NATO Slackers!

[Whisper]

Okay who here is pissed off at the fact that NATO countries like Germany, France, Italy etc....arent doing anything to help out there so called allies

there never in any dangerous areas at all
Yet there the ones who have benifited most from there NATO membership

while there so called allies aka USA, UK, Canada, The Netherlands, and Australia are dying because they dont have enough back up

http://www.mackaycartoons.net/2006/2006-11-30.jpg


Personally I think we should just kick the fuckers out
they dont wanna help us
then why exactly should we protect them?

If they don't want to help
then they don't deserve NATO protection

thoughts?

[DestroyTheFuture]

i agree.

because they havent been helping, i didnt even NOTICE that they werent helping. but yeah, if they dont do their share for us, then why do we do our share for them?

there is kind of an opposing side that i also agree with. maybe, if we dont ally with them, then we might need them, and they will just say, "screw you", and we will be screwed. maybe we just keep them on "idle" and dont help them out, then if we need them, we pretend that everything is cool.

but because North America is so strong, i agree that we wont lose much if we lose them, so overall, i think that we will benefit more if we just kind of let them be and kind of "idle" it. then, if we really need them, we'll call. but we shouldnt be spending money on them to protect them if they wont do the same.

[Whisper]

France hasent been an ally at all more of a burden
A) we had to save there ass from Germany who totally pwned them
B) they've been slamming America and the UK where ever possible on EVERYTHING
C) They've told Iran that having one or two nukes isnt a big deal
D) They played a major contributing part to the Rwandan massacure and just generally have a very shitty human rights record when it comes to there forign policys

beautiful country though......
i'm angry at them right now........sorry
lets hope its better with Chirac gone

Germany....Hitler (why were they even allowed in again?)

Italy....Mussolini (ditto?)

etc...

it just pisses me off because as members they've had the most to gain being so close to warsaw countries
Yet there the least willing to back up a fellow ally so why the hell have we let them stay in it
you dont wanna help thats fine you dont have to, get the hell out!
simple

http://www.gay.hr/slike/attachmenti/Nato_Flag.jpg

[Sapphire]

Just because we are all in NATO doesn't mean we all have to join wars we don't agree with. That is how World War One started. Let's not forget that it is because of WW1 that WW2 began.

Also lets remember, NATO is a defence alliance. We are there to defend one another. Not attack with each other

[Whisper]

actually thats exactly why NATO exists

america and england were attacked by terrorists that were directly traced back to afganistan
acording to the NATO agreement that means were all at war

thats how NATO defends its member countries
you fuck with one, you fuck with all

and now canadian, american, british and australian soliders are dying constantly while yet again france italy and germany sit on there fat useless asses

[redcar]

Ok I know that NATO exists as a defense alliance and all that. But when it comes to terrorism, thats been around for a while and I can never remember a NATO alliance acting on it.

Like when the IRA were bombing the UK, NATO didnt involve itself it was a British problem.

And I am sure they are not just sitting there.

I know Spain are going to have some strategic ground survalience base or something and Italy are building more bases or doing something anyway, cause there have been protests there this year from anti military people.

So I think its unfair to say they are doing nothing, just because they are not fighting.

[Sapphire]

actually thats exactly why NATO exists

Actually you will find NATO was formed in the 1950s mainly as a reaction to the tensions between the USA and the USSR. The US wanted to surround itself with allies in the event of a Soviet attack. This was closely followed by the formation of the Warsaw Pact which joined the USSR and some neighbouring countries in defence alliance against an attack from the US.

And how have they benefited more than any of us from NATO membership?

[Whisper]

Alex there only there for political reasons that way they can say they were there if it turns out well and if it doesn’t they can say that they had little to do with it
meanwhile our guys are dying
I grew up with a guy from grade 4 on
I met him when we moved here we were in the same class, were assigned the same seat on the bus hell we even have the same last name (not related as far as we know...)
He’s in Afghanistan right now
He could easily die there because there undermanned
Why? Because our so called allies are refusing to help

Of course they didn’t get involved in the IRA
The IRA was a revolutionary movement first of all, not a terrorist group from the other side of the planet
Second of all I don’t think the IRA ever murdered over 3thousand innocent civilians without provocation in one sweep
Not to mention the fact that they left the economy in shards and the Pentagon the HQ for the world’s most powerful military was crippled
I don't care what anyone says thats an act of war

Do you really wish we'd invaded Ireland?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_the_United_Nations), will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."

