What is the present role of NATO ?

Re 10

Tony

That says it all

Yes they owe but still contribute nearly a quarter of all the contributions and so probably feel justified in calling the shots.

The UK was the only country signed up for all of the organisations, NATO, CENTO and SEATO, though some have gone I bet most of you didn’t realise there were several.

Did, but was unaware that the UK was part of the late Warsaw Pact…;o)

NATO does what is intended and secures our borders by mutual military cooperation, hence why Russia feared the Ukraine and Georgia joining, as they wouldn’t then be going to war against one country, but all of them. It is now important to some of the smaller nations such as Latvia and Poland, the likes of the US F15’s and UK AWAC’s deployed to the region are working as part of NATO in the defence of those states whilst sending a clear Warning.

Since the Wall came down on the basis of NATO, etc, explicitly promising Gorbachev that it wouldn’t expand Eastwards it is hardly surprising that Putin is edgy. Yes, those states should have self determination but we, as NATO, seem to have (for want of a better word) cheated on our promise, thus creating problems which might throw it all away. Not sure if that promise included the EU, but you can see why the Russians have geared up.

The UN these days is a Joke, they used to have a military role to back up the threats, but when one country can veto a proposal ( often the aggressor ) then what is the point?

The UN doesn’t matter: the US always does what it wants anyway – except (do they still owe millions of dollars to the UN?) pay their membership fees.

The UK was the only country signed up for all of the organisations, NATO, CENTO and SEATO, though some have gone I bet most of you didn’t realise there were several.

NATO does what is intended and secures our borders by mutual military cooperation, hence why Russia feared the Ukraine and Georgia joining, as they wouldn’t then be going to war against one country, but all of them. It is now important to some of the smaller nations such as Latvia and Poland, the likes of the US F15’s and UK AWAC’s deployed to the region are working as part of NATO in the defence of those states whilst sending a clear Warning.

The UN these days is a Joke, they used to have a military role to back up the threats, but when one country can veto a proposal ( often the aggressor ) then what is the point?

Haha! Haven’t heard that clown’s name for a while. He hasn’t joined the aliens yet then?

Sounds like a David Ike(ism) 🙂

I am trying to define “transnational monopoly”.

…..>>….It is more likely described as some sort of mutual arms club where the members are able to train with each other in different climates and swagger around pretending to be the worlds policemen; but when one member has troubles (coff, hack, snort, Falklands) the barriers go up and you are left to sort it out yourself….

Quite, the member countries do seem to pick and choose when they want to get involved.
Is NATO a luxury we can still afford ? After all, if we want to play at being the world’s policeman, there is still the UN Peace Keeping force. So there will always be somewhere our politicians can send our servicemen to die, in the cause of freedom.

NATO has been described by some elements in Russia as : “..The military wing of the major transnational monopolies…”

We need NATO to continue to do the job that the EU thinks that it can do but, can’t.

i/ But the EU is European – surely it would not be in the interests of Canada and the US to be involved with a European-based military force.
ii/ NATO is not governed by the EU; in fact it seems to trail behind US actions and even then not all of (European) NATO take notice. Lets face it, both the EU and NATO seem to be clubs that the membership (mostly) decide to take what action suits them best and s0d the rest.
iii/ Not even sure NATO does the job it thinks it can do. Wasn’t it NATO in Afghanistan – and look at that mess as we pull out.

NATO might be based around defence of countries in and around the North Atlantic (ha – let the US West coast defend itself!), but it is more likely described as some sort of mutual arms club where the members are able to train with each other in different climates and swagger around pretending to be the worlds policemen; but when one member has troubles (coff, hack, snort, Falklands) the barriers go up and you are left to sort it out yourself….

John has given you your answer, Linc.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but NATO was formed to counter the perceived threat from behind the Iron Curtain.

Now that threat no longer exists, why do we still need NATO ? Should it be a police force, acting on behalf of the UN ?

Answers on the back of a stamp.

Good question Alan, but what’s YOUR answer?.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

We need NATO to continue to do the job that the EU thinks that it can do but, can’t.