Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Pb on March 09, 2022, 01:00:59 PM
-
Should the USA remain in NATO?
What do you think and why? I have been wondering about this
-
Any country north of the equator, touching the Atlantic Ocean, or has registered ships that do significant trade with countries north of the equator on the Atlantic Ocean, should be a member of NATO if they value free trade. Possibly including Russia.
-
Previously I've been of the opinion that we should wind it down and disband in an orderly fashion. The EU nations seemed to have pretty good relations with Russia. With Russia supplying energy to the Germans and others it looked like healthy relations were winning the day.
With the current fiasco I'm less prone to think that way. We will have to see how this all plays out.
-
I am thinking NATO as it has existed should be disbanded. Too many members who have different priorities. Of course, I almost thing we should disband the UN first or at least move it out of the US.
However, we may consider a similar organization that is just us, Canada and the UK. We may also want to think about separate or similar agreements with nations like Poland who value our help and may be decent trade partners. I am not sure if we need alliances with people like Turkey, but it might be considered. I just don't see why it needs to be the same organization.
I think all these alliances should be reevaluated every 10 years or so.
-
Maybe? Probably? I'll be interested in hearing cases for and against.
What does NATO provide to the US? I still see two arguments for remaining in NATO. First, while NATO is a military alliance, it also fosters good economic ties and influence. Second, the assurances it provides helps prevent other nations from feeling the need to develop their own WMD's. Part of the reason that the UK feverishly developed nuclear weapons post WWII was because they were not convinced the US would come back to Europe and fight the Soviets.
Nuclear states can project power far beyond their economic status would indicate, as should be very apparent at the moment. People with them do not want anyone else to have them. Which is why the whole framework of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is "Club of people that have these, and no one else is allowed to, mmkay?"
I do think there are some hazards in defensive pacts. Local fights turn into big fights.
Also, how does it play out if a NATO member is attacked while actively engaging in hostilities with a non-NATO member? If, for instance, Poland decides to hand over MIG's to Ukraine, consolidates and preps them at Mińsk Mazowiecki, and the Russians decide to flatten them on the ground in Poland, is that an article 5? What if Poland started to enforce a no-fly zone, and gets hit? At what point does a NATO member's actions cause them the loss of article 5 protections?
-
NATO is not great but okay. Funny how the euro members are upping their defense budgets now like some orange dude tried to get them to do three years ago.
Now the U.N.? I guess a cruise missile strike while it is in session is a little dire but close the doors, kick everybody out of New York and start over again where countries cannot veto action against wars they started and Iran isn’t on a human rights council.
-
I'm on the fence. I can argue for either side to some degree.
-
Disband.
Like the UN, It's just another useless entity that we fund and do all the heavy lifting for. And it's about to kick off WW3, if it hasn't already.
-
Disband.
Like the UN, It's just another useless entity that we fund and do all the heavy lifting for. And it's about to kick off WW3, if it hasn't already.
I'd kind of like to see just how buddy buddy Russia and China are before I say pull the plug on NATO. They may end up useful as enemies of our enemies.
The UN should be canceled and kicked out of the USA yesterday.
-
No to NATO yes to UN
-
At the moment, I'd say stick to NATO . . . but we should see how many of the other NATO nations meet their "2% of GDP for military spending" treaty commitments.
According to this site: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nato-spending-by-country (https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nato-spending-by-country)
as of 2022, the only countries meeting this threshold are the USA, U.K., Greece, Estonia, Romania, Latvia, and Poland. Lithuania is just shy at 1.98%. Every other NATO nation is a deadbeat. If nothing else, behind closed doors we should make our displeasure with the deadbeats known.
I see little or no benefit to staying in the UN. With a little editing, a Nicholas von Hoffman quote about the Democratic Party isn't too far off the mark when applied to the U.N.
To its committed members the Democratic Party United Nations was still the party of heart, humanity, and justice, but to those removed a few paces it looked like Captain Hook’s crew–ambulance-chasing lawyers, rapacious public policy grants persons, civil rights gamesmen, ditzy-brained movie stars, fat-assed civil servant desk squatters, recovering alcoholics, recovering wife-beaters, recovering child-buggers, and so forth and so on, a grotesque line-up of ill-mannered self-pitying, caterwauling freeloaders banging their tin cups on the pavement demanding handouts.
-
The mere fact that any one member of the sec counsel has absolute veto power over all the other members really makes the UN useless if any one of them go rogue.
-
... if any one of them go rouge.
... or even go mascara.
-
... or even go mascara.
Spell check strikes again!
-
I'd kind of like to see just how buddy buddy Russia and China are before I say pull the plug on NATO. They may end up useful as enemies of our enemies.
The UN should be canceled and kicked out of the USA yesterday.
I can see that being potentially wise. And to be fair, I guess we've never actually had to use NATO for it's true function. I do believe it'll just be more of the same, We get to pay for it (funding and the butchers bill)
Agreed on the UN.
-
That is a fair point about staying put for a bit. We might need the help.......
U.S. Navy: Our $2 Billion Warship Can’t Deploy Because The Commander Won’t Get Vaccinated
https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-navy-our-2-billion-warship-cant-deploy-because-the-commander-wont-get-vaccinated?utm_campaign=dw_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=housefile&utm_content=non_member