather than social. That's one of the reasons why Germany and France are so opposed to the Iraq war, they can't afford to be a part of it.
The UN might survive. I expect that if France vetoes a Security Council resolution and the US and allies go in alone, and find WMD, then there will be a serious talk of restructuring of the Security Council.
The UN might survive. I expect that if France vetoes a Security Council resolution and the US and allies go in alone, and find WMD, then there will be a serious talk of restructuring of the Security Council.
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:08am
That's not what happened at all. That is a gross misinterpretation.ArmorPierce wrote:I just want to say that NATO's refusal to help Turkey if it is invaded by Iraq is bullshit.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/871076.asp?0cv=CB20
As can be seen NATO isn't refusing to help Turkey as there is nothing in the NATO charter that explicitely says they have to provide aid for a preventative war.Article 4, which is the article in question, states that the members of NATO “will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened.” The key words here are “will consult.”
This morning, in response to the three countries’ refusal to send arms, Turkey invoked this article and called an emergency meeting of the alliance. Initially, according to one U.S. official, Belgium, France, and Germany all tried to block even this meeting — though, toward the end of the day, they relented. Had the three persisted in opposing this meeting, then, yes, they would have been in violation of the letter and spirit of the NATO Charter. (Note that Article 4 says the members must consult whenever there’s a threat merely “in the opinion of any of them.” It could be a threat in the opinion of a psychotic; it doesn’t have to be backed up.)
However, there is nothing in the charter that says the alliance — or every member of the alliance — must agree to send arms as a prudent measure in preparation for a preventive war.
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:14am
This shithead backstab by France and Germany will NOT be forgotten. The Eastern Europeans will join NATO, and France may be on the way out. The original purpose of NATO was a bullwark against Solviet expansion, and as such, the Balkans are still nervous over the long term aims of Russia. The French, and Germans no longer need Nato to keep Russia off their backs.
Note: There is a very real possability that the troops leaving Germany will NOT go back. The Balkans ALL want US army bases, (and the dollars that follow them, AND the protection the soldiers bring as well)
Fuck the Germans, not backing up an allie, well, makes you no longer an allie, by definition! (There is still time to get on board)
Double Fuck the French, they ARE no longer our allies, and we, (the USA )have something up our sleave for them. It involves not buying anything French!
Note: There is a very real possability that the troops leaving Germany will NOT go back. The Balkans ALL want US army bases, (and the dollars that follow them, AND the protection the soldiers bring as well)
Fuck the Germans, not backing up an allie, well, makes you no longer an allie, by definition! (There is still time to get on board)
Double Fuck the French, they ARE no longer our allies, and we, (the USA )have something up our sleave for them. It involves not buying anything French!
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:19am
Sort of as an aside, France is the nation that commits the most espionage against the United States, particularly American defense industries. Lockheed Martin employeesare specifically warned any time they travel to France to watch out for SDECE personnel attempting to obtain information from them. They, Japan, and Israel are the three worst, and we still somehow remain allied with them. I will never understand how governments work.
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:25am
True Strafe, but what did happen was the refusal to draw up merely a contingency plan for agression aginst a member state. No one , including Turkey required real commitment of troops or arms , but a 'just in case'. Turkey shares almost 150 miles of border with Iraq , much of it porus desert and the possibility of Iraqi action into Turkish territory, while highly unlikely ands suicidal on the part of Iraq, is not beyond the realm of possibility. Schroeder and Chirac have decided that Turkey is unworthy of their support as a memeber nation in NATO, for reasons of their own. Much of this is tied to the multi-billion dollar agreements that both nations have with Iraq and to the desire of both leaders to step away from te alliances and agreements that both nations have made now that they are inconvienient to their national intrests.
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:28am
True but Israel and Japan at least don't take every chance they get to stab us in the back.The Dark wrote:Sort of as an aside, France is the nation that commits the most espionage against the United States, particularly American defense industries. Lockheed Martin employeesare specifically warned any time they travel to France to watch out for SDECE personnel attempting to obtain information from them. They, Japan, and Israel are the three worst, and we still somehow remain allied with them. I will never understand how governments work.
And we protect the French because the ony choice was worse. Now days though it's a different story.
