Is it time to think international relations and security beyond NATO?

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,739
The dumb thing in this whole discussion is that NATO's structure - as in a coalition for collective defense - is rather ideal. Since it by nature it allows participating military forces to be slightly smaller while still having sufficient enough collective punch. Making it cost efficient method for having strong defense. Of course such a structure is only ideal for defensive purposes, not so much for offensive - that would require much more unified structures under single command.
Unfortunately the current US administration CLEARLY cannot even do a basic cost-benefit analysis... (Viz Trump's business record, tariffs on China, etc...)
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,958
Sydney
Thinking in term of war will end up in getting you one ,

I'm not too sure what a guy in Tennessee would do if a bunch of guys from far away came on its fence waving guns and generally pissing on his boots
and calling it "defence "
I would suggest that so far Russia had been rather patient ..... afraid , certainly not ....worried , oh yes
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegreathoo
Oct 2012
794
Thinking in term of war will end up in getting you one ,

I'm not too sure what a guy in Tennessee would do if a bunch of guys from far away came on its fence waving guns and generally pissing on his boots
and calling it "defence "
I would suggest that so far Russia had been rather patient ..... afraid , certainly not ....worried , oh yes
Then again, not sure if Russia is acting like the best of neighbours.
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,958
Sydney
Then again are you sure their neighbors are acting like the best
it seems to me that there are absolutely no intent to act as good neighbors ,
more like if some people are just enjoying themselves scratching old wounds to make them bleed again
 

Vaeltaja

Ad Honorem
Sep 2012
3,693
Nato has an unified command structure ,
it's called SHAPE is located at Mons and is always headed by an American general
SHAPE | Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe
Yes, and no. NATO itself will not activate (per charter) unless article 5 is invoked. Since that is purely defensive role it hardly matters for actions outside the scope of NATO. So again we come to being 'good at defense' but not so much for offense - since such actions would require agreements past the scope of NATO which very likely would create rather non-united force. What i mean is that there is not strict high command which could marshal NATO forces how it saw fit - there are clear and distinct limits on what it can and can not do.
 

Vaeltaja

Ad Honorem
Sep 2012
3,693
I'm not too sure what a guy in Tennessee would do if a bunch of guys from far away came on its fence waving guns and generally pissing on his boots
and calling it "defence "
I would suggest that so far Russia had been rather patient ..... afraid , certainly not ....worried , oh yes
The problem with this is that so far only Russia has had offensive or aggressive posture. Only Russia has done simulated attacks against neutral countries (like Sweden). Only Russia has violated for example the Finnish airspace without apologizing for it. Only Russia keeps interfering with and deliberately endangering civilian aviation and shipping. Only Russia had deliberately tried to prevent neutral state owned research vessels from operating on high seas. So your argument really doesn't work. The only party pissing on other people here has been Russia and it is apparently quite upset that other countries didn't like how it kept doing that. OTOH that Russia is paranoid is hardly news.
Then again are you sure their neighbors are acting like the best
it seems to me that there are absolutely no intent to act as good neighbors ,
more like if some people are just enjoying themselves scratching old wounds to make them bleed again
I'm not quite sure if their neighbors are 'acting like the best' but they certainly have not been in any manner threatening Russia - apart from trying to be more independent and sovereign without having Russia influencing to their actions. The problem is that Russia has difficulty understanding that countries beyond its borders are actually sovereign and not just some puppets to play with. What i try to point out is that no one really cares of Russia or what it does internally. As long as it keeps its nonsense within Russia's own borders it is perfectly free to become what-ever dystopia its autocratic leader(s) desire it to become. What other countries want is for Russia to deal with them as actual countries and not as subjects - to have ability to trade in Russia without undue restrictions, to be able to have some trust in rule of law in Russia, and so on. Other than that posture towards Russia is strictly neutral, not offensive or aggressive - it may not be friendly but it certainly ain't hostile either.
 

