Popular Post webfact Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Then-Nato Supreme Allied Commander Europe US Admiral James Stavridis at a press conference in 2009. Photo: AFP Former Nato supreme allied commander James Stavridis suggested the military alliance recruit Asia-Pacific countries that share ‘its vision of freedom’ His list of potential allies with a similar view on democracy, liberty and human rights also included Australia, New Zealand and South Korea The Nato military alliance should consider broadening its membership to include Asia-Pacific nations, said a former Nato supreme allied commander. “Nato should think about recruiting a few new members from outside its traditional boundaries,” retired US Navy Admiral James Stavridis wrote in a Bloomberg opinion piece on Monday. Stavridis served as the military alliance’s chief from 2009 to 2013. Before that, he was the Commander of the US Southern Command from 2006 to 2009, where he oversaw military operations in Latin America. Widening Nato’s membership, Stavridis wrote, was a necessary response to the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, the Russia-Ukraine war, US-China tensions, and the territorial dispute in the South China Sea. In his opinion piece, Stavridis suggested recruiting Asia-Pacific countries “that share the alliance’s vision of freedom, democracy, liberty and human rights”. That list of potential allies included countries like Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea. Full story: South China Morning Post 2024-04-11 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe 1 8 1 1 24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post sqwakvfr Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 The Admiral should be like Macarthur: "old soldiers never die, they just fade away". I have heard of two definitions of NATO: 1. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. When did LOS move? 2. No Action Talk Only-I heard this from a old soldier who served in Europe. 6 3 1 4 3 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tropicalevo Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 34 minutes ago, webfact said: Stavridis suggested recruiting Asia-Pacific countries “that share the alliance’s vision of freedom, democracy, liberty and human rights”. That list of potential allies included countries like Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea. I do not disagree with his thinking here, but ..... Quote In addition, Southeast Asian nations like the Philippines, Thailand, and Singapore could also be brought in due to their ties with the United States, Stavridis wrote. Not much freedom, democracy, liberty and human rights there 6 4 6 14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hummin Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 Already seen the limits with Turkey and Bulgaria onboard, so to be sure we weakened our lines and exceed our capacity to support and respond in crisis bring them onboard. Great suggestion 👌 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ikke1959 Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Only problem is that Thailand is no democracy, and has no liberty, no human rights and no vision of freedom... Examples more over as look in prisons how they deal with inmates, the Thaksin soap, and of course the coming dissloving of the MFP and the refusal of Pita as PM....and many more 8 3 3 2 17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post pegman Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 1 hour ago, sqwakvfr said: The Admiral should be like Macarthur: "old soldiers never die, they just fade away". I have heard of two definitions of NATO: 1. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. When did LOS move? 2. No Action Talk Only-I heard this from a old soldier who served in Europe. Well this admiral went to work for the Carlyle Group which is heavily invested in the American military industrial complex. NATO expansion is a long running scam. Each new NATO country must conform to NATO standards for all their mutations. Corrupt politicians who receive campaign contributions from munitions manufacturers pay them back by creating these new customers. 6 1 4 2 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mfd101 Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 (edited) Thailand, Philippines & Singapore have no military capability worth recruiting. And neither does NZ: It has been a taker not a giver since the 1960s (as any Oz soldier alongside them in V'nam can vouch). As to Japan it's currently being worked in to the AUKUS arrangement, which is much more relevant than NATO could be in the Indo-Pacific region. Edited April 11 by mfd101 6 1 1 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gweiloman Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 That’s right. Spend billions to defend your trade with China against… China. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Stocky Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 The geopolitical realities of SE Asia mean it's best not to pick sides. I doubt any country would be dumb enough to join NATO. As for "potential allies with a similar view on democracy, liberty and human rights", sure countries in SE Asia are just as flexible as the USA, UK etc. 1 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Korat Kiwi Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 56 minutes ago, mfd101 said: Thailand, Philippines & Singapore have no military capability worth recruiting. And neither does NZ: It has been a taker not a giver since the 1960s (as any Oz soldier alongside them in V'nam can vouch). As to Japan it's currently being worked in to the AUKUS arrangement, which is much more relevant than NATO could be in the Indo-Pacific region. What a load of <deleted>. Given its small size NZ has contributed whenever and wherever it can. Somalia, Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, East Timor to name a few and ongoing support to NATO missions throughout the world. The NZ government may not have supported its military to the extent that it could have, I would add. But soldiers/airmen or sailors have always done the best they could given what they had. (Beg steal and borrow does come to mind). 1 3 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post John Drake Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Philippines are part of the frontline of defense already. Forget Thailand, because it is on the other side already. 3 1 3 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Etaoin Shrdlu Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 This has been tried before. It was called the South East Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) and was started in 1954 by President Eisenhower and John Foster Dulles as an anti-communist military alliance. The headquarters were here in Bangkok. It lasted until 1977. