Is NATO a military dinosaur?
- Thread starter Ozzy Blizzard
- Start date
- Status
Dae JoYoung
New Member
NATO is quite pointless, US needs to get out. Unfortunately, I don't see this changing. Not enough creativity on part of the US.
The issue is not whether its pointless, its whether it needs to be restructured to account for different threat matrices that effect its members.
Just because the collective embrace of dealing with a cold war response has changed doesn't mean that it can be reformed into something that has greater relevance.
I'm curious as to why its encumbent on the US to be creative. One could argue that they demonstrated a shot at creativity by letting NATO deal with the Balkans.... For a number of reasons, NATO's response was probably found wanting. That doesn't mean that its ready for euthenasing.
One wonders why the new EU members are so keen to see NATO live another day......
Dae JoYoung
New Member
Obviously, EU is keen on seeing NATO continue because US carries the bulk of the cost. Most Americans are sick and tired of dealing with whiny Europeans with their anti-American rhetoric, while at the same time forcing US to carry most of the burden.
US needs to get out of Europe period; but, as I said, I do not see that happening.
Creativity equals getting out of NATO, setting up United Federation, with US setting up Invitation Only Policy, minus France, and forcing member nations to carry a proportional/equitable share in the total cost.
That's what I would set up, but as I said, that's unlikely to happen.
The US pays what is normal for its sice. Others don't pay less when you compare their economical strength. Or do you want to for example Denmark to pay as much as the US?
Let's take an example.
Germany pays 18% of NATO with a GDP of ca. 2.5 trillion.
USA pays how much with its 13.2 trillion GDP? According to their GDP they should pay more than 90%.
And leaving all your bases in europe would be difficult for the US. The reaction time and support for operations in and around europe would decline.
Here are your bases in europe:
Germany- Ramstein Airbase (USAFE), Campbell Barracks (HQ USAREUR, V Corps, LANDCENT), Kaiserslautern Military Community, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (Largest hospital outside the US), Patch Barracks (EUCOM, SOCEUR), Grafenwöhr training Area
Italy- Naval Air station Signella, Aviano Air Base, Caserma Ederle, San Vito dei Normanni Air Station, Camp Darby (Largest base outside the US)
Turkey- Incirlic Air Base, Izmir Air Base
Spain- Morón Air Base
Bulgaria- Bezmar Air Base, Graf Ignatievo Air Base, Novo Selo Training Range, Logistic Centre Aitos
Others- SHAPE Technical Centre (The Hague), Lajes Field (Azores/Portugal),
And these are just the major ones. Not to talk of the bases and training areas of the members you can use.
It is not as if you get nothing out of NATO.
Let's take an example.
Germany pays 18% of NATO with a GDP of ca. 2.5 trillion.
USA pays how much with its 13.2 trillion GDP? According to their GDP they should pay more than 90%.
And leaving all your bases in europe would be difficult for the US. The reaction time and support for operations in and around europe would decline.
Here are your bases in europe:
Germany- Ramstein Airbase (USAFE), Campbell Barracks (HQ USAREUR, V Corps, LANDCENT), Kaiserslautern Military Community, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (Largest hospital outside the US), Patch Barracks (EUCOM, SOCEUR), Grafenwöhr training Area
Italy- Naval Air station Signella, Aviano Air Base, Caserma Ederle, San Vito dei Normanni Air Station, Camp Darby (Largest base outside the US)
Turkey- Incirlic Air Base, Izmir Air Base
Spain- Morón Air Base
Bulgaria- Bezmar Air Base, Graf Ignatievo Air Base, Novo Selo Training Range, Logistic Centre Aitos
Others- SHAPE Technical Centre (The Hague), Lajes Field (Azores/Portugal),
And these are just the major ones. Not to talk of the bases and training areas of the members you can use.
It is not as if you get nothing out of NATO.
Explain the lack of creativity on the US's part and why we need to get out. I think i can already see your views by your location "american empire"
contedicavour
New Member
The fact that NATO has trouble finding its political role in today's world should not erase the fact that it has done wonders as a military command & control organization for operations involving tens of different countries' armed forces. This knowledge should not be wasted, its has taken 50 years to build !
Besides, nobody else (certainly not the UN or the EU) has such control & coordination capabilities. In today's world of sudden crisis and multinational peacekeeping/enforcing operations, it is hugely valuable.
cheers
Besides, nobody else (certainly not the UN or the EU) has such control & coordination capabilities. In today's world of sudden crisis and multinational peacekeeping/enforcing operations, it is hugely valuable.
cheers
Dae JoYoung
New Member
The US pays what is normal for its sice. Others don't pay less when you compare their economical strength. Or do you want to for example Denmark to pay as much as the US?
Let's take an example.
Germany pays 18% of NATO with a GDP of ca. 2.5 trillion.
USA pays how much with its 13.2 trillion GDP? According to their GDP they should pay more than 90%.
And leaving all your bases in europe would be difficult for the US. The reaction time and support for operations in and around europe would decline.
