Subject:
|
Re: Value of NATO?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:43:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
377 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&e=3&u=/ap/20030129/ap_on_re_mi_ea/nato_iraq
>
> Apparently, if I'm reading the story right, NATO planners don't want to
> discuss what to do if Iraq attacks Turkey.
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 before making part of it...
It's just another way of pressure, really. In the end, since war *will* go
ahead, there will be no other option for NATO members but to assist Turkey.
What this will mean in the meanwhile is that the US will have to make a lot
more concessions (read "bribes") to Turkey to get it *in* war in the first
place.
As for the value of NATO... it depends. As much as I'd love to see the EU
reaching an agreement regarding military alliances (2), I am fully aware of
the issues "neutrality" among the memberstates that prevent that from
happening. And in the end, I kinda like having the US subsidizing our
armament... :-)
So NATO will be here for years to come, and I can't immagine an alternative
under the present circumstances.
Pedro (Euro-enthousiast)
(1)- I laughed hard when I heard Rumsfeld speaking about "Old Europe" and
"New Europe" - does he *really* think anything can be done in Mainland
Europe without France and germany wanting it to happen???
(2)- it's pathetic that the EU represents the second largest *economic*
power on Earth and has no *military* power of its own. The Commission is
living in fantasy if it thinks anyone will take it serious in the world
arena before any of its threats can be backed up with actual power to
enforce them...
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | 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… (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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 (...) (21 years ago, 29-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
