Amazon.com Widgets
  • NATO unites Europe and North america.

    No wars have taken place in any country that is part of NATO after they joined. No one is going to strike up a war with the Western world if they know that they'll be fighting all of them... Eastern Europe is safe from Russia, Ukraine and Georgia are trying to join, and they stand for Democracy.

  • New International Threats

    NATO can be effective in today's society by combating the new threats today's world faces. Instead of focusing on the rapidly declining interstate conflicts (as a result of interdependence), they can focus on threats such as cyber warfare, terrorism, and piracy. This could compliment well with NATO's decreasing resources and eliminate the need for a large standing army.

  • NATO should be expanded

    NATO, is an effective military body, in the same way the United Nations has been a successful diplomatic body. One of the major problems with the preceding league of nations, was the lack of 'teeth'. NATO is a unified body designed to make military co-operation for efficient. World peace is for the most part pie in the sky, it is true that their have been no major global conflicts in the latter half of the twentieth century and into the twenty first. As the recent events in North Korea demonstrate war can occur as relations demonstrate. Although china is a trading powerhouse the western world should not grow complacent in the fact that china is a human rights abuser and steals military secrets with its state sanctioned and supported hacking programs. NATO can expand from a military treaty and is still highly relevant in anti-piracy and flash points around the world particular in the middle east and Africa.

  • Of course NATO is still relevant.

    NATO is very relevant. Just look at North Korea, there nuclear missiles tests are a threat to the world and therefore it is important to have an organization that tries to prevent war. NATO provides security to the world because of their rules and regulations that prevent war. Considering those FACTS it is foolish to say that NATO is not relevant.

    Posted by: neso
  • Diplomacy is only as strong as the stick you back it up with

    Sure...The US could assume an offensive posture to take down any country in the world....But vs the biggest powers it would be bloody. Take into account that the biggest threats most likely will not want to take the US on head to head. Any threat that opposes us will have allies...We should too. People need to stop being so damn nationalistic. The world is what's most important.

  • NATO is good

    “No one is going to strike up a war with the Western world if they know that they'll be fighting all of them”“No one is going to strike up a war with the Western world if they know that they'll be fighting all of them”“No one is going to strike up a war with the Western world if they know that they'll be fighting all of them”

  • NATO is still relevant

    The argument that the UN is better then NATO and is the leader is not true, the UN has made major mistakes the were "peacekeeping" in Africa and under their watch next thing you know a mass genocide happens right under their noses 800,000 Tutsi were killed by the hutu under the UN's watch. The UN also let thousands of Muslims be slaughter they said they have safe spots for the Muslims to go but failed to secure it.NATO on the other hand is currently leading Resolute Support, a non-combat mission which provides training, advice and assistance to Afghan security forces and institutions. Resolute Support was launched on 1 January 2015. It includes approximately 13,000 personnel from both NATO and partner countries and operates with one hub (in Kabul/Bagram) and four spokes in Mazar-e Sharif (northern Afghanistan), Herat (western Afghanistan), Kandahar (southern Afghanistan) and Laghman (eastern Afghanistan).During a period of growing Western tension with Libya after the UN Security Council imposed sanctions designed to induce Libya to surrender suspects in the bombing of a Pan Am airliner over the town of Lockerbie in Scotland in 1988, NATO provided increased AWACS coverage of the Central Mediterranean to monitor air approach routes from the North African littoral. NATO AWACS aircraft flew a total of 36 missions with a total of 2,336 flying hours (1992) so of course NATO is still relevant

  • Fuck bitches Get Money

    Free My Nigga Chap,he be the best matha faking dude in the whole wide world. Who else can escape from a high end Prison. Through a hole. His goons are the defecation of ride or die my niggas cant even make up their mind when we want to go clubbing .Nigga

  • The Bear is waking up!

    The resurgence of Russia in the Crimea, Syria are militant aggressive acts. The capitulation of Obama to Cuba reflects a need for a sphere of influence that will protect vunerable countries from an aggressive Communist mindset that is bent on world domination. Democracy gives people the freedom of choice. Amen!

  • S s s

    S s s s s s s s s s s s ss s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s ss s s s s s s s s

  • No more NATO

    NATO was founded to promote democratic values and encourage cooperation on defense and security issues. Since the end of the cold war, NATO and the UN have become nearly interchangeable in and benefit mutually. Now however, it seems that the UN is beginning to be the leader in international crisis management and humanitarian issues it, it begs the question of two such entities.

  • No more NATO

    NATO was founded to promote democratic values and encourage cooperation on defense and security issues. Since the end of the cold war, NATO and the UN have become nearly interchangeable in and benefit mutually. Now however, it seems that the UN is beginning to be the leader in international crisis management and humanitarian issues it, it begs the question of two such entities.

  • Is Warsaw pact still around?

    Who is NATO protecting from Who with NATO bases all around Russia?
    Follow the money of military industrial complexes and thousands of people making a good living out of any war declared or not. Britain has been selling arms all over the world even to South Africa and only enemies we have here is poverty.

