Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why do we still need NATO.

  • 13-03-2018 5:19pm
    #1
    Mutant z
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭


    With the cold war long over why is there any need for NATO anymore as far as i can see its no longer jusified and should be disbanded its brought huge instability in recent years by attacking sovereign states like Libya and Syria which is largely responsible for the refugee crisis which the rest of us will be expected to clear up, unnecessary tension with Russia especially with NATO support of a hostile regime in Ukraine. The fact is its no longer fit for purpose and should be dismantled its nothing but a cold war relic which has had its day and should disband immediately.


Comments

  • #2
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Two thread on the first page of this forum.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057849032
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057849032

    The Russian Bear hasn't gone away you know.


  • #3
    Mutant z
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Mutant z


    Its the NATO led nations who are primarily responsible for the destabilising of Syria not Russia not to mention causing the spread of ISIS and Al Queda over Syrian territory which the Russians have helped to beat back and restore Syrian rule yes Assad may not be ideal but he's certainly a better option than the NATO backed jihadi headhackers.


  • #4
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,621 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Mutant z wrote: »
    Its the NATO led nations who are primarily responsible for the destabilising of Syria not Russia not to mention causing the spread of ISIS and Al Queda over Syrian territory which the Russians have helped to beat back and restore Syrian rule yes Assad may not be ideal but he's certainly a better option than the NATO backed jihadi headhackers.

    The very fact that Russia is so intent on dismantling it is kinda proof enough that its still needed


  • #5
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,847 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    The countries that were forced to join the USSR and live under oppression for 50 years would disagree with you. They are terrified of Russia doing a Crimea on them or worse.

    While NATO might have its flaws its nothing compared to what the Russians do.


  • #6
    Mutant z
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Mutant z


    The native Russians of crimea suffered discrimination under the hostile Ukranian government and they wanted out and what exactly have the Russians done that NATO hasnt done as far as i know it was NATO led forces who attacked Libya causing the refugee crisis we are being forced to deal with and those who actually caused it can just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Mutant z wrote: »
    The native Russians of crimea suffered discrimination under the hostile Ukranian government and they wanted out and what exactly have the Russians done that NATO hasnt done as far as i know it was NATO led forces who attacked Libya causing the refugee crisis we are being forced to deal with and those who actually caused it can just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.


    Ваши идеи интригуют меня, и я хочу подписаться на ваш информационный бюллетень.


  • #8
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,181 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Mutant z wrote: »
    With the cold war long over why is there any need for NATO anymore as far as i can see its no longer jusified and should be disbanded [...] The fact is its no longer fit for purpose and should be dismantled its nothing but a cold war relic which has had its day and should disband immediately.

    The thing is, the further East in Europe you go, the less there is agreement with the idea of abandoning NATO. The Baltic States and Poland in particular seem to have rather strong concerns to the point that they have been strongly encouraging forward deployment of NATO forces in their countries. NATO may seem less relevant to you living on the Atlantic Coast, but those on the Russian border see it as quite relevant.


  • #9
    moneymad
    Registered Users Posts: 882 ✭✭✭moneymad


    America doesn't want Russia and the EU getting on. Their tactic has been to drive a wedge between the 2.


  • #10
    demfad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,182 ✭✭✭demfad


    moneymad wrote: »
    America doesn't want Russia and the EU getting on. Their tactic has been to drive a wedge between the 2.

    Russia unilaterally decided to interfere in the internal politics of over 20 countries in the last decade including what amounts to an unprovoked cyber war. They have also literally attacked a soveriegn European state. This is the first time anything has happenned since WW2.

    Everything to do with Putin, nothing to do with the US.


  • #11
    moneymad
    Registered Users Posts: 882 ✭✭✭moneymad


    demfad wrote: »
    Russia unilaterally decided to interfere in the internal politics of over 20 countries in the last decade including what amounts to an unprovoked cyber war. They have also literally attacked a soveriegn European state. This is the first time anything has happenned since WW2.

    Everything to do with Putin, nothing to do with the US.
    What I said above was correct and factual.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    demfad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,182 ✭✭✭demfad


    moneymad wrote: »
    What I said above was correct and factual.

    Whatever you say. Any chance of providing some substantiation to back your wild assertions up?


  • #13
    moneymad
    Registered Users Posts: 882 ✭✭✭moneymad


    demfad wrote: »
    Whatever you say. Any chance of providing some substantiation to back your wild assertions up?
    No, not really.


