In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
NATO Reconsidered
kimi
Member Posts: 44,723 ✭✭✭
Excerpts from
NATO Reconsidered
By Joseph A. Harriss on 3.28.11 @ 6:11AM at
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/28/nato-reconsidered
From the April 2011 issue of The American Spectator
NATO went into limbo and into a funk. "It entered a profound existential crisis two decades ago," explains Dominique David, executive director of the French Institute of International Relations in Paris. "But it managed to survive for several reasons. First, big bureaucracies never go away. They always find other pretexts to stay in business. Then, the U.S. wanted to keep an eye on Europe and NATO was a convenient way. But the biggest boost came in the early 1990s when former Soviet satellites requested membership. It became both a military organization and an instrument for the political stabilization of Europe. That made it a strange, schizophrenic animal constantly looking for new threats to relegitimize itself."
WITH NATO's new vocation as a global, proactive, security, crisis management, peacekeeping, and humanitarian organization, it now commits Americans to fighting and dying in any hotspot on the planet. As a Cato Institute study puts it, "The transformation of NATO from an alliance to defend the territory of its members to an ambitious crisis-management organization has profound and disturbing implications for the United States. [with] the potential to entangle [it] in an endless array of messy, irrelevant disputes."
NATO Reconsidered
By Joseph A. Harriss on 3.28.11 @ 6:11AM at
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/28/nato-reconsidered
From the April 2011 issue of The American Spectator
NATO went into limbo and into a funk. "It entered a profound existential crisis two decades ago," explains Dominique David, executive director of the French Institute of International Relations in Paris. "But it managed to survive for several reasons. First, big bureaucracies never go away. They always find other pretexts to stay in business. Then, the U.S. wanted to keep an eye on Europe and NATO was a convenient way. But the biggest boost came in the early 1990s when former Soviet satellites requested membership. It became both a military organization and an instrument for the political stabilization of Europe. That made it a strange, schizophrenic animal constantly looking for new threats to relegitimize itself."
WITH NATO's new vocation as a global, proactive, security, crisis management, peacekeeping, and humanitarian organization, it now commits Americans to fighting and dying in any hotspot on the planet. As a Cato Institute study puts it, "The transformation of NATO from an alliance to defend the territory of its members to an ambitious crisis-management organization has profound and disturbing implications for the United States. [with] the potential to entangle [it] in an endless array of messy, irrelevant disputes."
What's next?
Comments
Clouder..
[:)]
quote:Originally posted by whiteclouder
When Reagan dismantled the "wall" in Germany, so should have NATO been disolved. The Europeans have NEVER appreciated what we did for them (with the possible exception of the English) and it's way past time that we let the liberal freeloaders defend themselves. The author of the article is spot on.
Clouder..
When Reagan dismantled the "wall" in Germany, so should have NATO been disolved. The Europeans have NEVER appreciated what we did for them (with the possible exception of the English) and it's way past time that we let the liberal freeloaders defend themselves. The author of the article is spot on.
Clouder..
Oh, they appreciated it.
We simply overstayed our welcome.
I can't imagine having thousands of foreign troops on your soil, immune to your laws, and at times getting away with rape and murder would be a pleasant experience.
Or more to the point, if we did them all such a huge favor by being there, if it was so awesome, why don't we get ourselves some foreign military bases here? I'm sure Turkey, Mexico, or Japan would love to house some troops in Iowa, Kansas, or Oklahoma.
When Reagan dismantled the "wall" in Germany, so should have NATO been disolved. The Europeans have NEVER appreciated what we did for them (with the possible exception of the English) and it's way past time that we let the liberal freeloaders defend themselves. The author of the article is spot on.
Clouder..
Agreed.
quote:Originally posted by whiteclouder
When Reagan dismantled the "wall" in Germany, so should have NATO been disolved. The Europeans have NEVER appreciated what we did for them (with the possible exception of the English) and it's way past time that we let the liberal freeloaders defend themselves. The author of the article is spot on.
Clouder..
Oh, they appreciated it.
We simply overstayed our welcome.
I can't imagine having thousands of foreign troops on your soil, immune to your laws, and at times getting away with rape and murder would be a pleasant experience.
Or more to the point, if we did them all such a huge favor by being there, if it was so awesome, why don't we get ourselves some foreign military bases here? I'm sure Turkey, Mexico, or Japan would love to house some troops in Iowa, Kansas, or Oklahoma.
We are not immune from their laws and you probably know that, but what the hey, it's never stoppped you from stretching things before. There is a Status of Forces Agreement in every country who have ASKED us to establish a presence. The host country agrees to everything in it; they agree or we don't stay so I can't see where you construe they're doing us a favor.
We don't need foreign troops to take care of our security. Sadly, we chose to ingore the fact that we have borders but if we did, our troops are capable of defending this country from your pals.
Clouder..