We Must Reconfigure Our NATO Alliances

[GreentheViper]

It would be good to have a united Western army or alliance of sorts, but I don't know if NATO is the right organization.

[Dragoon]

Its quite interesting because in the US its the Democrat voters who support NATO more than the Republican voters. Its certainly an internationalist organization, the Paleocons dont like such groups due to interventionism and less focus on America but they dont have any representative in government.

In Europe, it seems the right support it more than the left. Not always the case but its a trend.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/05/23/...s-of-atlantic/
https://news.gallup.com/poll/204071/...-alliance.aspx

NATO is bullshit we need united european army (not libtard) and ally status with Russia and England. I don't trust Turkey and USA.

Thats a very European thing to say and interesting proposition. But its unlikely to happen unless NATO disappears and Europe gets independence. Plus you have the federalists, altanticist and gaullist (now small) divisions on how Europe should proceed.

NATO doesnt seem to be going anywhere. Recently the American government had a vote and the majority voted to keep it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/26/o...ato-trump.html

The countries bordering Russia seem to like NATO (mostly). America wont give them up easily because it allows them to border Russia.
And some governments within the smaller original EU countries still prefer the Americans in (Netherlands seems to be an example).

UK is closely attached with USA (Anglo-American alliances/relationship).

Lets not forget that the EU army/military would still be within NATO or still allied with America.

https://www.politico.eu/article/ange...mplement-nato/

Its a complicated thing. Seriously every country has those pro and against. The percentages change depending on what happens in geopolitics and whos in charge.

[The Lawspeaker]

I know one thing the Netherlands should do: return to a Cold War military size but up-sized in order to reflect our current population (120 ship navy like during the 1960s instead of the paltry 25, 95.000 (instead of 20.000) men peacetime army - divided over 2 army corps - mobilization strength of a minimum of 350.000 men - calling up 45.000 to 50.000 draftees every single year) and an air force which holds a minimum of 201 fighter planes (F35 - instead of the planned 37). This should mean that the Armed Forces need to be up-scaled immensely as the proposed size of roughly four times our present day forces and that retired regiments need to be returned to active service and that some now merged regiments needs to be separated again. I would suggest that the Navy also buys the F-35B when a more sound government position would many of our amphibious warfare and supply ships with ships of a type not to dissimilar to the Spanish Juan Carlos I-class. Instead of maintaining the current Holland-class OPV's, it might perhaps be more interesting to opt for a standard frigate with the capacities of destroyers and replace our De Zeven Provinciën- class, Holland-class, Alkmaar-class and Karel Doorman-class with a much larger number of general purpose ships (maybe something like the British City-class) under the idea "weapons - are more important than platforms"). The submarine service should be rapidly expanded and the new submarines seem to be already in the works: my suggestion is that we double the order.

Returning to this size (corresponding to our current population size), set-up would be more reflective of the Defence Force as it was during the height of the Cold War.

I think that we should move the units of the already integrated 1. German-Dutch Army Corps to permanent positions inside Eastern Germany together with its HQ (currently in Munster). If the Netherlands is smart and willing to cut costs, it should ask the Belgians and Luxembourgers (and maybe the British) to join the new 2. Army Corps as a 2. UK-Benelux Army Corps.

[Jägerstaffel]

I don't trust Turkey and USA.

I don't either.

[The Lawspeaker]

And when we take that into consideration: it's time to bring back the Bescherming Burgerbevolking (Dutch Civil Defence) as well and see what we can learn from the shelter programs adopted by Sweden or Switzerland. With Russia becoming as aggressive as it is: total defense should be the watch word and any idea of us leaving NATO (something I would have liked to have done until very recently) should be considered quaint and old-fashioned for the time being. Clearly, Russia doesn't differentiate between neutral or NATO, so there is no reason not to be in NATO: either we'll hang together or they will hang us separately.

[Wanderer]

No. It is very inadvisable to reconfigure our alliance. First of all, to renege on the promises we've made to our allies would be wrong, and would undermine our trustworthiness. Secondly, reconfiguring to alliance so that it's us versus the Muslim world would be incredibly myopic. Do we really want to turn this into a civilization conflict, when it need not be one? I don't. The concept of a "holy war" is antithetical to Christ's teachings. War is evil. Satan is evil, and Islam is satanic. You cannot defeat Satan with evil. Islam teaches that war is justified (or even obligatory) in response to aggression against Muslims or persecution of Muslims. With that in mind, reconfiguring our alliances in a way that's suggestive of war against Islam is just about the most counterproductive thing possible.

I stated Islam is satanic, and I do believe it is. But we must remember that God has ultimate power over Satan. Satan can do nothing without God's acquiescence. God ultimately wields Satan to strengthen our own faith as Christians. So why does Islam exist? Well, if we as Christians forsake Christ's teachings, then Satan will surely rear his ugly head.

[Petros Agapetos]

I believe NATO is obsolete the way it exists today. NATO was originally formed in order to combat Soviet/Communist aggression against the European allies of the United States. Now that there is no Soviet Union any longer, and Russia is no longer a threat to the US, NATO can be allied with Russia against the international jihad threat. Vladimir Putin once asked president Barrack Obama to join with him in an international alliance against (Islamic) terrorism. Obama refused this offer. I think president Trump should honour president Putin's request. NATO can still be relevant if it were oriented to fighting our current outstanding enemy: the global jihad.

[jingorex]

NATO = USA and their slaves i don't wanna be american servant. By the way a Brazil-EU alliance would be great. I like Bolsonaro

Rainbow MIMI? Is that you? GHAGAGAGAAA!

[Westbrook]

It's time to let old things die.

[Stefanos.tasidis]

let's do each their own. and make sure usa leaves fyrom too, will they do it ?
hahahaha...