The end of NATO?Follow

NATO's reply to any crisis is "More American Troops".


NATO has been ineffective for quite some time IMO.

It will be interesting to see if Sarkozy actually commits french troops to Kandahar to help the Canandians. It will be even more interesting to see if the Canadians keep their word and pull out if they don't get the help they requested.

Of course with the inevitable spring election that Harper is trying to orchestrate everything is up in the air.

Protecting us from the threat of Stalin?

I think he will, the only question is whether what he commits makes any difference. The signs are pretty positive, though. Sarko is an Atlantist, and has even mooted the idea of France re-joining the military command of Nato.

But yeah, domestic Canadian politics might still make all this purely academic.



I totally agree. Eventhough NATO's purpose has had to change, it has become primarily a "Western intervention force". If 2/3rd of the Western bit can't be bothered to send troops, it's pretty pointless...

NATO still exists in order to keep America in Europe, to ultimately provide for a single common defense for Europeans instead of a bunch of smaller alliances that will ultimately just cost more money, and to provide more attractive opportunities for foreign investment.

By keeping America in Europe, you're ensuring that the ties across the ocean won't get displaced by other countries or regions of the world, such as Asia or the Pacific. This also helps keep America tied economically with Europe for trade and such.

When it comes to defense, Europe has historically established alliances with other European countries for defense. If we did not have NATO, we would have two or three competing alliances within the European continent that would start to raise tensions back up again (even if it's a little).

Lastly, with NATO membership, a nation becomes more attractive for foreign investment, since that nation is tied now to the West, and it will have a foreign and domestic policy that will be more likely to fall in line somewhat with the West. In addition, by being a part of NATO, it helps to ensure better economic ties between it and other alliance members (going back to point one, keeping America in Europe) that won't be endangered with the coming of an international crisis.

NATO is still needed today, in my opinion, for these reasons. Maybe when the EU becomes more assertive and can control it's own defense and whatnot, then NATO might be replaceable.

But that's not anytime soon.

With the rate at which the global economy is expanding, I'm not sure that NATO serves to tie any country to the US any more than businesses do on their own. After all, US firms don't limit their trade to NATO countries.

In all honesty, the only thing that the US would lose by leaving NATO (which would likely cause it to dissolve) would be the moral support.

I've always thought of NATO as more of a joint-defense alliance rather than a European/American* Army. While the Balkans was a noble cause, it seemed to overstep the idea of NATO in the first place, likewise Afghanistan. I get the impression that many of the host nations feel the same way, hence their reluctance to send substantial numbers into regions where NATO took an offensive stance.

I think it still serves purpose in that an attack on one European nation is a de facto attack on all of Europe and America but I doubt its effectiveness as an offensive force.


*Including Canada

Well, there's a reason Russia still ******* every time one of its ex-satellites asks to join the NATO Club and we have China on the rise and Iran testing missiles. And the slow collapse of Pakistan. So I think a joint-defensive alliance is still worth the expense.

As for Afghanistan, NATO agreed to get involved so I do feel that the European nations should be pulling their weight. I won't pretend to be qualified to say exactly what that should entail.

yes i agree.

now on a side note of this, what do you think of Puttin's attempts to "bring back" the cold war with his threat at a military build up again due to NATO and the EU "ignoring Russia's" needs?


IMHO NATO has been worthless since the fall of the old USSR. 80% of the troop actions have been supplied by the USA with most of the countries either not suppling troops at all or a pathetic amount of troops to not be worth counting. We are talking less then a company in most cases (company being at least 4 squads of 8 - 15 men).

As for the "financial and political" ties between the US and EU i do not see them getting worse then they are not under GW Bush and our next pres with or without NATO.

As for small collisions of EU countries forming causing strife, that very well could happen, but i doubt that strife will be aimed at other native EU countries, but could be aimed at allies of other collisions. that could cause strife like WWI.

As for losing ties with Turkey, Turkey has to much to lose if they break ties off with the west and they know it. no way they would risk cutting ties with the west if NATO were to dissolve.

either way i do not feel it would be a bad thing to see NATO go the way of the dodo bird, but i do agree something needs to replace it.

if countries are not willing to do their fair share of the work, then they should be kicked out of NATO and be striped of the benefits they have gained as being a member of that organization. call it something different what ever, but if you do not play, you do not benefit.

nobby, my point is if you are part of a military organization and refuse to send military force of any measurable amount, then you should not be part of that organization. it is rather simple really. or at least should not benefit from said organization if you do not participate.

yes EU had a different perspective in WWI and WWII then the US simply by its nature and location. in both major wars without the US you would be speaking german right now anyways, or russian for that matter.

so why is it that the US has to bail you out of everything and risk our boys in a fight but you get to sit there and not risk that?

yes your cities and towns face threat, well then do something about that threat instead of calling out the world police force to fix it for you?

that is my point. yes diplomacy must be used (see my comment on things not getting worse ...) but action needs to be taken by the EU members of NATO for it to remain a valid force.

After serving both directly with, and indirectly with UK forces, I will honestly tell you that UK servicemen are on the same page as American military.


If there is ANYTHING UK, American, and Canadian forces can agree upon, it's the betterment of world security. The only reason I post this is because I've served (and drank) with UK, and Canadian Navies. Outstanding sailors the lot of them are.



Almost as good as us US Sailors are.







Sorry, had to throw that last, and little tidbit of information in there.

Well, they also provide a deeping of the "eastern front" but that doesn't so much require troops as much as just allowing us to stage there if need be.

Also, they might have some Soviet-era prisons we can use.

Our current US political environment isn't so far off cold war hysteria. I remember talking with friends in 1991 about how with the fall of communism, it will go from a Soviet/US Split to a north/south split with other center of power being in the middle east. While the various organizations like Al Quaeda certainly don't rival the USSR in any sense of the word, the spectre of that kind of terror and its ability to cast all political alliances in terms of the vigorousness of their opposition or alliance with various middle eastern groups is very much like the cold war. It makes sense given the current administration's ties to intelligence agencies during the cold war.

Because of this, NATO certainly has a role on some level, though the current administration has erred too much in alienating the EU, but they have at least a role in upholding the propaganda of the Western Powers protecting the "free world," even if it can't maintain a military alliance.



Edited, Feb 11th 2008 2:44pm by Annabella