4 ms·

That's not how must treaties work and certainly not how the NATO treaty is written. Maybe you should read it first.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> not how must treaties work and certainly not how the NATO treaty is written Most treaties have termination clauses. The North Atlantic Treaty’s Article 13 provides for voluntary exit [1]. (One could argue Ankara’s SS-4 purchase constitutes an Article 8 violation, though this would be petry.) Treaties are about mutual understanding. If Americans and Czechs would find it unseemly to fight for Turkey’s defence in case of invasion, it does more harm to pretend they’re under collective defence than to amend the treaty to make it extremely clear whom one can invade without getting nuked and whom one cannot. All this said, I think Turkey should remain a NATO member. They have shown themselves by arming Ukraine and denouncing Putin. They are a founding member. And their position remains strategically critical. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.ht...
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  It doesn't sound like you know what you are talking about and I have no idea what an "SS-4" is.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > doesn't sound like you know what you are talking about Okay? > no idea what an "SS-4" is Sorry, pre coffee. S-400.
    - whimsicalism 4y ago
      okay how would Turkey's s400 purchase be an article 8 violation?
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > how would Turkey's s400 purchase be an article 8 violation? This has been covered in the American refusal to sell Ankara F-35s and ensuing sanctioning of it under CAATSA [1]. In short, no detection system is perfect. And no modern military system is sold without servicing. Letting Russia service an air defence system with the privilege of painting NATO jets, arms and missile defences is a breach of trust. It could be considered, again, pettily, though good luck to those who claims the law is often anything but, “an international engagement in conflict with” Turkey’s NATO obligations. [1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mepo.12628 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mepo.12628

> not how must treaties work and certainly not how the NATO treaty is written Most treaties have termination clauses. The North Atlantic Treaty’s Article 13 provides for voluntary exit [1]. (One could argue Ankara’s SS-4 purchase constitutes an Article 8 violation, though this would be petry.) Treaties are about mutual understanding. If Americans and Czechs would find it unseemly to fight for Turkey’s defence in case of invasion, it does more harm to pretend they’re under collective defence than to amend the treaty to make it extremely clear whom one can invade without getting nuked and whom one cannot. All this said, I think Turkey should remain a NATO member. They have shown themselves by arming Ukraine and denouncing Putin. They are a founding member. And their position remains strategically critical. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.ht...

whimsicalism 4y ago
It doesn't sound like you know what you are talking about and I have no idea what an "SS-4" is.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > doesn't sound like you know what you are talking about Okay? > no idea what an "SS-4" is Sorry, pre coffee. S-400.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    okay how would Turkey's s400 purchase be an article 8 violation?
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > how would Turkey's s400 purchase be an article 8 violation? This has been covered in the American refusal to sell Ankara F-35s and ensuing sanctioning of it under CAATSA [1]. In short, no detection system is perfect. And no modern military system is sold without servicing. Letting Russia service an air defence system with the privilege of painting NATO jets, arms and missile defences is a breach of trust. It could be considered, again, pettily, though good luck to those who claims the law is often anything but, “an international engagement in conflict with” Turkey’s NATO obligations. [1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mepo.12628 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mepo.12628