NATO - Why?


Registered Senior Member
Except for a post by tiassa over a year ago ("For instance: I, personally, am ambivalent about NATO actions against the Serbs" - 04/05/00) I found nothing re.NATO! Surprised the hell out of me since dear Bush, along with trying to convince the European nations that our missile shield would be in their interest too, wants to convince Russia that expanding NATO is not a threat to Mother Russia!

Considering the intended purpose of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was to protect Europe from the USSR and the only thing it apparently accomplished was the forming of the Warsaw Pact Nations, Why the hell is it still around? Particularly at a time when the EU nations are considering forming their own, independent military alliance?
Where else but NATO and the embassies could you readly plant a foreign spy to gain info from those most likely to have it? I have for a long time thought that we should consider having another country host the UN. I think that we'd done our share and it's time for another to do it for a while. I would be willing to bet if this proposal came up there would be a hue and cry from amongst it's members over the idea. It would suprise me considerably if that were not the case.
Why are we so interested in Russia? I mean they are still in the 1920's. Do they have supermarkets now? or do you still have to go to 5 different stores to get your groceries>?
Re. Russia

Jagdwuf, because they are a leader in Space, Aeronautic, and weapons technology if for no other reason. Are you aware that we are currently using Russian rocket engines for our, I believe, Delta rockets? That they developed underwater super-cavitation based weapons at least twelve years ago? That the ISS, International Space Station, is heavily dependant on the Russians for resupply and crew evacuation? That the Russian SU 37, I believe, outperforms any fighter we currently have? That we had to contract the use of an AN 227, I believe, to fly the the disassembled P-3 out of China because we have nothing large enough to do it?

Sometimes the technical sophistication of a country cannot be measured by the number of supermarkets it has.
Re: Re. Russia

Originally posted by Chagur

Sometimes the technical sophistication of a country cannot be measured by the number of supermarkets it has.


Anyway, what's wrong with a continued allaince? Surely the World's problems cannot continue to rest on the shoulders of America!?;)

Though science topics have always interested me, History and Political Science are my true passions. The primary reason NATO is around is because it was created in post WWII world of rising tensions between the democratic west and the communist east. Basicially it was if you hit any of our boys in NATO, we'll wack you. I partially agree that NATO is antiquated, but its good to have because this lets the US, NATOs big cheese control most of the first-world's military in some situations. Though NATO is are ally, we have done things they don't like, for instance like bombing Iraq in Feb. 2001.
I've noticed that many of you disagree with our membership in the United Nations, and you think we should leave. Frankley, YOU ARE ALL IDIOTS! The reason the Second World War happened isn't directly because of Hitler. After WWI, Germany had been defeated the League of Nations was formed. It had many members of the Allied nations during WWI, except for the isolationist USA. They never had the balls to enforce sansions on Germany or take out the Nazis when they begain to tear up the Treaty of Versallies. If this simple step would have been taken, 50 million people wouldn't have died during the six darkest years in Earth's history. We scrued up big time.
The primary reason we haven't had WWIII isn't because of nukes and a MAD policy, its because the UN has acted as a mediator, "the peoples court" if you will of the world. If we left the United Nations, I would start building a bomb shelter or go to Canada to flee an impending draft. There would be a lot more wars without the UN.
Hey thecurly1, are you trying to jerk my chain or something?
I partially agree that NATO is antiquated, but its good to have because this lets the US, NATOs big cheese control most of the first-world's military in some situations.
Or ... that it maintains a market for our weapons manfacturers?

And maybe, just maybe, that's why the EU is in the process of creating it's own rapid reaction force ... to get out from under our control and our pressure to 'upgrade' (read that as buy our weapons) for the purpose of 'interoperability' (like when during the Balkans bit we had some serious problems co-ordinating with the other nation's armed forces, particularly their airforces).
I smell a certain paraned conspiracy theory about keeping the arms manufacutres supplied by staying in NATO. Trust me, defense contractors like General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing while fairly large corporations don't make as much as Ford, or Exxon Moble, therefore have signifigantly less pull into the political arena. The US military is still far and away more advanced than any of Europe's militaries or the worlds for that matter.

I find it interesting that no one commented about people wanting to get out of the UN. Maybe its because I proved my point of what happened, and what would happen if we left.
I think the word is 'paranoid'


Gee, where have I been?

Like I thought that the Pentagon is pretty damned concerned that due to cutbacks in recent years this country's weapons manufacturers aren't going to be able to keep their production lines open. And not only the Pentagon, Congress too.
About the cutbacks. In the 1990s there wasn't a need for a massive Cold War style military. I'm not sure if scaling down is the word, but the US military should significantly reduce its nuclear weapons arsenal. Adopt new policies towards future guerilla warfare and urban warfare. We also need to become a quicker, more agile force without compromising lethality. The last revamp of the military was in the '80s by Regain. We'll have to replace most of this hardware in the next few years. The defense industry will come back a bit stronger and everything will be fine. The only thing I hope for is that when we re-do the military is that we don't blow so much money it adds more money to the national debt. Something that you and I can both agree on. :) :) :)
I read your bio...

I'm not saying this to flatter Chagur but you seem to be a very intelligent man, gifited in many fields. Its fun to academicly spar with eachother. A sport which can only be fully appreaceated by men of our intelligents. Thanks for replying.