  • #14
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,621 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    moneymad wrote: »
    America doesn't want Russia and the EU getting on. Their tactic has been to drive a wedge between the 2.

    The EU doesnt want Russia and America getting on..... what of it?

    Also you dont "get on" with russia, you get annexed


  • #15
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    moneymad wrote: »
    No, not really.

    Mod note:

    Please read the charter re: standards of posting required before posting again. If you are going to make an assertion, you will need to be able to back it up and debate it if required.


  • #16
    Infini
    Registered Users Posts: 4,573 ✭✭✭Infini


    Is the Op from the IRA? :D (no not OUR IRA that other one!)


  • #17
    Del2005
    Registered Users Posts: 18,847 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    Mutant z wrote: »
    The native Russians of crimea suffered discrimination under the hostile Ukranian government and they wanted out and what exactly have the Russians done that NATO hasnt done as far as i know it was NATO led forces who attacked Libya causing the refugee crisis we are being forced to deal with and those who actually caused it can just sit back and twiddle their thumbs.

    I'm not saying that NATO is an innocent organisation but if it wasn't for it we'd all be praising Uncle Joe for "saving" us from the Nazis and from working with several people who grew up under the Soviet system I'm glad that we thank Uncle Sam and have NATO protection.

    At least with NATO and the fecking mess it's made of a lot of places, with plenty of help from Russia/Saudi Arabia/Iran etc. we are free to criticise it and there are protests. Have you seen what happens to critics or protesters in the other countries I listed?


  • #18
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    Given that it now looks like Russia has deployed a banned Chemical weapon on the soil of one of the main members of NATO I think the existence of that organisation is more justified than ever. Couple it with illegal aggression in the Ukraine, possibly shooting down a civilian airliner, interference in numerous democratic processes in Europe and the US; and actively bombing civilians and propping up a viscous tyrant in Syria then I believe today's Russia is even more dangerous than the USSR ever was. At least the Communist State was predictable, the Gangster led country that is Russia today is unpredictable and dangerous.


  • #19
    Nitrogan
    Registered Users Posts: 277 ✭✭Nitrogan


    Ireland needs NATO for it's neutrality.
    Without NATO there would need to be a huge increase in EU defence commitments with no opt outs for small countries.
     
    Ireland might need to introduce conscription or national service to meet quotas of personnel needed.


  • #20
    CrabRevolution
    Registered Users Posts: 2,795 ✭✭✭CrabRevolution


    NATO doesn't have mandatory manpower quotas as it is, why would the EU introduce them if they took up NATOs role?


  • #21
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Considering what the Russians are up to these days e.g. annexing the Crimea, to say there is no need for NATO, is to be rather naive. Putin, has his agenda, and it is imo a matter of time, before he take the rest of the Ukraine, and if NATO were to disappear, so would the Ukraine.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users Posts: 5,030 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    demfad wrote: »
    Russia unilaterally decided to interfere in the internal politics of over 20 countries in the last decade including what amounts to an unprovoked cyber war. They have also literally attacked a soveriegn European state. This is the first time anything has happenned since WW2.

    Everything to do with Putin, nothing to do with the US.

    Small fry compared to the meddling the US get up to in others affairs


  • #23
    demfad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,182 ✭✭✭demfad


    The Golden Miller wrote: »
    Small fry compared to the meddling the US get up to in others affairs

    Please elaborate. Also please show how what you claim the US did should call for Europe to not defend itself against Russian Cyber and/or military warfare?


  • #24
    Nitrogan
    Registered Users Posts: 277 ✭✭Nitrogan


    CrabRevolution wrote: »
    NATO doesn't have mandatory manpower quotas as it is, why would the EU introduce them if they took up NATOs role?

    Where are the replacements for US and UK personnel going to come from?

    Mostly larger countries but Ireland will have to commit a proportional share which along with domestic requirements will be a lot bigger than our current military numbers.

    NATO looks like it could break up in the near future.


  • #25
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    BTW Putin needs NATO to exist just as much as the countries that NATO is protecting. How else is he going to distract the Russian people from the pilage of their countries riches by him and his regime of cronies.


  • #26
    denismc
    Registered Users Posts: 1,377 ✭✭✭denismc


    The funny thing is about 10 years ago people were debating the need for Nato as the Cold war was over and Russia was in economic decline.
    Then Putin annexed The Crimea and got involved in Ukraine and suddenly NATO became relevant again.
    While Putin sees NATO as a threat I actually think his actions have made it survive longer whereas if he did nothing it may have broken up years ago.


Advertisement