General Discussion

Jedi Guy

(3,448 posts)

19. Under the terms of the NATO charter and Article 5 in particular, yes. We fight him there.

Fri Feb 25, 2022, 03:42 PM

Feb 2022

Otherwise NATO is revealed as utterly toothless and useless, and Putin can do as he likes. The risk of the conflict escalating and becoming widespread is certainly there, as is the risk of a nuclear exchange. But Article 5 must be the line in the sand that cannot be crossed.

If NATO stands around doing nothing after a member country is attacked, then the post-war liberal democratic order is well and truly dead, and it's every man for himself.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Question: If NATO air power would be sufficient to secure victory for Ukraine... [View all] BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 OP

President Zelensky with good reason does not want US or NATO fire power in Ukraine PortTack Feb 2022 #1

Is that really the case? BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #3

That's for domestic purposes. Wingus Dingus Feb 2022 #7

No Lithos Feb 2022 #2

It would but Pentagon is reporting Russia does ***NOT*** have air superiority yet. Maybe UKR uponit7771 Feb 2022 #4

It's kind of a hypothetical question. BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #5

Not kinetically, but radar support would be MUCH needed and most likely used. uponit7771 Feb 2022 #6

That's called World War Three. Wingus Dingus Feb 2022 #8

Let's suppose Putin attacks Lithuania, a NATO ally next. BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #9

That's also WW3. Wingus Dingus Feb 2022 #10

So what would you do, then? BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #12

Defend Lithuania and prepare for the worst. Wingus Dingus Feb 2022 #13

Okay, thanks for the answer. BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #17

NATO has been crystal clear that ANY ATTACK ON A NATO MEMBER WILL BE CONSIDERED MarineCombatEngineer Feb 2022 #15

I know that. BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #21

Spot on. nt MarineCombatEngineer Feb 2022 #23

Under the terms of the NATO charter and Article 5 in particular, yes. We fight him there. Jedi Guy Feb 2022 #19

The big question would be if Article 5 is in effect when the attack is retaliatory. Lancero Feb 2022 #38

Requires attacking assets in both Belarus and Russia WWIII bottrott Feb 2022 #22

Of course not. WarGamer Feb 2022 #11

Okay, let me ask a followup that I've also posted above. BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #14

Yes, because we're BOUND to it by treaty WarGamer Feb 2022 #16

So something being WW3 is not necessarily a reason to avoid it. BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #18

Bottom line... WarGamer Feb 2022 #20

I'll say this.... Happy Hoosier Feb 2022 #26

I don't think people understand the issues here... WarGamer Feb 2022 #27

I work in tactical aviation Happy Hoosier Feb 2022 #30

Woohoo! Then war it is. WarGamer Feb 2022 #31

I prefer peace too. Unfortunately there is a war. Happy Hoosier Feb 2022 #32

The threat is that Putin would invoke the nuclear option to avoid a humiliating defeat DemocratSinceBirth Feb 2022 #33

I agree with you completely. NT Happy Hoosier Feb 2022 #36

Is Putin a rational actor? DemocratSinceBirth Feb 2022 #37

I see the argument you're making and to some extent, I agree. Jedi Guy Feb 2022 #25

Thank you. You expressed my point much better than I did. BlueCheeseAgain Feb 2022 #29

If NATO committed to an air campaign.... Happy Hoosier Feb 2022 #24

Unlike other recent wars Sgent Feb 2022 #28

Remember that only ground troops can actually hold ground dwayneb Feb 2022 #34

We may find out maxrandb Feb 2022 #35

Only to establish a safe zone for refugees in NW Ukraine. roamer65 Feb 2022 #39