Name (required):

  Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>>I think NATO changed their strategy sometime in the >>mid 1990s after the Cold War. So it is no longer just >>for the defence of Western Europe and North America >>but can be used as an offensive alliance as we saw in >>Kosovo and today in Afghanistan. >> >>>The copy I read was a recent copy >>> so maybe it has been changed on the 'quiet' >>> >>> >>> >>>>>Since when has NATO only been for western europe. I >>>>>have just read through the treaty and it says >>nothing >>>>>about being solely for western europe. >>>>> >>>>>North Atlantic Treaty Organisation -set up in 1949 >>>>for the defence of western europe. To contain the >>>>expansion of Soviet union. NATO is a defensive >>>>alliance for the defence of western europe. Its no >>>>coincidence that apart from the US all it's other >>>>original members are western european nations. It >>>>never was intended to use this defensive alliance >for >>>>offensive wars in eastern europe or Afghanistan. It >>is >>>>not or should not become a tool for American >>ambitions >>>>outside western europe. Somehow i would not be >>>>surprised if your treaty has been re written. >>>>> >>>>>>>>America & Britain cannot afford to fight these >>>>>stupid >>>>>>>>wars because the aims are to vague & beyond >>>>>>>>realisation apart from the colossal expense you >>>>have >>>>>>>>to deal with not one failed state but two >>>-Pakistan >>>>>>>>who's government is riddled with je-haddists. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Unfortunately the UK is a signatory of NATO, >along >>>>>>>with the rest of Western European, which means we >>>>>have >>>>>>>to get involved with this war, as the September >11 >>>>>>>terrorist attacks and the war in Afghanistan were >>>>>>>considered a direct attack on the USA by the NATO >>>>>>>alliance. I agree though, it is an unwinneble war >>>>and >>>>>>>a total waste of time, but what can you do. >>>>>> >>>>>>N.A.T.O. is for the defence of western europe, it >>>was >>>>>>not designed to undertake wars in the middle east >>or >>>>>>Afghanistan. signatories of N.A.T.O. are under no >>>>>>oligation to under take any military operations >out >>>>>>side the sphere of western europe. The other >>N.A.T.O >>>>>>countries are well within the treaty not to get >>>>>>invoved. > >The north atlantic treaty, 4 april 1949 has 14 articles >Article 5 -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 if such an armed attack >occurs each of them , in exercise of the right of " >Individual" or collective self-defence recognised by >article 51 of the UN, will assist the party or parties >so attacked by taking forthwith , >"INDIVIDULALLY" & in concert with other parties such >action as it deems necessary including the use of >armed force, to maintain the security of THE NORTH >ATLANTIC AREA.
Choose Message Icon: None :-) Happy ;-) Wink :-D Joy :} Smirk <:-} Innocent ☮ Peace >:) Mischief B-) Shades <3 Heart |O Yawn <:P Sick >:-( Angry :~( Sad ? Question *!* Alert Thumbs Up Thumbs Down (!) Idea [Info] Info Oo. Talk [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.