France, Germany & Belgium - allies?

[SplitPersonality1]

(AP) - France, Germany and Belgium rejected a scaled-down U.S. proposal Wednesday for NATO preparations in case of war in Iraq, prolonging the alliance's worst internal crisis since the end of the Cold War. NATO diplomats said the third day of emergency talks ended after about an hour and would resume Thursday. For the past month, the holdouts have blocked the start of military planning to help defend Turkey — the only NATO member bordering Iraq.

This latest round of rhetoric from France, Germany and that icon of military expertise, Belgium :rolleyes: has me wondering a few things.

NATO’s strength is in unity and the fact that they have a mutual defense clause. “Attack one NATO ally and you attack them all”. The fact that France, Germany and Belgium may not honor that pledge when it comes to Turkey is really outrageous to me.

I’m going to ask the following question in all seriousness: “Are these counties truly friends of ours and do they belong in the NATO alliance?”

It’s one thing to disagree on whether to go to war or not, but quite another to not honor a treaty that you signed 50-plus years ago; a treaty I might add that has protected you from harm during that time.

I’ve done my share of friendly French-bashing, but this is getting serious. If these three countries want to pick and choose which “allies” to support…fine. Maybe the rest of NATO needs to rethink its view on protecting these guys. Just a thought.

[GrantDawg]

It looks like the end of NATO to me. Maybe the UN for that matter.

[Bee]

They seem to want to tie actions by NATO to UN decisions, which I think is wrong.

While I understand their concerns about attacking Iraq, I don't understand how they justify not providing DEFENSIVE help to a country that has requested emergency DEFENSIVE aid. Turkey is requesting help in detecting possible missile attacks from Iraq, not military action against Iraq.

[rkmsuf]

France, Germany and Belgium...all interested in self important issues.

I'd love to hear the French postition had the Tower been demolished.

Obviously oil is important more to these nations than supporting a treaty they signed. As far as I am concerned they can suck ass.

NATO and the UN will go on but this will be remembered...

[SplitPersonality1]

I agree Bee. DEFENSIVE help seems to be the key here. It's almost like they want to flex their muscles and show the rest of the world that they are still relevent in some way.

[astralhaze]

Are our allies required to support and participate in every action we take?

[rkmsuf]

no but blocking and coming out against such actions kind of goes against the concept of allies...

[vtbub]

No, but Turkey requested help. And under the NATO charter, all are supposed to help if one asks.

[SplitPersonality1]

Originally posted by astralhaze
Are our allies required to support and participate in every action we take?

No. But they are required to support an Alliance agreement. That agreement includes a mutual defense clause.

They do not have to like and/or send support in an impending war with Iraq, but they should honor the defense of a military ally. (Turkey)

[astralhaze]

When was Turkey attacked? Did I miss this?

[rkmsuf]

didn't they say they wouldn't defend Turkey should there be an attack?

[vtbub]

They asked for assistance in case of attack by Iraq.

[Bee]

They could easily say they will not participate any any offensive moves taken against Iraq, but that doesn't exclude providing defensive support to Turkey.

It's not even a matter of supporting US Troops in Turkey, it's a matter of defending the people of Turkey from either a pre-emptive strike or possible counter strike if the US were to attack Iraq. With the recent developments of the movements of missiles in Iraq towards various borders, it seems like a justified concern of Turkey IMO.

[SplitPersonality1]

Originally posted by astralhaze
When was Turkey attacked? Did I miss this?

Grrrrr!

What this entire thread is about is the fact that France, Germany & Belgium have stated that they are not willing to defend Turkey if they are attacked by Iraq.

My point is...Is that something an ally should say?



Edit: I'm a bit slow in my responses today. Thanks guys for making my point :D

[Bee]

Originally posted by astralhaze
When was Turkey attacked? Did I miss this?

I think Turkey would prefer to actually have the defensive support prior to an attack.

[astralhaze]

I don't see them saying that they will not defend Turkey if attacked by Iraq. The quote you posted states :

"For the past month, the holdouts have blocked the start of military planning to help defend Turkey — the only NATO member bordering Iraq."

If Turkey is attacked by Iraq and they then refuse to help defend Turkey, then you have a case.

[vtbub]

Read the paper. That's what this is about.

[Bee]

Originally posted by astralhaze
I don't see them saying that they will not defend Turkey if attacked by Iraq. The quote you posted states :

"For the past month, the holdouts have blocked the start of military planning to help defend Turkey — the only NATO member bordering Iraq."

If Turkey is attacked by Iraq and they then refuse to help defend Turkey, then you have a case.

If someone were coming to your house to shoot you, would you want the police there before they showed up or after?

[Blade]

Originally posted by astralhaze
I don't see them saying that they will not defend Turkey if attacked by Iraq. The quote you posted states :

"For the past month, the holdouts have blocked the start of military planning to help defend Turkey — the only NATO member bordering Iraq."

