NATO should recruit Thailand, Singapore, Philippines, Japan, and more, ex-commander says

[gjoo888]

NATO members are supposed to contribute 2% of their GDP to the organization. Every new member country is theoretically a windfall for the defense contractors. Nice work if you can get it.

[off road pat]

6 hours ago, pegman said:

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.  

Some members of the Carlyle Group are ex presidents, ex prime ministers, like George W. Bush and Family, Thaksin Shinawatra, Tony Blair,....

[Jingthing]

Just now, gjoo888 said:

NATO members are supposed to contribute 2% of their GDP to the organization. Every new member country is theoretically a windfall for the defense contractors. Nice work if you can get it.

That isn't the rule actually.

[Jingthing]

3 hours ago, Bannoi said:

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.

There is no appeasing Putin. That just makes him be even more aggressive. I reckon there is a good chance the man after Putin will be much the same. 

[Schnicnac]

3 minutes ago, gjoo888 said:

NATO members are supposed to contribute 2% of their GDP to the organization. Every new member country is theoretically a windfall for the defense contractors. Nice work if you can get it.

 

Maybe the general gets a sales commission on each new member nudged into joining 🙂

[John Drake]

3 hours ago, Airwolf said:

At the very least, you need to be a democracy to join NATO, so, no dice. 

 

If the military dictators in Myanmar are finally kicked out and the democratic government restored, then bring in Myanmar as part of the Nato alliance, sitting on Thailand's doorstep.

[thesetat]

5 hours ago, John Drake said:

Philippines are part of the frontline of defense already. Forget Thailand, because it is on the other side already.

Thailand does not take sides. The accept all. That is why there has been no wars taken to Thailands shores. 

[Jingthing]

3 hours ago, BE88 said:

To do what ? Make war on China ? Dead laughing 

The idea is to DETER war. 

[Jingthing]

Japan definitely. 

[This Guy]

War mongering at its best

[Sharp]

Nope

NATO!! Run by war mongering parasites 

[eisfeld]

1 hour ago, Schnicnac said:

 

There are currently also no nuclear missiles in Cuba as far as publicly known 🙂

 

The suggestion of the other poster to me was that I'm ok with Russia putting nuclear missiles into Cuba because I'm ok with the US having a few troops in Taiwan. My point was that it's silly to compare a few dozen or hundred soldiers being stationed somewhere to nuclear missiles being put next to an enemy country. The US troops pose zero risk to China and so China can't use them as an excuse. The US has zero interest in invading China. Same like neither the EU nor US have any interest in invading Russia. Yet Russia used the made up threat of the west to them as an excuse to actually invade a country and destabilize the whole region. China is also threatening to invade Taiwan. The US put troops into Taiwan decades ago when the first crisis in the Taiwan straight happened. They withdrew nearly all troops when things calmed down. Now China is rattling the sabers again and so the US is putting some troops back.

 

It is abundantly clear who the aggressors are. It's Russa and China.

[Geordieabroad]

Thai military in NATO 🤣🤣

[eisfeld]

1 hour ago, gjoo888 said:

NATO members are supposed to contribute 2% of their GDP to the organization. Every new member country is theoretically a windfall for the defense contractors. Nice work if you can get it.

 

This is not true. NATO only has a guideline for members on their total defence spending. That does not mean contribution to NATO. It is the total defence spending including for their own military and for example pensions of retired soldiers and whatnot. A small small fraction goes to NATO. And it's not a rule, just a guideline in order to show intent. There is no windfall when a member joins NATO.

 

[Schnicnac]

11 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

 

The suggestion of the other poster to me was that I'm ok with Russia putting nuclear missiles into Cuba because I'm ok with the US having a few troops in Taiwan. My point was that it's silly to compare a few dozen or hundred soldiers being stationed somewhere to nuclear missiles being put next to an enemy country. The US troops pose zero risk to China and so China can't use them as an excuse. The US has zero interest in invading China. Same like neither the EU nor US have any interest in invading Russia. Yet Russia used the made up threat of the west to them as an excuse to actually invade a country and destabilize the whole region. China is also threatening to invade Taiwan. The US put troops into Taiwan decades ago when the first crisis in the Taiwan straight happened. They withdrew nearly all troops when things calmed down. Now China is rattling the sabers again and so the US is putting some troops back.

 

It is abundantly clear who the aggressors are. It's Russa and China.

 

Cool, so you wouldn't mind a small contingent of Chinese troops in the places the US is concerned about in its neighborhood, for example in Cuba or Venezuela? 🙂 You know, these countries are also worried about invasions or regime change triggered from up north, so just to deter war you know...

 

Last time I checked, Turkey was quite next door to enemy (USSR) territory... the reaction to placing missiles there back then is I guess well known. 

 

The war in Europe is the unfortunate outcome of a big country being encircled from north to south instead of leaving them neutral in between, or even better follow up on Russia's interest to join NATO around 2 decades ago. As said, breathtaking hypocrisy and megalomania has made its way in many western capital cities after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and now the wind is changing slowly but steadily... 

