Russia: No CFE treaty for you!

[Tripledoc]

About Turkey. Can someone explain me the logic that it is part of NATO. North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

Last time I looked Turkey did not border the North Atlantic. Nor does Poland for that matter.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Ned
Tripledoc, in March 2003?

No country was more hostile than France and Germany were.

And Russia? I think China abstained, but then again they always do.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
No country was more hostile than France and Germany were.

Save Russia, China, Greece, Belgium, and the 100 odd countries that opposed the invasion of Iraq, but it doesn't matter I suppose.

And France and Germany clearly wanted to NUKE the US to teach you a lesson, and nuke the Polish weasels along it. Ha! You had it coming.

[Ned]

Agreed about Russia. China's relations with the US are warming.

But it does appear that Moscow, Berlin and Paris are forming their own alliance.

[Ned]

Spiffor, regardless of your jokes, one could justifiably say that Saddam Hussein did have allies in Paris, Berlin and Moscow.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Ned
Agreed about Russia. China's relations with the US are warming.

China's relations are warming with everyone.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Last time I looked Turkey did not border the North Atlantic. Nor does Poland for that matter.

Neither do Greece and Italy.

[Tripledoc]

NATO should change its name. What about Anticomintern?

[Spiffor]

Yes, just like he had allies in pretty much the whole Arab world, a large chunk of Asia, etc.

The offensive war decided by the US went completely against France's interests, and France opposed it. Just like you'd oppose France going to war against one of your clients.

This hostility to the American offensive did not mean we were hostile to America itself.

And regarding the Poles: we were disappointed that they didn't follow France and Germany like the poodle we expected them to be. Yet, even with this disappointment, there is not any reason to go to war and invade them. Maybe this little bit espace Americans, but countries generally don't decide invasions on a whim.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Yes, just like he had allies in pretty much the whole Arab world, a large chunk of Asia, etc.

The offensive war decided by the US went completely against France's interests, and France opposed it. Just like you'd oppose France going to war against one of your clients.

This hostility to the American offensive did not mean we were hostile to America itself.

And regarding the Poles: we were disappointed that they didn't follow France and Germany like the poodle we expected them to be. Yet, even with this disappointment, there is not any reason to go to war and invade them. Maybe this little bit espace Americans, but countries generally don't decide invasions on a whim.

Spiffor, I think you are missing the point. With Russia behaving in an increasingly autocratic manner, with their deliberately keeping bases in two countries against those countries' consent, with the dictator of Belerus doing his "thing," the Eastern front is becoming more dangerous by the minute to bordering states. They need protection.

France and Germany have recently demonstrated that they will not protect an alliance member if that members asks. Further, France and Germany have all but inked a formal alliance with Putin.

Given this, Poland and the Baltic states truly need American support and bases and need France and Germany out of the alliance.

[Patroklos]

DP

[Ned]

Also, note here Apolytoners who may be in denial, that Spiffor has admitted that Saddam's Iraq was a client state.

[Patroklos]

Trukey was asking for help agaisnt a non state actor. That isn't what NATO is for. It was deemed outside the scope of the organizations reach.

A state like Russia invading a member nation? No question there.

We don't move them back to Europe because basically EuroCom is a staging area (and not just for our interests). It would cost a lot more for us to move those troops from teh US to where ever every time Europe renigs on its international obligations.

[Ned]

Pat, I don't understand your post. Please elaborate on what you mean by "non state" actor?

[Patroklos]

Turkey wanted help from NATO to regulate and contain the flow of refugees. Basically they wanted NATO forces to build camps in Northern Iraq so the Kurds wouldn't enter urkey and cause problems (which they were doing).

Turkey did have a real problem, but it was not within the scope of NATO's designed reach. NATO was designed as a defensive alliance to defend against state actors (USSR, Warsaw Pact members, etc) as opposed to non-state actors like refugees. The mandate has been stretched to inclide terrorists, but terrorists and refugees are no where neart he same.

Or are you talking about another request?