If Turkey is attacked by Iraq and they then refuse to help defend Turkey, then you have a case.

The point is, as Allies, should we not prepare to defend Turkey before they are attacked, in case of an attack? How many people have to die in an attack on Turkey before the three opposing NATO allies decide that we should defend Turkey after all?

[SplitPersonality1]

Fine. Here is a link to the complete article.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030212/ap_on_re_eu/nato_iraq_87

Why would you tell an ally, I'm not going to help defend you until you are attacked. Turkey asked for aid from its allies. They should get it.

[astralhaze]

French President Jacques Chirac told his Turkish counterpart by phone Wednesday that France "would assume its obligations if Turkey were really threatened," said Chirac's spokeswoman, Catherine Colonna, in Paris.


But he stuck to France's position that it is not possible to make advance plans on Turkey's defense in the absence of a U.N. Security Council decision to use force against Iraq.

[SplitPersonality1]

Why tie in the UN Security Council decision with a NATO mandate. They are and should be two separate things.

[Bee]

And assuming there is no threat to Turkey because there is no UN decision to use force against Iraq is naive at best.

[astralhaze]

I think the point the French, Germans, and Belgians are making is that the only reason Iraq would attack Turkey would be if the United States attacked Iraq. If there is no resolution authorizing the use of force by the United States, they do not believe Iraq should be attacked, hence, they should not prepare to defend Turkey. It is more about making that point to the United States than anything else. In any case, I think Turkey will be more than well defended by the United States and, if needed, Germany and France.

[SplitPersonality1]

Here is an analogy. Not a perfect one, but it will do.

Let's say that there is a bully that lives next door, and he has threatened me and othersin the past. In fact, he has tried to beat the crap out of a weaker friend of mine a while ago, but was stopped when me and some of my bigger friends put a stop to it.

Now, the bully is threatening again and I have a reasonable expectation that he may try to beat the crap out of me. If I ask my friends for help, I would much rather have them say "Sure, we'll help you out. That bully is a jerk and we don't want him messing with you".

The alternative is "Well, the bully is a jerk, but don't call on us until he starts punching you"

Which set of friends would you rather have?

[astralhaze]

You really think that analogy is accurate?

[Qwikshot]

I think France and the like took us as the lesser of two evils (the other being Communist U.S.S.R.), now I think they would prefer just being left along until the next threat looms. They just don't think Iraq is a threat, or any other muslim nation. I think they also are irritated (jealous) by U.S. presence, I mean, during the Cold War there was immense infiltration and propoganda by U.S. to keep U.S.S.R. from influencing Europe. Now these countries (and probably others) see the U.S. as too big, and leading them into conflicts they'd much rather ignore.

[SplitPersonality1]

astralhaze: As I said, not a perfect analogy, but it will do.

Originally posted by Qwikshot
I think France and the like took us as the lesser of two evils (the other being Communist U.S.S.R.), ... Now these countries (and probably others) see the U.S. as too big, and leading them into conflicts they'd much rather ignore.

I think you may be on to something here.

Unfortunately, I think these countries are being a bit short-sighted when it come to extremist terrorist organizations and nations that support terrorism. These guys just don't hate the US, but almost all things Western. I believe that France and the like are/will be targets as well, and it would be in their best interests to support anything which would eliminate or and least hurt the cause of terrorism.

[SplitPersonality1]

dola -

astralhaze, I know you have been vehemently opposed to any military action against Iraq, but this thread is only indirectly about that. My initial post was basically a mini-rant to invite discussion on how we should view NATO, our allies etc.. It was not meant to be either pro or anti-war.

I really didn’t intend this thread to be another “I want war because” or “I hate war because” type of thread. We already have waaaay to many of those here as it is.

[astralhaze]

I am not expressing favor or disfavor towards the war in Iraq in this istance.

However, if we are discussing the actions and decisions made by Germany, France, and Belgium, of course their opposition to the war must be brought in to the discussion.

As far as the analogy goes, I think you fail to mention that you have a huge, well sculpted bodybuilding friend watching your back who could easily beat the snot out of the bully. In that case, why would you need to ask your other friends to help you out?

[SplitPersonality1]

Originally posted by astralhaze
As far as the analogy goes, I think you fail to mention that you have a huge, well sculpted bodybuilding friend watching your back who could easily beat the snot out of the bully. In that case, why would you need to ask your other friends to help you out?

Touche! :D

To keep this rapidly deteriorating analogy going..Maybe because if your "well-sculpted bodybuilding" friend beats up on the bully...other kids in the schoolyard will regard your buddy as an even worse bully.

