[quote]rainjack wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
I’m not defending NATO or the fact that we basically subsidize European countries that don’t want to spend anything on defense. That’s not the crazy part.
The crazy part would be us chaining ourselves to a reciprocal alliance with third-rate Eastern European militaries that would offer us next to nothing in return for us potentially shedding American blood over their quarrels with Russia. Does that make any sense?
What’s the difference between the Eastern Euro countries now, and the state of the Western Euro countries when we signed on to NATO?
You really think that those countries in the East are looking to pick a fight with Russia? I would think they would just want to be left the fuck alone, and using the US as a running buddy would keep Russia from pulling a Georgia on all the other former prisoners of the Iron Curtain.
We are already obligated to spill American blood for people who vilify us. I would rather do it for countries who are willing to fight with us.
Fuck Western Europe.
[/quote]
You are not alone.
"…But even without invoking the ghosts of Munich, it is obvious that there are occasions when military force is the only way to deal with a tyrant. Europeans were unwilling to stand up to Serbian mass murderers.
Americans (with initial reluctance) had to do the dirty work. When the U.S. decided to push Hussein’s killers out of Kuwait, German protesters screamed that they would never “shed blood for oil.”
There is, on the other hand, also little doubt that European diplomacy has had some remarkable successes. The prospect of joining the European Union has strengthened the democracies of central and eastern Europe, and of Turkey too. Some of these democracies have joined NATO, and others still desperately want to.
NATO, however, unlike the EU, is a military organization. And therein lies Chamberlain’s old problem: Are Europeans prepared to fight wars on behalf of their fellow members?
While the Cold War lasted, this was not a serious dilemma. Europeans relied on NATO and the Pax Americana to defend them in case of Soviet aggression.
Now, however, Georgia and Ukraine would like to join in the expectation that Europeans and Americans would shed blood to defend them against Russia. The choice is stark: If Europeans are prepared to fight for Georgia or Ukraine, these countries should be invited to join. If not, not.
Instead of making this choice, major European countries, such as Germany, have dithered, first dangling NATO membership as a juicy carrot and then, on second thought, withdrawing the offer, leaving Americans to indulge in heroic rhetoric without necessarily following through.
All this is making the Western alliance look incoherent and, despite its vast wealth coupled with American military power, strangely impotent. [b]It is time for European democracies to make up their minds.
They can remain dependent on the protection of the U.S. and stop complaining, or they can develop the capacity to defend Europe, however they wish to define it, themselves.[/b]"