 

[Shmo]

8 hours ago, pegman said:

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.  

This!! 
 

succinct and to the point, they are all in on the money. 

[herfiehandbag]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

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
 

 

 

There used to be SEATO, broadly a parallel of NATO set up for mutual defence.

 

The US screwed whatever potential it might of had by insisting that the participants contributed to it's political doctrine inspired wars in the region.

 

Some might say that they came quite close to doing the same to NATO in the Middle East over the last couple of decades!

[frank83628]

5 hours ago, Bannoi said:

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.

ok, so how long has Putin been in charge and how  has his 'hell bent on recreating the old USSR' expansion gone so far? the only bully in the world in the US of Arse.  

[frank83628]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

There is no appeasing Putin. That just makes him be even more aggressive. I reckon there is a good chance the man after Putin will be much the same. 

Putin isnt going anywhere anytime soon.

[herfiehandbag]

26 minutes ago, Geordieabroad said:

Thai military in NATO 🤣🤣

Well they did contribute an Engineer unit to the occupation of Iraq.

 

Known, I understand, as "The Olympic Flames" as they never went out!

 

It took an entire (Italian I believe) infantry battalion to provide force protection when they were deployed to a task.

 

In fairness, they didn't want to be there, didn't know why they were there, were neither equipped nor trained nor able to look after themselves.

[eisfeld]

35 minutes ago, Schnicnac said:

Cool, so you wouldn't mind a small contingent of Chinese troops in the places the US is concerned about in its neighborhood, for example in Cuba or Venezuela? 🙂 You know, these countries are also worried about invasions or regime change triggered from up north, so just to deter war you know...

 

If any of these countries asked China to station a small contingent of troops in their country for defensive piurposes then yes I would have no problem with that. They don't do that as far as I know. I don't think any country in the US neighborhood is worried about the US invading them either.

 

35 minutes ago, Schnicnac said:

Last time I checked, Turkey was quite next door to enemy (USSR) territory... the reaction to placing missiles there back then is I guess well known. 

 

The placement of these missiles was a reaction to the Soviet Union placing nuclear missiles next to its western neighbours. But yes I don't think any country should threaten another country with nuclear weapons.

35 minutes ago, Schnicnac said:

The war in Europe is the unfortunate outcome of a big country being encircled from north to south instead of leaving them neutral in between, or even better follow up on Russia's interest to join NATO around 2 decades ago. As said, breathtaking hypocrisy and megalomania has made its way in many western capital cities after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and now the wind is changing slowly but steadily... 

 

Russia is not encircled. Nobody has threatened Russia. NATO is a defense alliance. It only works when some member is being threatened or attacked. It's a protection alliance against Russia who is the big bully in the region. How does invading Ukraine help them get more far away from the west? It puts them closer! Both in geographical terms as well as making the west and NATO grow stronger together. The hypcrisy and megalomania is purely on Putins part. He's the maniac who starts a war and builds palaces with stolen money on intelligence agency grounds. He was the one who made Russias application to NATO a non-starter by not wanting to play fairly with everyone. Russia is the threat. The notion that the invasion of Ukraine was any kind of defense is just so absurd...

 

[Jiggo]

Seen some talk about Australia joining makes sense.

Now there's no SEATO

[Jingthing]

17 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Putin isnt going anywhere anytime soon.

It's impossible to know that.

[Bernietravelling]

it’s called North Atlantic Treaty Organization, not Pacific Treaty Organization!
 

… if the US Neocons want to start World War 3 with China:
Do it on your own!

[Schnicnac]

10 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

 

If any of these countries asked China to station a small contingent of troops in their country for defensive piurposes then yes I would have no problem with that. They don't do that as far as I know. I don't think any country in the US neighborhood is worried about the US invading them either.

 

 

The placement of these missiles was a reaction to the Soviet Union placing nuclear missiles next to its western neighbours. But yes I don't think any country should threaten another country with nuclear weapons.

 

Russia is not encircled. Nobody has threatened Russia. NATO is a defense alliance. It only works when some member is being threatened or attacked. It's a protection game against Russia who is the big bully in the region. How does invading Ukraine help them get more far away from the west? It puts them closer! But in geographical terms as well as making the west and NATO grow stronger together. The hypcrisy and megalomania is purely on Putins part. He's the maniac who starts a war. He was the one who made Russias application to NATO a non-starter by not wanting to play fairly with everyone. Russia is the threat. The notion that the invasion of Ukraine was any kind of defense is just so absurd...

 

Stationing nuclear missiles in any part of a country's own territory is a bit different from placing them in "allied" countries. Wouldn't otherwise have heard of a Bering Strait missile crisis...

 

But since you have all the insights, so what exactly triggered the failing of Putin's interest to join NATO? Fear of unemployment and drifting into irrelevance by the NATO apparatchiks back then once  there was no enemy to "defend" against anymore? Or fear of another big country in the club so that the US wouldn't be the only one?