On a lighter note, I can see the new Army commercial now:

"The US Army - Well-sculpted bodybuilding friend to the world" ;)


Edit: "freind to friend". I spells veddy gud. :rolleyes:

[Fritz]

alliances are not very valuable if you can not depend 100% on you allies.

alliances are not very valuable if your enemy has no confidance in your alliances.

[Qwikshot]

United we stand, divided we fall...I thought it was a bad idea to have Russia join NATO in the first place....waaaay too many cooks spoil the broth, and you have the two baddest kids on the block in the same club, bound to be some friction, now all the little toadies are thinking they can be baddies too.

[BishopMVP]

Originally posted by Qwikshot
United we stand, divided we fall...I thought it was a bad idea to have Russia join NATO in the first place

Replace Russia with France and I agree, we shouldn't have let them back in. All we did in the 30 years without them was win the Cold War.

It's all about Echelon these days anyway- US, Britain, Australia, NZ and Canada.

[JonInMiddleGA]

?Are these counties truly friends of ours and do they belong in the NATO alliance??

No, and no.

Whew, I thought it might be a hard question or something :)

[The Afoci]

All this talk about Turkey brings up my favorite horrible joke...

If Russia attacked Turkey from the rear, do you think Greece would help?

:)*laughter*:)

Well we know France, Germany and Belgium won't.

[sabotai]

"The US Army - Well-sculpted bodybuilding freind to the world"

That's a lot better than the one they have now. "An army of one." What the hell does that mean anyway!? :)

[illinifan999]

I agree with Fritz.

[ACStrider]

If I may, I would like to draw a similiar analogy. Let's say the disruption over in Venezula erupts into an international war. Several of the bordering nations decide that they want to step in and help the current regime while others side with the opposing parties. Now for the sake of argument, let's pretend that Columbia had a history of conflict with Venezula and feared that the current conflict could spill over into attacks on their own soil. What should they do? Should they simply appeal to the US? The problem with that is that US intervention or support for a nation opposed to the current regime labels them as "oil-hungry opportunists". No, to get unbiased support an appeal to the global community is necessary. So they appeal to the global community and receive a "well, you haven't been attacked so bug off" response. The bombs start falling as war does in fact break out in the region. To everyone's shock, Columbia is one of the nations hit in the cross-fire. The global community responds to the situation by affirming Columbia and insisting that they have their support. They send off military assistance in the form of anti-aircraft missles and fighter aircraft. They arrive in Columbia to prevent any future bombing, but at the expense of millions upon millions of dollars of dammage already inflicted. It's a shame that in the weeks of time that it took to respond and send support to the other side of the world, the countryside of Columbia was decimated. I hope the point to this story is clear by now. To withold support for Turkey until war actually breaks out could be costly to the lives and livelihood of many Turks, our allies.

[Honolulu_Blue]

This is situation is working on two levels.

1. Germany, France, and Belgium are all anti-war. They have opposed a war on Iraq at every stage of the game. They have been vocal about this and extremely critical of the U.S whenever military action or even a resolution allowing military action is discussed. The Franco-German-Belgo alliance will not waver on this stance. Turkey has agreed to allow US to use its airfields to lunch attacks in case of war and to station troops there, etc. So, Old Europe is saying "Listen, Turkey. You are our ally, but we don't condone this course of action. If you allow US troops to be stationed in your country and allow US planes to take off from your airfields to drop bombs on Iraq, you are asking for an attack. You will be provoking an attack. You will be implicit in this war that we oppose. By refusing to offer NATO defensive efforts we are telling you we think this is an unjust, unncessary war and hope that you will see it our way and not offer your country as a base of attack. Please see it our way, don't allow this unjust war to go on." I think that's the reasoning. Or at least some of it.

For Germany, a country who benefited from this alliance for years and years and years (there were always defensive plans in case the Commies decided to attack), refusing this seems pretty hypocritcal. For sake of argument, if Germany or France was using its airfields to help another country lunch attacks against an enemy in a war that the US deemed "unjust" do you think that we could send aid under the NATO alliance? I certainly don't. We would say "US doesn't back this war. This is unjust. God and country. You're on your own, Frenchies."

All this being said, I think they should give Turkey support.

2. The other sort of tension lingering in the background is Turkey's relationship with Europe. Turkey desperately wants to join the EU and feels it should. The majority of the EU isn't too thrilled with the idea. The US saw this as a great opportunity to say to Turkey "Turkey. We think you should be in the EU. We will back you 100%, if you let us use your country for our war." I am sure this is going on in the background.

[Fritz]

Originally posted by Qwikshot
United we stand, divided we fall...I thought it was a bad idea to have Russia join NATO in the first place


Funny, the NATO webpage does not list Russia as a member. Russia is a partner in the EAPC, but not a member of NATO (unless I have missed something.)

[cincyreds]

Here are my takes.

