We're starting to figure it out

[*bfine32*]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-floats-expanding-nato-add-184217898.html

Quote:U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday said he supported expanding the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to include Middle Eastern nations, as the United States seeks to limit its troop footprint globally.

[GMDino]

That Jared is in over his head?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/us/politics/jared-kushner-trump-campaign.html

[hollodero]

We want to activate a military assistance clause every time some rocket is launched in the middle east?

[fredtoast]

Cheap trick to get Israel into NATO.

Seriously, who is going to decide which middle eastern countries would be part of NATO?

[Belsnickel]

Yeah, no. Shit idea.

[jj22]

At least he isn't trying to get Russia in anymore.

For now.

[Dill]

(01-10-2020, 02:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Cheap trick to get Israel into NATO.

Seriously, who is going to decide which middle eastern countries would be part of NATO?

LOL the less you know about the NATO and the Middle East, the cooler this idea seems.

File this with using atomic bombs to stop hurricanes and Mexico's payments for the "beautiful" wall.

[*bfine32*]

(01-10-2020, 02:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Cheap trick to get Israel into NATO.

Seriously, who is going to decide which middle eastern countries would be part of NATO?

I'd assume current members like we do it know. I see no issue with countries in the ME becoming part of a larger alliance.

[hollodero]

(01-10-2020, 04:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'd assume current members like we do it know. I see no issue with countries in the ME becoming part of a larger alliance.

So if Iraq or Jordan or whatever country is part of NATO and then gets attacked by Hisbollah or some other Iranian proxy, would that mean going to war under article 5?
Or would it mean scratching article 5?

[fredtoast]

(01-10-2020, 04:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'd assume current members like we do it know. I see no issue with countries in the ME becoming part of a larger alliance.

You think they will let in both of our buddies Saudi Arabia and Israel?

If not then how do we respond when the one that is not in NATO gets attacked by the other.

[*bfine32*]

(01-10-2020, 07:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You think they will let in both of our buddies Saudi Arabia and Israel?

If not then how do we respond when the one that is not in NATO gets attacked by the other.

If they both petition and agree to be part of the alliance then yes. Why wouldn't we? Poland and Germany weren't always best buddies. 

[*bfine32*]

(01-10-2020, 06:10 PM)hollodero Wrote: So if Iraq or Jordan or whatever country is part of NATO and then gets attacked by Hisbollah or some other Iranian proxy, would that mean going to war under article 5?
Or would it mean scratching article 5?

Sure. We did it after 911. Why not include countries in the ME

[Benton]

This is what happens when the POTUS gets foreign policy advice from Russia.

Russia would love to see NATO fall apart. One of the quickest ways to do that is fill it with a bunch of countries that, historically, can't get along.

Throw enough gas at the pile, eventually all you've got to do is toss in a match.

[hollodero]

(01-10-2020, 08:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure. We did it after 911. Why not include countries in the ME

Because most people, and I'd suppose that goes for the US as well, would not like to go to war over a conflict between two middle eastern countries or entities.
Which would most probably happen. Someone would use some proxy war attack to call article 5, and then american lifes are lost in intervening on behalf of one despot over another despot, or on behalf of one islamic religion over another islamic religion, or on behalf of one fringe guerilla corps over some other half-official entity. I don't know, that idea sounds like a lot of war. Or the end of NATO.-

[*bfine32*]

(01-10-2020, 11:37 PM)hollodero Wrote: Because most people, and I'd suppose that goes for the US as well, would not like to go to war over a conflict between two middle eastern countries or entities.
Which would most probably happen. Someone would use some proxy war attack to call article 5, and then american lifes are lost in intervening on behalf of one despot over another despot, or on behalf of one islamic religion over another islamic religion, or on behalf of one fringe guerilla corps over some other half-official entity. I don't know, that idea sounds like a lot of war. Or the end of NATO.-

Well what we're doing is not working. Invite them to join, select those that agree to terms, and make them part of the coalition. Wasn't NATO formed by countries that didn't always get along?