[lkastonidwedsrer]

Mr. Giuliani, long a supporter of Israel, acknowledged that pushing its membership in NATO might be viewed as provocative. Still, he said, he thinks it only natural, since the Israelis would be “willing to help us in the effort against terrorism.” Interesting, I never knew that the NATO was established to fight terrorism

[Emedgella]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
Interesting, I never knew that the NATO was established to fight terrorism Apparently. Amazing the stuff you learn .

[gamecasta]

What would NATO do if Greece and Turkey went to war with each other

[MAKEMONEY]

Nice to have India on your team when you're eventually fed up with Taliban-infested Pakistan.

[bQXHsKzS]

That's fairly irrelevant. More importantly, Israel lacks internationally-recognized borders. Exactly which borders would we be obligated to defend?

[Quonuttott]

Originally posted by Ramo
That's fairly irrelevant. More importantly, Israel lacks internationally-recognized borders. Exactly which borders would we be obligated to defend? One could offer NATO membership CONDITIONAL on acheiving internationally recognized boundaries. IIRC, something similar was offered to the Hungarians and Romanians, and expedited their resolution of outstanding issues.

That would be a powerful incentive to an Israeli-Pal agreement, and would add to the arguments the "peace camp" in Israel can use internally.

Whether thats what Giuliani has in mind, i dont know. BUt if he wants to walk back, that would be a very reasonable position to walk back to.

[Dynasty]

Originally posted by Ramo
"We would have to look at all that..." Hilarious.

Yeah, I liked that. It was kind of like a "****, I was just pandering... I didn't really mean it" answer.

[Goalseexere]

As much as it keeps out Greece or Turkey.

[NumDusthouh]

Obviously, this is a pipe dream for a variety of reasons, but the basic ethical premise isn't offbase.

It certainly isn't unreasonable to extend NATO membership to Japan or Australia; the political realities with make India and Israel prohibitive, however.

[sEe]

Originally posted by Guynemer
Obviously, this is a pipe dream for a variety of reasons, but the basic ethical premise isn't offbase.

It certainly isn't unreasonable to extend NATO membership to Japan or Australia; the political realities with make India and Israel prohibitive, however. Well, it's kind of silly to extend NATO to Japan or Oz, but the general idea of a global NATO-style alliance of suitable democracies is not a bad one at all.

[hLabXZlK]

Originally posted by Guynemer
Again, Greece, Turkey...

A name is just name. You've also got the problem that NATO's charter limits it to responding to attacks in the US or Europe.

[drexigordiche]

Global Defense Initiative

[Zpxbawtz]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEATO

Somehow the US managed to be part of the South East Asian Treaty Organization.

[Manteiv]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


You've also got the problem that NATO's charter limits it to responding to attacks in the US or Europe. I see Canada's stealth nation technology is still banging on all cylinders.

[Dapnoinaacale]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I see Canada's stealth nation technology is still banging on all cylinders.

[Qwjyrgij]

And this would go a long way to the coveted Alliance of White Races.

It ain't going to happen. Europeans don't have the masochistic urge that Americans do to take on Israel's problems.

[oronozopiy]

Originally posted by Agathon
And this would go a long way to the coveted Alliance of White Races. Like the Japanese?

[gydrorway]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Like the Japanese? As Noam Chomsky is fond of saying, they have always been allowed in as "honorary whites" as a matter of convenience.

NATO is a cold war relic. But of course it was never going to be dismantled, just as we were never going to get a "peace dividend" from the end of the cold war.

[Frinzer]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Agathon


As Noam Chomsky is fond of saying, they have always been allowed in as "honorary whites" as a matter of convenience.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924


NATO is a cold war relic. But of course it was never going to be dismantled, just as we were never going to get a "peace dividend" from the end of the cold war.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton...on#The_economy

[stastony]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Kuciwalker
They are in the top ten or so on just about every measure of military power.

No, they dont have bases abroad, or logistics units designed for distant deployments. That could easily be rectified.

And they have a Constitution which would have to be amended. And a population that isn't all that eager to amend it, especially just so they can gain new military obligations.


If they don't want to join, they won't join. I was responding to the notion that its absurd for them to join cause of geography.