Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkyiv
Not the poster you are replying to, but I want to chime in.
Here is what is confusing to me, and what Kasparov posed the other day during a talk. How does anything you said compute if you suppose that russia does attack a NATO country?
What does NATO do then? Because the fear of a nuclear war is precisely the same as it is if NATO were to intervene now, defending a non-NATO country.
This is the confusing part. It's not like when a NATO member is attacked, the aggressor's nuclear arsenal disappears. Therefore, the distinction between defending a NATO member or a non NATO member looks arbitrary.
|
The distinction is that NATO is a DEFENSIVE military organization with clear protocols, namely that it doesn't act unless one of its member countries is attacked. NATO does not otherwise intervene, police, etc for non-NATO countries.
NATO not intervening for a non-NATO member conflict is not arbitrary; it is the exact function of NATO.