 | | Value of NATO?
|
|
(URL) if I'm reading the story right, NATO planners don't want to discuss what to do if Iraq attacks Turkey. That strikes me as imprudent. Whether you think a war with Iraq is justified or not or whether NATO should participate or not (1), it seems (...) (22 years ago, 29-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Value of NATO?
|
|
(...) I think this has more to do with politics than military necessity. It seems more a signal that NATO is wary of US intentions than anything - note that the foot-draggers are saying that the planning may be necessary eventually. The US is trying (...) (22 years ago, 29-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Value of NATO?
|
|
(...) My reading is that France and Germany (1) are delaying the plan to assist Turkey in the hope the Tukish government becomes frightened of entering war - thus forcing a review of US plans. Besides, given that Turkey does not want to upset the EU (...) (22 years ago, 29-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Value of NATO?
|
|
(...) If that attack is in self-defence as result of illegal attacks launched from US bases inside Turkey, then I don't see why they should? If the attack is an unprovoked attack by Iraq, then a NATO level response is justified. I expect the chances (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Value of NATO?
|
|
(...) Very few countries could seriously threaten the EU - of those that could, very few would. I'd rather my tax was spent on education. The EU and USA are aligned pretty well, so I see not need to compete with them in terms of military spending… (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Value of NATO?
|
|
(...) Precisely. For the time being, there is no need for an European Army - there are no threats! Although I argue there is a need to start testing its future appearance, out of precaution alone; after all, the best way to avoid wars is still not (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Value of NATO?
|
|
(...) On all 4s - he's bush's poodle. Scott A (22 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Value of NATO?
|
|
(...) So you've seen George Michael's clip as well, eh? ;-) Pedro (22 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Poodles & Chimps [Re: Value of NATO?]
|
|
(...) Indeed. In the UK, Blair is often satirised as a poodle, whilst "his master" is a chimp. More often he's just a diminutive form of bush: (URL) kind of a shame, as Blair is often argued to be one of the smartest leaders there is - but I suppose (...) (22 years ago, 31-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