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post WHansen Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Sorry sir, this club has a no sandals policy 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gweiloman Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Correct me if I’m wrong but NATO was created to contain the Soviet Union. Soviet Union is no more so NATO’s raison d’etre is also no more. However the generals are greedy to continue the grift for obvious reasons. 6 2 1 3 1 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DjSilver Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Haha, what a joke, everyone knows that Thailand is Chinas puppet. If China says jump, than Thailand says yes Master and jumps 🤣 4 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Card Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Never, Thailand would be a conduit of NATO secrets to China. 2 1 1 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ogb Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Thailand should sit on the fence (and definitely NOT jump on a sinking ship) 2 1 2 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sydebolle Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organisation The commodore must have been missing that particular class in geography - unless, of course, the local goons moved Thailand to the Atlantic ...... wonders never seize 😉 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post frank83628 Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 10 minutes ago, Gweiloman said: Correct me if I’m wrong but NATO was created to contain the Soviet Union. Soviet Union is no more so NATO’s raison d’etre is also no more. However the generals are greedy to continue the grift for obvious reasons. exactly. Nato has no purpose, basically those joined countries have to jump to whatever the US commands. 4 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post spidermike007 Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 He says nations that share the alliance’s vision of freedom, democracy, liberty and human rights. Ha. As if Thailand were anything even closely approaching a democracy. With coups and stolen elections, as a regular occurrence. 1 3 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammieuk1 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 (edited) You will be sure to get a red in the bed with shower of <deleted>e 🤔 Edited April 11 by sammieuk1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfd101 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 46 minutes ago, Korat Kiwi said: Given its small size NZ has contributed whenever and wherever it can. Somalia, Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, East Timor to name a few and ongoing support to NATO missions throughout the world. The NZ government may not have supported its military to the extent that it could have, I would add. But soldiers/airmen or sailors have always done the best they could given what they had. (Beg steal and borrow does come to mind). Yes, you have confirmed by view of NZ as seen from Oz and elsewhere: A taker not a giver. The beg, borrow or steal bit is notorious in the Oz military. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harleyclarkey Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 Only if there is a Thai ladies brigade.....😅 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Modern Coding Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 Former Nato Supreme Leader should rather mind his own business. 1 1 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post wensiensheng Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 (edited) 3 hours ago, Tropicalevo said: I do not disagree with his thinking here, but ..... Not much freedom, democracy, liberty and human rights there To be fair, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and S Korea were his first picks. The others were after thoughts and while Singapore ranks up there with the first four, the rest are a rabble. And in the case of Thailand, Russia has its claws in already, as has China. Clearly NATO has no business in the Asia Pacific region. Separate military Alliances are needed for what is a quite separate theatre of operation. by the by, before reaching out beyond the Atlantic, how about weeding out some countries within the current membership that are clearly at odds with NATO interests, in fact acting in concert with NATO adversaries. Looking at you Hungary. Edited April 11 by wensiensheng 2 1 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotchilli Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 3 hours ago, webfact said: Former Nato supreme allied commander James Stavridis suggested the military alliance recruit Asia-Pacific countries that share ‘its vision of freedom’ What? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post wensiensheng Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 37 minutes ago, Gweiloman said: Correct me if I’m wrong but NATO was created to contain the Soviet Union. Soviet Union is no more so NATO’s raison d’etre is also no more. However the generals are greedy to continue the grift for obvious reasons. Soviet Union is no more but the major power within the Soviet Union (Russia) certainly is, and is on the march. NATO’s flaw is not one of grift, it is one of inaction in the face of its major (only) protagonist aggressively attacking both its and NATOs neighbor. if NATO isn’t going to use it’s power now, it will probably always find an excuse to kowtow to the Soviet Union in its current guise, ie RUSSIA. 1 1 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilli42 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 This is already well underway and is to include Japan, Korea, Philippines etc. The Empire is building its counter alliance to China/Russia. Good luck getting Thailand to commit to a military alliance that is a thinly veiled counter to China. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Presto Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 7 minutes ago, wensiensheng said: Soviet Union is no more but the major power within the Soviet Union (Russia) certainly is, and is on the march. NATO’s flaw is not one of grift, it is one of inaction in the face of its major (only) protagonist aggressively attacking both its and NATOs neighbor. if NATO isn’t going to use it’s power now, it will probably always find an excuse to kowtow to the Soviet Union in its current guise, ie RUSSIA. Didn't Putin want to join NATO at some time? So there must be something to it! 😂 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Bannoi Posted April 11 Popular Post Share Posted April 11 46 minutes ago, Gweiloman said: Correct me if I’m wrong but NATO was created to contain the Soviet Union. Soviet Union is no more so NATO’s raison d’etre is also no more. However the generals are greedy to continue the grift for obvious reasons. You are correct NATO was created to contain the old Soviet Union and should have just naturally faded away. Unfortunately Putin seems hell bent on recreating the old USSR it making NATO just as relevant today as it ever was. The only thing that will stop Putin is an overwhelming show of force if he thinks he might lose or get a bloody nose he will not start or back down just like any other bully. 1 4 2 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now