To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 18781
    Value of NATO? —Larry Pieniazek
   (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 (...) (21 years ago, 29-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Value of NATO? —Bruce Schlickbernd
     (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 29-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Value of NATO? —Pedro Silva
     (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 29-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Value of NATO? —Scott Arthur
     (...) 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… (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Value of NATO? —Pedro Silva
     (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Value of NATO? —Scott Arthur
      (...) On all 4s - he's bush's poodle. Scott A (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Re: Value of NATO? —Pedro Silva
     (...) So you've seen George Michael's clip as well, eh? ;-) Pedro (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
    
         Poodles & Chimps [Re: Value of NATO?] —Scott Arthur
     (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 31-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
   
        Re: Value of NATO? —Scott Arthur
   (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR