5 ms·
The threath from Africa is of the asymetric counter-insurgency type; not a large scale military to military type this article is about. Neither Russia or China
by throwaway4good 6y ago
The threath from Africa is of the asymetric counter-insurgency type; not a large scale military to military type this article is about.
Neither Russia or China pose any military threath to Europe unless we send our ships right up their shores. Maybe that is what we are about to do?
- goatinaboat 6y agoNeither Russia or China pose any military threath to Europe unless we send our ships right up their shores. Ukraine and the Baltic States are in Europe, no? The Baltic States are, for better or worse, NATO members and the alliance is bound to defend them.
- nspattak 6y agoCan you name some of the latest NATO member that were defended by NATO?
- goatinaboat 6y agoCan you name some of the latest NATO member that were defended by NATO? NATO has the "enhanced forward presence" (tanks) in Estonia and "Baltic air policing" (fighter jets) covering all 3.
- rmind 6y agoWest Germany during the Cold War? At least technically, USA (following 911)?
- sudosysgen 6y agoSo, not a defence. There was no confrontation in East Germany. NATO in practice is an offensive alliance as much as a defensive one.
- goatinaboat 6y agoThere was no confrontation in East Germany. The scenario BAOR was prepared for was the Third Shock Army surging through the Fulda Gap, and likewise the Third was prepared to do that.
- sudosysgen 6y agoThe question was, did NATO ever defend anyone, not "did NATO prepare to defend anyone".
- goatinaboat 6y agoAre you counting defence only as actively fighting in response to an attack? Because deterrence is defence is its passive form of which NATO has done plenty
- iomodo 6y agoSince when Ukraine and Baltic States are not considered in Europe? Do you mean EU?
- literallycancer 6y agoRussia is currently occupying the territory of another European country, or several countries if you count the Caucasus as Europe. What makes you say they pose no threat?
- sudosysgen 6y agoRussian occupation of Ukraine is a bit more complicated. It's in the context of a red line they set out decades ago, which is that NATO wouldn't be able to extend all the way to the Russian border in the south. Now certainly that's a bit unreasonable as countries should be allowed to associate with whoever they want, but it's not exactly a live wire threatening war left and right, it's a red line they set out a very long time ago, and there's not much reason to think they're interested with much beyond that red line.
- mc32 6y agoSevastopol is critical to the Russian navy. It’s like Mexico taking over San Diego. It will not be allowed to happen. The Crimea was not historically part of Ukraine, though for political and administrative purposes it was assigned to the Ukraine soviet republic. Given its criticality Russia took it back.
- Robotbeat 6y agoBalooney. Crimea was not historically part of Russia! Second, Russia is not just annexing Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula but also attempting to annex parts of eastern Ukraine and recently moved a bunch of troops potentially to expand their held territory beyond the peninsula and deeper into central Ukraine. I don’t understand these arguments carrying water for Russia. Yeah, we all know Russia wants to annex parts of Ukraine for what they consider strategic reasons. But we can’t go about justifying wars for annexation in the 21st bloody century! Doesn’t matter if it’s the US, China, or Russia. Annexation is not justifiable.
- mc32 6y agoIt was made part of Russia by the Russian Empire during expansion a couple of centuries ago. It was its own soviet republic prior to WWII and afterwards made part of Ukraine SSR. Now Russia took it back. Majority speak Russian not Ukrainian since most actual native Crimeans were displaced during Soviet era.