Q: Where would France be without the US? I mean they would be part of Germany if it wasn't for us saving their freaking butts in WWII.

My gosh, what are they stupid? I mean they side with a country that tried to take them over years ago!!

I know bygones are bygones, but I am ticked off by their so remarks.

Don't be surprised if they are funding terrorists, maybe that is why they have not been attacked. Who knows?

I just get sick and tired of some of this stuff!!

I have a brother over there who is defending this country along with several other troops, "GOD BLESS ALL OF THEM".

Sorry for the rant, but it just seems the only real ally we have is Great Britain.

C'MON!

[stkelly52]

I think that it is a bit far to say that France is supporting terrorists. The bigger reason is that France is xenophobic.

[Bee]

There seems to be a lot of Anti-American sentiment in France, but the opposite is true as well. I think damage to that relationship will hurt France far more than it will America, although I could be wrong.

I think it's important for France to let their opinions be known worldwide, but I think there is a crossroads coming up for France that will have serious consequences to their future. I hope they make the correct decision.

[Samdari]

Great France observation:

"Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion"

[ACStrider]

Originally posted by cincyreds
Here are my takes.

Q: Where would France be without the US? I mean they would be part of Germany if it wasn't for us saving their freaking butts in WWII.

My gosh, what are they stupid? I mean they side with a country that tried to take them over years ago!!

I know bygones are bygones, but I am ticked off by their so remarks.

Don't be surprised if they are funding terrorists, maybe that is why they have not been attacked. Who knows?

I just get sick and tired of some of this stuff!!

I have a brother over there who is defending this country along with several other troops, "GOD BLESS ALL OF THEM".

Sorry for the rant, but it just seems the only real ally we have is Great Britain.

C'MON!

Whoa...calm down there just a tad Cincy. Do France, Germany and Belgium need to show a little more (a lot more) respect for its allies and the agreements that they have made with them? Yes. Should they be mindful of the fact that without our support, Europe would be Communist right now (frankly, many of them are headed that direction if you consider socialist similiar to communist)? Yes. As true as that is, I don't think it would be good of us to constantly pull the "we saved your tail twice" argument. While there is good reason to believe that they would be hesistant to go to war with a nation that they have trade agreements with, it is also a long stretch to suggest that they are funding terrorists. While both raise serious questions, one is far more despicable. As far as allies go, the allies for war are far more then those against. If you noticed, all 16 of the other Nato powers supported sending assistance to support Turkey. We have the support of all of the Eastern European nations aside from Russia. Most of the Middle Eastern nations have our support. England is our most vocal ally. In the pacific, Japan, Taiwan and Australia are very strong supporters as well. Wo it is a bit misleading to suggest that England is our only ally. I would like to reinterate one of your points. GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!!!

[Easy Mac]

Originally posted by cincyreds
Here are my takes.

Q: Where would the US be without the French? I mean we would be part of England if it wasn't for them saving our freaking butts in the Revolutionary War.

My gosh, what are we stupid? I mean we side with a country that tried to take us over years ago!!.
C'MON!

And they haven't had a terrorist attack?

Have you forgotten the French airliner where 400 people died? Didn't they try (and failed) to crash french airliners into the Eiffel Tower long before 9/11?

I think they are a bitch if they don't help Turkey, but they don't have to support a war if they don't want. So long as they defend and don't attack, I could care less what they do.

[MIJB#19]

Living in a country neigbouring only Belgium and Germany (and with a goverment acting like they are one, but in fact they have not a single right to act after they officially stepped down), I'm very sure all three countries are going to help Turkey if Iraq invades.

So far, Iraq is not invading Turkey, making the side of not sending troops at this moment the only correct awsner to the collective agreement of defending eachoter.

Besides that, the only people in the world who have the right to make fun of Belgium are the Dutch.
And right now, the Dutch public opinion supports Belgium and the two bigger countries, not our own defunct goverment.

My guess is that in less then 48 hours, we'll see what Bush is up to. If he's going to war, I have no doubt that the Germans, French and Belgians are going to defend Turkey, but are not going to support US troops attacking Iraq.

[Qwikshot]

Originally posted by Fritz
Funny, the NATO webpage does not list Russia as a member. Russia is a partner in the EAPC, but not a member of NATO (unless I have missed something.)

My bad, I thought I had read on CNN a while ago that they had joined NATO. Here's something from the CBC.

http://cbc.ca/stories/2002/05/28/nato_russia020528

[BishopMVP]

I remember something about Russia joining part of NATO in Rome, but not as a full-fledged member. It would be kind of ironic to let in the country that caused the alliance to say the least.

Also, I believe France and Germany do support terrorists. They funnel millions to the Palestinian Authority, a terrorist organization, plus they sold weapons and knowledge to Saddam, who has probably given some of these to terrorists.