Has NATO out lived its use ?

Question

before you have a go at me I was a geography student and NATO was something that we studied quiet a lot ,

Answer 1

No, the alternative you suggest is to not have any communication or coordination with other developed nations and live in a bubble. The world is too small for that mentality.

Answer 2

None of the NATO countries want to get into a fight with Russia. As you know, the agreement is that if one member is attacked every member has to come in defense. A fight with Russia is one that cannot be won because IT WILL go nuclear.

People who say things like "Russia won't use nukes because MAD still applies" incorrectly assume that in times of desperation and psychological stress people always act rationally. If someone is pushed far enough they will do insane things.  

Do you remember the Cuban Missile Crisis? Probably not, but the U.S. government was actually prepared to initiate nuclear war with Russia. If pushed, people are crazy enough. The reason nothing happened is because Russia thought over it and decided to remove its missiles from Cuba.

Russia had something to lose in the Missile Crisis; Cuba wasn't worth Russia's destruction. If Russia itself as a country is attacked, its military forces hopelessly outnumbered and outgunned, Russia's very existence threatened, Russia will have nothing to lose. And if happens, Russia will take down everyone with them.

While SOME people may think "I'd rather lose my country than fight a doomsday war" there is no need for public consensus. The decision all comes down to a single person: the leader of the country, who may or may not have temporarily lost his mind.

Russia has stated repeatedly that it will do ANYTHING to prevent Ukraine and Georgia from entering NATO. Russian military doctrine calls for first use of nukes if the opposing nations also possess them, which some NATO countries do.

Nukes are not something you can gamble with, and if Russia says they will use them I don't think anyone is crazy enough to try to call Russia's bluff.

A nuclear war is unwinnable; if you don't know how dangerous nukes are read my other post here ( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?... ) Other than economic and diplomatic intervention there is nothing NATO can do about Russia.

Read this article in TIME: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0...

Answer 3

NATO and crusaders - good comparison. And it can be applied to modern situation. The Crusades were only a defense op. By the time they started muslims had conquered more than half of christian land. And I wouldn't say they were all a failure. A lot of crusaders didn't want to go too far and joined Spanish kings. As a result Spain was cleared of arabs. By the way arabs were invaders in Palestine.

But what starts new and new generations of muslim fundamentalists now is their desire to wash off  that humiliation of the tragedy of Andalusia in Spain. They want to come to power in muslim countries and overpower the West. In the middle ages crusaders came to fight Russia instead of making it an ally. And now America is demonizing Russia instead of fighting our common enemy together.  

Answer 4

Fern O is right.

Also, the more eastern European countries that get added to NATO the worse off it will be.  Any alliance will struggle as more members are added since interests become more divergent.  Plus adding these countries is rightly seens as a threat by Russia.

As for geography, since when did Georgia become part of Europe?  Yeah, yeah west of the Urals but too far south I think.

Answer 5

Not at all.  NATO has just never been tested.  Russia isn't stupid enough to attack a NATO member, so they attack pending NATO members like Georgia.

Answer 6

NATO is an effective alliance but it should confine itself only to Europe and not venture out into other continents. It can become perceived as a crusading tool to undermine Muslim nations in Africa and Asia. NATOS' push to include the former Soviet state of Georgia into its alliance is probably the main reason for the Russian invasion of that country.  

Answer 7

No.  While things have changed and several organizations have outlived their ability to be useful, NATO still serves to combine the interests of several countries that for all intents and purposes have a similar belief system.

Perhaps this can be made more clear by asking if something went wrong and you needed international help, who do you think would come to your aid?  To me it seems NATO aligned countries would have a higher likelihood of doing so, whereas the UN would be more likely to pass resolutions which they would never act upon.

Answer 8

Hi!

Nope, NATO has not lived its use since it reformed.

Relating to the incidents in Georgia I must say that NATO still tries to find a peaceful or reasonable solution. let's not forget, Georgia is a NATO ally. Russia is NOT!

Answer 9

Just the opposite for traditional NATO countries and Poland. It should not be policeman of the world. Iffy on how many former Soviet Satellite States should be allowed to join.Freeze that but make it clear that any further venturesomeness by Russia means war. Lets not go through another Wilson era. Wish they said that to us six and a half years ago.