It was actually started in Europe with the Treaty of Brussels America was asked to join later
it was the precursor to NATO

The USSR wanted to join
Because they were not a democracy, did not protect human rights, freedom etc...
they were refused entry

this pissed them off and Warsaw was created shortly after


They benefited more because they were the ones that were the most in danger
In Germany's more...rash days they invaded France if it wasn’t for the allied countries we dont know what France would be like today

Germany PISSED the USSR off by allowing them to join they became a less appealing target because the second Germany was invaded then 3 nuclear power countries were supposed to anyway be very upset

NATO is still growing
In 2004 alone 6 countries were added
They don’t posses the military power that some of the long time members such as America, the UK, France etc... Have so i fully understand them not helping much its not because they don’t want to
For them it’s because they can’t

But France is a nuclear power
They have a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Counsel
They have a very powerful military
Yet will they send any of their men to the front lines where there needed?
So that our guys can actually have someone watching their back
So that every day when I turn to CBC I won’t hear about another dead Canadian solider
God some of them were even younger than me...

Germany has a very powerful military, unfortunately
State of the art
Best money can buy
But will they help out at all? noooooooo
fuckin Nazis


step up or get out
simple as that

[redcar]

The IRA were not a nice bunch of people by any stretch of the imagination. What they did in the 70's, 80's and 90's I wouldnt consider revolutionary. They were just being blatent terrorists. In 1997 a warning was given in Omagh that there was a bomb at one end of a street, naturally people went the other way, to what they thought was getting away from the bomb, in fact they walked right into it. 29 people killed.

Granted the scale of attacks are not on the same level as the likes of Al Qaeda, but at the heart of it they are the same. Brutal killers. The IRA do not represent the people of Ireland and the general view.

I am not saying Ireland should have been invaded, hell the Irish government were trying to stop them. There are more ways than invasion to stop terrorist.

France may be a nuclear power and all but that doesn't mean anything. Just because they are not fighting on the frone line, so to speak, what makes you think they are not helping in other regards? Intelliegence etc.

NATO is an alliance. Thats all it is. They are not a single country. What you are expecting is nearly on a scale of greater than organistions like the EU. The EU is basically a massive country, we have same currency etc. but we even dont have a defensive system. An EU army so to speak.

[0=]

They are not needed. We're about ready to pull out as far as the citizens are concerned(and congress). The president won't allow us to.

[Whisper]

Canada had the Front de libération du Québec aka the FLQ
We inacted the war measures act (closest thing Canada has to martial law)
and we crushed them
now we just have the Parti Québécois
which is just that a political party
no more bombs

...getting side tracked though

the NATO alliance is nothing like the EU
the EU is an economic alliance
NATO is a millitary alliance

There cowards
simple as that



Your on the verge of leaving Iraq
not Afganistan

[redcar]

The EU is more than an economic alliance. We are basically a common military short of being one massive country. Common security, judicial, foreign relation polices something that the EU boast.

But back to NATO. An attack by terrorists is very different than an attack by a country. You can't see the terrorists. You cant pin them down to one single location. So what do you do? Bomb the shit out of a country hoping to hit them. Alot of people object to that sort of carry on. So what if USA, Canada, UK and Australia say "Well the terrorists are hiding there, lets go after them" and Spain, France and Germany say "Nah I dont think they are there and we are not doing that". What makes one side right over the other?

[0=]

One's more "patriotic".