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:32am
Ah, if only we could convince France and Germany to go to war with each other once more 
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:39am
This level of espionage interestingly began to sharply increase after the Gulf War of '91, when it was proved that American weapons were manifestly superior to a vast majority of European weapon systems. Especially hurt by this were AMX and Dassault, as it was shown that both companies products were incapable of even token resistence to American warplanes and tanks. Orders for Mirage fighters virtually dried up over night in favor of McDonnel-Douglas F-16's. Hate to say it but our amazing , nigh bloodless victory unnerved our allies severly and they have been trying to make up the difference for the last decade.The Dark wrote:Sort of as an aside, France is the nation that commits the most espionage against the United States, particularly American defense industries. Lockheed Martin employeesare specifically warned any time they travel to France to watch out for SDECE personnel attempting to obtain information from them. They, Japan, and Israel are the three worst, and we still somehow remain allied with them. I will never understand how governments work.
For Japan , Corporate espionage is a way of life for Japanese 'kieretsu', the Mega-Corps that control almost all of Japans industry. The Warlords of Japan didn't disappear , they just wear a suit and tie now rather than armor and a no-dachi.
Israel spys on everyone, they like to stay well informed, hell if my country was only 30 miles wide at points , so would I.......
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:40am
Do they even have manpower and equipment to fight?Darth Wong wrote:Ah, if only we could convince France and Germany to go to war with each other once more
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:45am
Oh , indeed they do , but I think this would just be a repeat of '40. Hell , the German formations would be swamped with wounded French men when they all dislocate an arm surrenderingRubberanvil wrote:Do they even have manpower and equipment to fight?Darth Wong wrote:Ah, if only we could convince France and Germany to go to war with each other once more
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:45am
France has many tens of millions of men capable of waving a white flag. I'd say they're in peak fighting form.Rubberanvil wrote:Do they even have manpower and equipment to fight?Darth Wong wrote:Ah, if only we could convince France and Germany to go to war with each other once more
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:48am
Not in any significant way.
Remove the US Troops from Germany and Germany will get paranoid about Russia. Which will lead to a military build up.
Of course then France will get paranoid about Germany...and so on.
Remove the US Troops from Germany and Germany will get paranoid about Russia. Which will lead to a military build up.
Of course then France will get paranoid about Germany...and so on.
Posted: 2003-02-11 01:50am
Wonder how long till Skimmer comes along and flames us both for slamming the French once again 
In with you Lord Wong, any one for tea and Panzers in Paris ?
In with you Lord Wong, any one for tea and Panzers in Paris ?
Posted: 2003-02-11 02:05am
True, hadn't thought of that. Considering I wasn't a teen yet when the war ended, my knowledge of trends is poor.Sokar wrote:This level of espionage interestingly began to sharply increase after the Gulf War of '91, when it was proved that American weapons were manifestly superior to a vast majority of European weapon systems. Especially hurt by this were AMX and Dassault, as it was shown that both companies products were incapable of even token resistence to American warplanes and tanks.
*Ahem*...Lockheed Martin F-16s. Not to be picky, but my father's worked on equipment for the new blocks. And it was General Dynamics before that. Mickey D built the F-15 before Boeing bought them out.Orders for Mirage fighters virtually dried up over night in favor of McDonnel-Douglas F-16's.
And at the rate they're going, it'll take a few more decades for them to reach where our corporations are now. I've got a feeling that if we do go to war, there may be some unusual equipment deployed. The government wouldn't reveal its truly secret stuff before it has to.Hate to say it but our amazing , nigh bloodless victory unnerved our allies severly and they have been trying to make up the difference for the last decade.
Posted: 2003-02-11 02:10am
D'Oh!!! I knew it was one or the other......I couldn't remember which.*Ahem*...Lockheed Martin F-16s. Not to be picky, but my father's worked on equipment for the new blocks. And it was General Dynamics before that. Mickey D built the F-15 before Boeing bought them out.
Posted: 2003-02-11 03:18am
I take comfort in knowing that the US has a few nukes targeted towards France. Or at least we did, during the Cold War, when France withdrew from NATO and said they'd defend their own borders from ANY nation that encroached on them...