 

Ukraine as the biggest territory in Eastern Europe was the last straw... it's great to see the world from a Rambo movie good vs evil perspective, but the world is a bit more nuanced and people both here and in Russia for that matter may have different views of world matters 🙂

 

Fair enough, no cries then when Chinese ships go tit for that with freedom of navigation exercises or build bases around the American continent at some point 🙂

 

[eisfeld]

1 minute ago, Schnicnac said:

But since you have all the insights, so what exactly triggered the failing of Putin's interest to join NATO? Fear of unemployment and drifting into irrelevance by the NATO apparatchiks back then once  there was no enemy to "defend" against anymore? Or fear of another big country in the club so that the US wouldn't be the only one?

 

I mentioned it twice already. Putin asked for special treatment. NATO said no, need to play fair. Putin didn't want that. He tried to play his usual game and failed. That's the end of the story.

 

2 minutes ago, Schnicnac said:

Ukraine as the biggest territory in Eastern Europe was the last straw... it's great to see the world from a Rambo movie good vs evil perspective, but the world is a bit more nuanced and people both here and in Russia for that matter may have different views of world matters 🙂

 

Last straw in what regard? What exactly did Ukraine do? They got rid of the Russian puppet that was their president? You know that it's not only Ukraine as the only ex soviet country who are turning away from the cleptomanianc oligarchs in Russia. Look at central asia.

 

5 minutes ago, Schnicnac said:

Fair enough, no cries then when Chinese ships go tit for that with freedom of navigation exercises or build bases around the American continent at some point 🙂

 

The only problem is that China doesn't have any excuse to put their troops there because the US is not threatening to invade any of these countries. Have any of these countries asked for Chinas protection? Why did nobody join a similar defense organization to NATO with China?

[Schnicnac]

5 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

 

I mentioned it twice already. Putin asked for special treatment. NATO said no, need to play fair. Putin didn't want that. He tried to play his usual game and failed. That's the end of the story.

 

Last straw in what regard? What exactly did Ukraine do? They got rid of the Russian puppet that was their president? You know that it's not only Ukraine as the only ex soviet country who are turning away from the cleptomanianc oligarchs in Russia. Look at central asia.

 

The only problem is that China doesn't have any excuse to put their troops there because the US is not threatening to invade any of these countries. Have any of these countries asked for Chinas protection? Why did nobody join a similar defense organization to NATO with China?

 

Wrong, or maybe you missed that specific history lecture day. The interest to join NATO dates back to Gorbachev already. A little bit more of foresight to seize that olive branch and then integrating an "enemy" could have prevented so much of what we see today. 

 

The last straw was that salami-slicing-tactic of bringing Ukraine into EU/ Western fold and calling the invasion of Ukraine (yes it is an invasion by Russia) an act of defense is obviously wrong, but it is simply a way to remove a too western friendly regime that would be another pearl on the string around Russia's western border. This, coupled with color revolutions that spread into Central Asia. Yes the very Central Asia you deem drifting apart from Russia that are actually closer to Russia and China, such as through the SCO.

 

In any case, fair game, when a country feels threatened by being invaded directly or by sponsored regime change operations, then yea why not ask buddies to protect you. That's what buddies do, right? 🙂

[Ben Zioner]

7 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

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. 

Right 100%, and I don't think any of the Lellows should be trusted, they are too much of a racist bunch IMHO. One of those situations where Wokeism can lead to doom.

[frank83628]

1 hour ago, eisfeld said:

 

If any of these countries asked China to station a small contingent of troops in their country for defensive piurposes then yes I would have no problem with that. They don't do that as far as I know. I don't think any country in the US neighborhood is worried about the US invading them either.

 

 

The placement of these missiles was a reaction to the Soviet Union placing nuclear missiles next to its western neighbours. But yes I don't think any country should threaten another country with nuclear weapons.

 

Russia is not encircled. Nobody has threatened Russia. NATO is a defense alliance. It only works when some member is being threatened or attacked. It's a protection alliance against Russia who is the big bully in the region. How does invading Ukraine help them get more far away from the west? It puts them closer! Both in geographical terms as well as making the west and NATO grow stronger together. The hypcrisy and megalomania is purely on Putins part. He's the maniac who starts a war and builds palaces with stolen money on intelligence agency grounds. He was the one who made Russias application to NATO a non-starter by not wanting to play fairly with everyone. Russia is the threat. The notion that the invasion of Ukraine was any kind of defense is just so absurd...

 

Nato was not supposed to expant Eastward, that was the deal back in 97... so nato moved closer to Putin. and if you knew  anything. about Ukraine you would know this did't start 2 years ago!

[liddelljohn]

Thailand is not NATO material ,, its a '' wrong un '' more in the China, north Korea ,Russia  , cambodia , Burma Junta camp also its equipment is a ''mish mash ''     Singapore is already NATO standard  but AUKUS. JAPAN,NZ, Vietnam , South Korea ,Singapore , Indonesia , malaysia  make more sense ...and feeble phillipines tacked on for R&R