cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/59867996
German media outlets Süddeutsche Zeitung, WDR, and NDR also cite the report, noting that Russian President Vladimir Putin appears intent on testing NATO’s Article 5 guarantees. The alliance’s mutual defence clause obliges member states to come to one another’s aid if attacked. The assessment suggests Putin may seek to challenge how seriously that commitment would be honoured.
My opinion is if they have any proof of this just declare article 5 now and attack them before they are prepared.
Waiting for Putin strikes me as stupid just get organised and crush them as brutally as possible.
Article 5 states that an armed attack against one member will be treated as an attack against all members.
There has been no armed attack against a member state.
A planned attack is still an attack. Waiting is stupid we should hit them with everything now if there’s proof.
If I see a local nutter known for stabbing people staring at me with a knife and bragging about he’s going to stab me later I’m stabbing him first to protect myself. Same thing imo.
You’re missing the point. It’s not a strategical decision that’s being made here.
NATO is a defense treaty, not a warfare alliance. It has specific language describing it as such.
Interestingly enough, you are paroting Kremlin talking points by treating it as anything other than a defensive agreement.
Well if I was the country that knew it was being attacked I’d not be waiting for the Russians to build up their equipment. This could be Ww3 if you wait until they’re ready or their buddies to arrive.
Might be time to end Nato and make a new alliance that is willing to do what is necessary.
Given that most of the countries in Europe have been relying heavily on their now-compromised former ally America for security, the smarter move would be to also spend the intervening years building up equipment.
Correct, they would have to use the infrastructure attacks
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Baltic_Sea_submarine_cable_disruptions
They can’t use article 5 preemptively
USA did after 9/11.
The use of “after” in your statement should be a clue that you’re wrong
Other nations preempted USA invoking it.
What was preemptive about 9/11? The US was attacked, therefore they invoked Article 5.
Other nations preempted USA invoking it.