News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
The only time in the history of NATO that article 5 was invoked was on September 12, 2001.
NATO countries sent soldiers to Afghanistan in support of the US. A two decades long war. I'm personally from a NATO country and have two family members that have PTSD because my country honored the agreement and supported the US after it was attacked.
The US has never engaged in a war to support any NATO members. NATO members have engaged in a war to support the US.
Recruitment numbers are down in my country in large part because of how the war in Afghanistan turned out. That was in large part due to the US going on a little side adventure into Iraq. Because of this, even though my country is purchasing equipment from the US defense Industrial complex (which if we're being real, is what the goal is) we don't have enough military personnel to operate that equipment.
So with all that, shitheads in the US complain about my countries "not pulling their weight". We've been sending our people to fight in a US war for two fucking decades because that's what allies do, but then shitheads in the US don't care about that, they only care about how much money is coming from NATO to the US defense industrial complex? It's craven.
And Russia propaganda and election interference is happening in every NATO country. For the same reason that there are many in the US don't think the US should support Ukraine, there's many people in other NATO countries that think the same because of the same Russian propaganda effort. Instead of being hyper-focused on the revenues of Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, maybe think a little more about who the real enemy.
While this is very obvious just putin expressing his control over the us republican party:
And there are a lot more "not support" situations like that. In large part because WW1 taught humanity about the dangers of... actually being in military agreements. WW2 and The Cold War very much demonstrated the need to have those unified fronts but there is still the fear of one flashpoint plunging the entire world into war. Hence "Oh yeah. We are buddies. Uhm... could you NOT declare war because we will totally tell you to go fuck yourself rather than help"
Which is also why actually declaring war is so rare these days. Its not a war. Its a peacekeeping operation or a conflict or whatever. So we'll pressure you to help us commit atrocities but you'll also kind of just be in the area shooting some brown people and not be at war or anything.
And, just to be clear: I think the NATO support of Ukraine is excellent. I actively wish we had done more rather than use it as a way to bleed russia dry by a thousand cuts. But putting "boots on the ground" is how you get an Iraq/Afghanistan where all nations involved are actively wishy-washy on what their actual goals are and are trying to avoid committing out of fear of triggering "a real war"
Your bullet points are listing military action that were explicitly not NATO missions.
No one declares war anymore because a declaration of war is going from 0 to 100 with a stroke of a pen. Probably not a good thing to be doing after the invention of nuclear weapons. Probably wasn't ever a good thing, given it made war seem like something that was legal and civilized. Atrocities have always existed in wars and entangling alliances and declarations of war represented automatic expansion of atrocities. This is now widely seen as a bad thing.
Now we generally use the concept of escalation towards war. This allows for the potential to deescalate before it becomes an all out war. Yes atrocities can occur during escalation and deescalation. But it's significantly less than the 0 to 100 scenario that was happening when declarations of war was commonplace. Look to the cities of Germany at the end of WWII if you want to see the results of an all out war in modern times. Or look at Gaza right now. Look to the cities of Japan at the end of WWII if you want to see what all out war looks like after nuclear weapons came into existence.
So no, we probably should try to avoid the all out war scenarios that declarations of war represents. Especially since we're transitioning to being a more multi-polar world, which means there will be more wars going forward.
100% agree (am American).