It was prior to WWI. The Franco-Russian Alliance and the Anglo-Russian Entente ring any bells?
Finland's and Sweden's NATO accession following thread.
- Thread starter Tyzuris
- Start date
It was prior to WWI. The Franco-Russian Alliance and the Anglo-Russian Entente ring any bells?
All world wars have made strange bedfellows.
Yep, like Hitler-Stalin and then FDR+Churchill and Stalin in WWII.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
Let's be honest; congress lost those powers over half a century ago.
Technically speaking, NATO has to deliberate a response if one of its members is attacked. It doesn't have to guarantee to respond militarily, though obviously that's by far the most likely outcome here.
Airedale260
Well-known member
As stated above, it’s a deterrence thing, especially given that with Finland primed to slice off the Kola Peninsula (seriously, there is one rail line and one road from Moscow/St. Petersburg to it…and they’re in a heavily forested area running next to each other. At the other end? The Plesetsk Cosmodrome (one of Russia’s biggest launch sites) as well as a shit ton of naval bases like Murmansk…it’s a huge and hard-to-defend asset. Russia actually trading shots with a NATO member is guaranteed suicide, and Putin can’t enjoy his wealth and power if he’s, you know, dead.
The North Atlantic Treaty stipulates members have to be part of Europe (although Canada and the U.S get a pass). Furthermore, it also doesn’t pertain to actions north of the Tropic of Cancer (30 degrees north). Any attacks on sites outside of those boundaries -which include the state of Hawaii, incidentally- do not count as potential triggers for Article 5.
Uh, the North Atlantic Treaty explicitly states that it doesn’t. The very first line of Article 11 is, and I quote, “This treaty shall be ratified and its provisions carried out by the Parties in accordance with their respective constitutional processes.” (Bolded mine).
When the treaty was first being debated in 1949, then-Secretary of State Dean Acheson explicitly told the Senate that no, it does not in any way, shape, or form, subvert Congress’ power to declare war. And in fact, Congress had made it clear that their rejection of the League of Nations 20+ years earlier was due in no small part due to it not explicitly having such guarantees against usurpation of Congressional authority.
In other words, Paul tried adding something completely redundant because apparently he and his staff couldn’t be bothered to look into how the thing actually works. This despite the fact that they could very easily have the info on the debates from 1949 and other expansions pulled, as well as get a copy of the actual text if he didn’t trust the version posted on NATO’s own website.
Edit: For clarification, I agree that commitments shouldn’t usurp Congress’ power, either, and that’s why in every single mutual defense treaty we’ve signed, there is a stipulation that it can’t usurp Congress’ power in that regard. The War Powers Act of 1973 (which potentially has its own constitutional issues) nevertheless authorizes the president to take action in the short term until Congress can get together for a formal vote.
Last edited:
Tyzuris
Primarch to your glory& the glory of him on Earth!
So North Macedonia has ratified Fin&Swe NATO applications bringing the total to 19 out of 30. With US Senate having the issue now on executive calendar, French National Assembly dealing with the matter on August 2nd, and some other nations just ratifying the applications without prior announcements, we could be with well over 20 ratifications by the end of next week. Maybe even have 3/4 of the ratifications after just a month of ratifications having been possible.
Sergeant Foley
Well-known member
Did anybody else watch the US Senate voting overwhelmingly to approve Sweden and Finland to join NATO?
The vote was 95-1. But who was the one person to vote against it?
The vote was 95-1. But who was the one person to vote against it?
Josh Hawley lol! He believes that this will distract the US from focusing on the greater Chinese threat. Rand Paul voted present.
Sergeant Foley
Well-known member
That Jackass needs to sit down and shut the FUCK up!
Sergeant Foley
Well-known member
Hawley has some reason: Taiwan and other neighboring countries getting raped by China
Yes our current leadership is shit but lets keep in mind the russians have been massive assholes in international diplomacy for a long time.
Lol
Yeah, because Russia--which is a dying state, is totes gonna be a threat to the US. Or China, which is about to implode under its shrinking population, debt, and poor functioning economy.
The others are just non-starters.
And we don't ban opinions here.
As for NATO, it's probably going to disintegrate. The prime motivation for NATO has all but evaporated. This thing with Russia is pretty much its last hurrah.
And that is a reason for the subtle signs of NATO getting a new motivation.
Japan to join NATO summit for first time as China challenge looms
NATO has invited to the gathering the leaders of Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, which the Brussels-based organization views as its Asia-Pacific partner countries.
www.japantimes.co.jp
And that is a reason for the subtle signs of NATO getting a new motivation.
Japan to join NATO summit for first time as China challenge looms
NATO has invited to the gathering the leaders of Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, which the Brussels-based organization views as its Asia-Pacific partner countries.
NATO was specifically designed against Russia. Countries like France or Germany really don't have much of a dog in the fight between the US or China, save that they don't want to be on anyone's bad side. They may call it NATO, but this is an entirely different alliance.
It's best to think of the US as having three main alliance systems:
Asia-Pacific
Europe/NATO
Middle East, especially the Persian Gulf
I'd actually eliminate the Middle East entirely. The US really has no strategic interest in the region, aside from playing favorites and ensuring that no great power emerges that might threaten its power.