Should NATO reconfigure its alliances?

[Petros Agapetos]

Should NATO reconfigure its alliances under Trump?
What do you think about adding or removing certain countries to NATO?
Do you like the state of NATO today? What, if anything, do you think can be improved?

[Drawing-slim]

Only loyal popualtions of NATO should be part of this group. albania US germany turkey croatia Poland austria italy great Britain norway dnamrk..
Basically the superior white club members only which are bound together not only in pholosophy but by blood, by nature.

[Petros Agapetos]

Only loyal popualtions of NATO should be part of this group. albania US germany turkey croatia Poland austria italy great Britain norway dnamrk..
Basically the superior white club members only which are bound together not only in pholosophy but by blood, by nature.

But if you're sympathetic with the spirit of reconfiguring our alliances to compat Islamofascism, then countries like Turkey would have to be removed, for their role in aiding the Islamic State by (i) allowing them to enter Syria from Turkey and (ii) for refusing John Kerry's request that Turkey stop financing the Islamic State by buying oil from them.

Who do you consider to be a greater threat to world peace, modern Russia or global Islamic jihad?

I for one think NATO itself is obsolete, since there is no Soviet Communist empire anymore.

[Petros Agapetos]

What do you think of Russia joining NATO? Would it defeat its own purpose?. Or would it mean a new era in foreign policy?

[Dema]

NATO too strong

[Petros Agapetos]

NATO too strong

Do you think NATO will be strengthened or weakened if Russia joined?

[Proto-Shaman]

Nato is just a graveyard of the peoples of Europe.

[Petros Agapetos]

Nato is just a graveyard of the peoples of Europe.

So would you support that Turkey leave NATO?

[Petros Agapetos]

Why is Turkey in NATO?


Why is Turkey in NATO? Is Turkish membership of any value, or is it a danger to the effectiveness of NATO as that organization must necessarily turn its attention away from Russia to the threat from Islam worldwide, and especially to the threat, foreign and domestic, that Muslims who take Islam seriously pose to the West and to the West’s most important military alliance, NATO?

Of what conceivable good, of what possible benefit, is Turkish membership in NATO to the other members of NATO? And why should Turkey be a member, and not instead a country that is of far greater value militarily and morally to that very West that NATO was originally established to protect — that is, Israel?

Some still choose to describe Turkey, quite backdatedly (it’s not the 1950s or the 1960s anymore) as “our NATO ally Turkey.” Turkey is indeed a member of NATO. But the main reason for NATO’s existence in the past was the military threat posed by the Soviet Union, and Turkey, which was happy to collaborate in efforts to contain its ancient enemy Russia, was a good ally. The Soviet Union was for the Turks their hereditary enemy, Russia, under a slightly different guise, and Turkey could and did offer troops (for the Korean War), and listening posts and airbases.

[Petros Agapetos]

NATO Warns Turkey; No Support if You Start a War With Russia

Literally for months, Turkey has been causing all sorts of trouble in the Middle East, and wielding its membership in NATO as a shield against reprisals. Today, that nonsense ended.

“Ankara should not exaggerate its NATO resources: The alliance would not give any support of a Turkish aggression against Russia.” Those were the words of Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn, who made clear he spoke for several other NATO Member countries.

An example of Turkey’s abuse of its NATO membership became crystal clear about five days ago, when Turkey began artillery shelling from 400 meters away from its border with Syria. The Turks fired countless artillery shells into Syria, in support of Turkish-backed rebels who are trying to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Syria told Turkey to stop the artillery shelling. Turkey refused. Then Russia told Turkey to stop because the shelling is endangering Russian forces inside Syria who are fighting the Rebels and ISIS/Al-Qaeda terrorists. Turkey refused. Then The United States told Turkey to stop the artillery shelling, and Turkey again refused, apparently thinking that its membership in NATO made Turkey invincible. ”

“They seem to think the US and NATO are obligated to fight for Turkey even if Turkey is the one who starts a war” said one US State Department Spokesman. “That is not how the NATO Treaty works” he continued. Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn confirmed this when he said ‘The mutual defense guarantee applies only if a Member State is attacked in a unique way.

Some have used more common examples to describe Turkey’s recent behavior. “They’re like a little brother who abuses everyone thinking his big brother will simply beat up everyone the little guy starts a fight with.” Sooner or later, the big brother has to allow the little guy to get a bloody nose so he understands he cannot treat people any way he wants and use the big brother as a threat.”

Despite this clear warning, Turkey continues its artillery shelling of Syria. Sadly, it looks like Turkey is headed for that “bloody nose” to teach it to behave.