Here are your bases in europe:
Germany- Ramstein Airbase (USAFE), Campbell Barracks (HQ USAREUR, V Corps, LANDCENT), Kaiserslautern Military Community, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (Largest hospital outside the US), Patch Barracks (EUCOM, SOCEUR), Grafenwöhr training Area
Italy- Naval Air station Signella, Aviano Air Base, Caserma Ederle, San Vito dei Normanni Air Station, Camp Darby (Largest base outside the US)
Turkey- Incirlic Air Base, Izmir Air Base
Spain- Morón Air Base
Bulgaria- Bezmar Air Base, Graf Ignatievo Air Base, Novo Selo Training Range, Logistic Centre Aitos
Others- SHAPE Technical Centre (The Hague), Lajes Field (Azores/Portugal),
And these are just the major ones. Not to talk of the bases and training areas of the members you can use.
It is not as if you get nothing out of NATO.
See, this is part of the problem. US has 172 bases around the world and what's the point of it? What have we gotten in return but grief and anti-American rhetoric? America needs to close most of those bases and consolidate remaining ones, but Bush simply does not possess enough processing power to compute.
EU should take care of it's own problems. America is wasting time and money over there. Europeans have done nothing but take advantage of America's generosity, and all we've gotten is grief. Most Americans would prefer our boys come home and set up camp South of the Borders. We have enough problems in the States with Illegals, thank you.
I think sometimes Americans would like to see some countries suffer after we leaves just to point finger and say, "See, I told you so." Of course that's not going to happen, but that's the general feeling around these parts.
In return you got the ability to strike everywhere and everytime you want and support military operations all around the globe.
You get the opportunity to train with your allies which improves your skills.
If you want to remain the "American Empire" you have as your location you need these bases all around the globe.
You get the opportunity to train with your allies which improves your skills.
If you want to remain the "American Empire" you have as your location you need these bases all around the globe.
Dae JoYoung
New Member
What's the size of most of those Armed Forces? Almost nothing. Germany didn't even have a transport plane few years ago to help us in Afghanistan. They had to borrow a transport plane from Poland!
nfloorl: Do you know how ridiculous that sounds, having to borrow a transport plane from the Poles? [Admin: text deleted. there is no need for derogatory comments] Yet, they had a transport plane, and a third largest economy in the world didn't!
Most Americans died laughing when they heard that, but did Germany even feel embarrassed about it? Probably not.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dae JoYoung
New Member
We don't need 10 million bases over there, just need one. It's all waste of money.In return you got the ability to strike everywhere and everytime you want and support military operations all around the globe.
You get the opportunity to train with your allies which improves your skills.
If you want to remain the "American Empire" you have as your location you need these bases all around the globe.
Ok, I'll stop discussing this with you immediatly.
Your comments are BS (Show me how many countries have planes in the category of a C-5 or An-124. Poland is not one of them...) and your way of how you express your ideas is...naaah I don't use the words coming to my mind.
Your comments are BS (Show me how many countries have planes in the category of a C-5 or An-124. Poland is not one of them...) and your way of how you express your ideas is...naaah I don't use the words coming to my mind.
What about the UK? Plenty of US bases here.
And getting out of Europe implies, to me, getting out of European overseas territories. Bye-bye Ascension, Diego Garcia, & Thule.
Are you suggesting that the USA should return to a policy of isolationism and let the rest of the world look after itself?
Cheers
Ah, sorry.What about the UK? Plenty of US bases here.
And getting out of Europe implies, to me, getting out of European overseas territories. Bye-bye Ascension, Diego Garcia, & Thule.
Just forgot them.
Comments about our "Empire" are the biggest reason we should pull back and adopt a more isolationist world view. Much of our "Global strike" philosophy revolves around the protection/support of our allies and alliances. And not just that but this Global Strike thingy lends to delusions that we can fix every wrong on the planet with a few dozen missiles.In return you got the ability to strike everywhere and everytime you want and support military operations all around the globe.
You get the opportunity to train with your allies which improves your skills.
If you want to remain the "American Empire" you have as your location you need these bases all around the globe.
I'm not saying its wrong to develop a global strike capability ; I'm just saying we should use it only in pure self defense, or, in the defense of a few special relationships we have. In that category I would add only Britain and Australia. I certainly wouldn't add the mainland Euros, who sit around their coffee houses and beer halls calling us "Romans" and that we "have an Empire".
Waylander its particularly humorous that you do so because Germanys history is full of savage Empire stuff, including as recently as WW-ll where you Germans threw 9 million woman and kids into ovens. And started a war that eventually killed over 50,000,000 human beings. Now that I would call an Empire.
Or the Soviet Empire I would call an empire. That particular empire enslaved much of Europe for almost 50 years, remember?
Bottom line? We dont need mainland Europe. They have always been marginal allies and are just as likely to cater to terrorists as they are to fight them. The Yank taxpayer has funded their defense for long enough.
OK, time to settle down folks.
Please go and self edit out the personal and ungentlemanly comments.
Thread locked until further notice.
Please go and self edit out the personal and ungentlemanly comments.
Thread locked until further notice.
- Status