Ah yes, the power to… defend against attacks from other nations. Such evil.
For anyone who isn’t aware, there are no provisions in the NATO charter for cooperative offensive actions. None. NATO is not a military alliance, it is a defensive pact only.
I’m mostly pro NATO but that is litteraly the worst single argument possible anyone ever made. Here’s a one word answer that totally shred its credibility: Lybia.
It’s only for defense until we decide to invade a country… but anyway, the real strength of NATO as a weapon is political influence. It allows the US to impose their security objectives to all the other members, and currently their main competitor is China and that was transcribed into NATO’s official strategy in 2022 with the stated objective to expend into the Indian and Pacific ocean specifically to counter them.
Lybia is not a NATO thing. UK, France and USA bombed some ships and ports in Libya, but I still remember the headlines and news that Germany didn’t want anything to do with that.
So it was a coordinated action between some members of NATO on their own.
Technically the UN Security Council, including China, asked them to do it, as a NATO operation. NATO just doesn’t have the power (or need) to force compliance from all members.
Why was NATO was willing to intervene in Libya and not other conflicts directly related to their reason for existing? Different question.
(It’s oil. Sweet, delicious and calorie dense oil…)
Ah yes, the power to… defend against attacks from other nations. Such evil.
For anyone who isn’t aware, there are no provisions in the NATO charter for cooperative offensive actions. None. NATO is not a military alliance, it is a defensive pact only.
Yeah but arent you gonna attack me when I defensively invade some sovereign country?!!
Checkmate
\s
I’m mostly pro NATO but that is litteraly the worst single argument possible anyone ever made. Here’s a one word answer that totally shred its credibility: Lybia.
It’s only for defense until we decide to invade a country… but anyway, the real strength of NATO as a weapon is political influence. It allows the US to impose their security objectives to all the other members, and currently their main competitor is China and that was transcribed into NATO’s official strategy in 2022 with the stated objective to expend into the Indian and Pacific ocean specifically to counter them.
Can’t really expect them to like it.
Lybia is not a NATO thing. UK, France and USA bombed some ships and ports in Libya, but I still remember the headlines and news that Germany didn’t want anything to do with that.
So it was a coordinated action between some members of NATO on their own.
Technically the UN Security Council, including China, asked them to do it, as a NATO operation. NATO just doesn’t have the power (or need) to force compliance from all members.
Why was NATO was willing to intervene in Libya and not other conflicts directly related to their reason for existing? Different question.
(It’s oil. Sweet, delicious and calorie dense oil…)