[Whisper]

Ya the EU does kick ass i'll give ya that Alex
its EXTREMLY impressive
North America has nothing like it

The Taliban are actually VERY easy to find in Afganistan
there the ones shooting at you
or trying to blow you up with an IED
or a genuine mine provided by Iran

Afganistan is where Al-quida and the Taliban are
and inch by inch, mile by mile were winning
the mission in Afganistan is a NATO lead operation aproved by the United Nations countries like Canada are there under the permission of the ligitimate Afgan government

The only country thats constantly bombing everything is America
the rest of us just go in and kill whoevers shooting at us

The mission needs more soliders on the front lines
they've asked and begged for them on multiple ocasions
yet the only countries that seem to be answering that call are canada, america, australia and the united kingdom other countries such as poland have a few there but the bulk comes from those four countries

while countries like france, germany, itaaly etc...
are ignoring us
they REFUSE to put there soliders where there needed
as a result the front lines are under manned
so its taking longer and its more dangerous


Canada has spent/announced close to 18billion
in 2006-2007 alone

We
need
help

there refusing which they do have every right to do
but you see NATO is a millitary alliance
if your constantly refusing to help
then your violating and nullifying that agreement
and should no longer be a part of it



and 0=
just some advice
but its better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and prove it true

shhhhhhh

[Sapphire]

The situation in Afghanistan is unstable now, it will be unstable tomorrow. It will be unstable in 30 years time regardless of how many troops are out there. By keeping them in there you are just condemning them to death because the situation won't improve.
In my opinion, those who are not in Afghanistan are the sensible ones. Not the cowards.

[Hyper]

Calling popo stupid makes you stupid, even if youre older

popo has what many of you don't have, he can see through the pretty treaties and brainwashing machines

Afghanistan still functions as a nice money maker for drug lords, and terrorists, and no it's not as simple as you think:

They shoot at us we shoot back

If you havent figured out the REAL terrorists are hiding and not running around on the streets. Though the real terrorists dont exist in high numbers. Most of the wars on this planet are to serve the military industry, not to serve some righteous quest to stop attacks

most of your government leaders wouldn't give shit about your friends dieing, your family dieing. YOUR OWN PEOPLE DIEING unless it affects their masters and their own pockets

FACE it: MONEY MAKES THE WORLD GO AROUND

And blind patriotism is used on poor fools who don't understand anything. All of the NATO operations are just a pretty show to fool, fools like you into thinking that the world is how its made to be seen by the media and government

Sure there are some ppl in governments who actually care about their own people and helping others and stoping terrorism, but theres so less of them, that they couldn't make a difference.

Generally to speak: The US looks for a reason to go to war, they create a reason if they have to and then for some reason they blow the shit out of a country, which costs more than attacking terrorists directly. And then NATO can show up and place their scare crows around..

Can you even imagine the amounts of money that goes through the military industry? The amounts for purchases and research funding

The US funds military research more than they fund any other research, and they fund every other research less than Nintendo spends on their research


France, Germany, Italy and etc as you say it, might be doing more than you can see or are told. And I don't see what kind of benefits you get from the NATO besides money to fuel military industries and keep some real 'terrorists' pockets filled.

[Mannequin]

The situation in Afghanistan is unstable now, it will be unstable tomorrow. It will be unstable in 30 years time regardless of how many troops are out there. By keeping them in there you are just condemning them to death because the situation won't improve.
In my opinion, those who are not in Afghanistan are the sensible ones. Not the cowards.

Haha, i'd say defending your country makes you a hero even if the majority agree the war is semi-meaningless. Those guys believe they are doing good for themselves and for the country. You should respect that. Please tell me have you ever committed to something seriously..ever?

[Sapphire]

Haha, i'd say defending your country makes you a hero even if the majority agree the war is semi-meaningless. Those guys believe they are doing good for themselves and for the country. You should respect that. Please tell me have you ever committed to something seriously..ever?

They believe they are doing good because otherwise they are in a situation of pure hell with no reason as to why they are there or as to why they are risking life and limb.
It doesn't justify the fact that they are dying in a futile struggle to stabilise a country that will be unstable regardless of how long they are there.

And don't you ever question my past regarding serious committment. You know nothing about what I have committed to and to what costs.

[Whisper]

w/e i dont care anymore you win
let our guys die while they sit n chill
go for it

i'm done