  • Is Warsaw pact still around?

    Who is NATO protecting from Who with NATO bases all around Russia?
    Follow the money of military industrial complexes and thousands of people making a good living out of any war declared or not. Britain has been selling arms all over the world even to South Africa and only enemies we have here is poverty.

  • My tax dollars don’t need to pay for Europeans to dislike Americans.

    We pay double what most European countries pay percentage wise and far more than that in real dollars. They seem to want the US to pay for everything and then bad mouth us constantly. I am tired of my money supporting people who don’t appreciate the US except for its money.

  • Mahidevran is haseki

    The emergence of new or the qualitative transformation of existing functional
    challenges (substantial imbalances in the distribution of income at the
    national level, demographic changes and population movements, the emergence
    and growing influence – at least in some countries – of Islamic parties
    and political movements, Islamic terrorism and climate change);
    (b) the appearance of new (China and India) or the return of old (Russia) extraregional
    actors in the Mediterranean, and the emergence of regional powers
    with increasing influence (Turkey and Iran);
    ) the declining influence and impact of the EU’s soft power and the gradual
    withdrawal of the USA from the Mediterranean;
    (d) the increasingly – although unequally – felt impact of globalization to a
    region that, with few exceptions, has not benefited greatly by this trend. At
    the same time, however, more ‘old’ regional conflicts remain unresolved (the
    Israeli–Palestinian/Arab conflict, the Kurdish issue and the Cyprus problem),
    while new ones have appeared, such as Iran’s nuclear programme, Iraq’s
    future after the gradual withdrawal of US forces and the rather unstable
    domestic situation in several Arab countries.

  • Mahidevran is haseki

    The emergence of new or the qualitative transformation of existing functional
    challenges (substantial imbalances in the distribution of income at the
    national level, demographic changes and population movements, the emergence
    and growing influence – at least in some countries – of Islamic parties
    and political movements, Islamic terrorism and climate change);
    (b) the appearance of new (China and India) or the return of old (Russia) extraregional
    actors in the Mediterranean, and the emergence of regional powers
    with increasing influence (Turkey and Iran);
    ) the declining influence and impact of the EU’s soft power and the gradual
    withdrawal of the USA from the Mediterranean;
    (d) the increasingly – although unequally – felt impact of globalization to a
    region that, with few exceptions, has not benefited greatly by this trend. At
    the same time, however, more ‘old’ regional conflicts remain unresolved (the
    Israeli–Palestinian/Arab conflict, the Kurdish issue and the Cyprus problem),
    while new ones have appeared, such as Iran’s nuclear programme, Iraq’s
    future after the gradual withdrawal of US forces and the rather unstable
    domestic situation in several Arab countries.

  • NATO is not relevant.

    It is not relevant because; 1 it takes billions of dollars to run. What may surprise you is that the US pays 75% of NATO's budget every year. That could be great if the US had that kind of cash, but to remind you we are 20.1 trillion dollars in debt. November 13, 2015 the tragic Paris terror attacks killing 130 people, and hundreds of people wounded. You know what NATO did? NOTHING they did nothing. Paris did not invoke article 5 on the NATO members causing the other 27 members to do nothing just like NATO. NATO could be incredibly effective if they started to take terrorism seriously but sadly they are not. That is why they are not relevant and not benefiting us the NATO members.

  • NATO has grown into an inefficient bureaucracy

    Basically, in 1948, because the United States, and their Western European allies were scared of the forceful spread of Communism (basically modern day progressivism), America, and 11 other countries, signed the NATO treaty. This was during the Cold War. The first, and only time the treaty was called into use, was after the September 11th attack on the World Trade Center. It basically currently serves as a, mostly American funded, goverment bureaucracy, that employ people that do literally nothing but waste money. According to NATO statistics, the U.S. spent an estimated $650 billion on defense last year. That's more than double the amount all the other 27 NATO countries spent between them.

  • Nato is not Relevant.....Provisionally

    According to Article 9 of the treaty every ten years the elements and de facto agreements between the parties. With the rise of Eurpoean Union it is time to reevaluate the financial commitment of each member of NATO specifically those NATO members who are in support of a European Union Army. I am skeptical that their commitments to such an army will be still able to fulfill the NATO agreements. Secondly it is unclear if NATO nations have fulfilled their financial agreements to the U.S and contributions to the alliance. NATO is not only a British, Canadian, and U.S effort. Additionally commitments to such an organization also may interfere with the actual security of the globe it is unreasonable to assume that what is always good for NATO is also always good for the world. Example putting Nukes in Turkey created a Nuclear Response from Russia upon which almost plunged the world into a nuclear conflict. While Russia's posturing contributed to this deployment, it doesn't help to know that an organization with multiple conflicted interests(I.E national interest is as effective at preventing war as the triple Entente was in World War I). Therefore we would still have to same problems of World War I expansive armies acting as checks and balances until one decides to push the pendulum. NATO still is not effective in this case. Or at least is as effective as the U.N


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.