M9Powell

Ad Honorem
Oct 2014
4,448
appalacian Mtns
Thinking in term of war will end up in getting you one ,

I'm not too sure what a guy in Tennessee would do if a bunch of guys from far away came on its fence waving guns and generally pissing on his boots
and calling it "defence "
I would suggest that so far Russia had been rather patient ..... afraid , certainly not ....worried , oh yes
They'd die long before they got here. That's what the US Navy is for.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,738
USA
Oh!!! Old the nukes, don’t send the Special Forces yet! That kind of aggressively is not needed. You are talking about an issue and I am talking about other. Related and yet distinct.

That some countries, NATO members, have a low contribution, that is been said by various USA presidents (pardon me not saying POTUS, but for a Portuguese sounds odd and almost offensive, besides what is the plural of POTUS?) and some European politics and it is quite correct to say so.

The business with Russia is an issue that both the Europeans and the companies of Trump have, and yes, I also agree with you that it is a threat to the NATO security.

But, my point was that the current USA administration, in the words of his president, Trumpa, stated that EU is “a foe”. Since many European NATO members are EU members that line of thinking had political repercussions in Europe.

If a NATO ally of the other side of the Atlantic, considers the Europeans “a foe” why should the formal alliance be maintained? This is a valid question after Trumps declarations.

Or saying that Trump called to EU “a foe” is fake news?

PS: I didn’t understood some parts of your post, due to language issues, for instance “rockingrockingboat”. English is not my mother language and in these cases Google didn’t helped me.
When the EU, specifically certain countries in it, work against the US, then they aren't acting like allies, are they?

You are acting like the current complaints about specific NATO countries is new. Its not. For decades, many in the countries who are providing more than their share is supposed to be have been complaining but its never been vocal, because past POTUS have not been willing to bring it up. GWB because he was in no position with the Iraq and A-stan debacle, including needing to use NATO for the latter. Then with Obama, well he was Obama. But it needed to be addressed. Certain member states of NATO are saving money by ignoring their own responsibilities. If they legitimately don't think the security situation warrants spending more money than they are, then NATO as a whole needs to be readdressed. If it is serious enough, it means they're purposely slacking, they are purposely diverting funding elsewhere to make others pay for their own security, which is wrong.

I'm glad Trump brought it up, it needed to. He uses Twitter because the MSM isn't his friend and its the only way to get his message across. He is blunt, but he's not a real politician. This issue should have been brought up in the late 90s.

I typed the last message on my cell phone and it does weird things. "Rocking the boat."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rodger

Rodger

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,171
US
When the EU, specifically certain countries in it, work against the US, then they aren't acting like allies, are they?

You are acting like the current complaints about specific NATO countries is new. Its not. For decades, many in the countries who are providing more than their share is supposed to be have been complaining but its never been vocal, because past POTUS have not been willing to bring it up. GWB because he was in no position with the Iraq and A-stan debacle, including needing to use NATO for the latter. Then with Obama, well he was Obama. But it needed to be addressed. Certain member states of NATO are saving money by ignoring their own responsibilities. If they legitimately don't think the security situation warrants spending more money than they are, then NATO as a whole needs to be readdressed. If it is serious enough, it means they're purposely slacking, they are purposely diverting funding elsewhere to make others pay for their own security, which is wrong.

I'm glad Trump brought it up, it needed to. He uses Twitter because the MSM isn't his friend and its the only way to get his message across. He is blunt, but he's not a real politician. This issue should have been brought up in the late 90s.

I typed the last message on my cell phone and it does weird things. "Rocking the boat."
And if you save money on your military spending, well then you can spend more on domestic issues. In my opinion, if you contribute like the little brother in the family, then expect to be treated this way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: royal744

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,738
USA
And if you save money on your military spending, well then you can spend more on domestic issues. In my opinion, if you contribute like the little brother in the family, then expect to be treated this way.
That's exactly what it is. They think they found a loophole, they get the services (security) without paying in (military budget and commitment for an efficient and capable military force). They save all that money they can use for their welfare state instead. They think they found a winning political solution. Letting them get away with that encourages more of it. It needs to be stopped. Either cut them off or bully them into paying their share.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rodger