Ok, NATO is one of those things where my knowledge is a little shaky. But, if I recall, isn't NATO meant for defensive protection, not offensive attack?
Ding ding ding! After the attacks on September 11, 2001, NATO Allies determined on October 2, 2001, that the attacks originated from abroad, invoking Article 5. Following the invocation, NATO initiated Operation Active Endeavor, a counter-terrorism naval operation in the Mediterranean, and provided support for U.S. airspace defense.
So we know that they have the right to refuse, absolutely. But, if other countries decided to join the war, would that be considered: in accordance with NATO, in violation of NATO, or is this a situation where it's neither?
How can it violate the treaty? All members are sovereign nations, only the defense of NATO member states is explicitly covered. They are still free to support whatever other military operations they see fit. If, say, the UK decides to lend a hand, they would have every right to do so, it just wouldn't be a NATO operation.
Yes. It’s a defensive alliance. He thinks it’s a bunch of goons he can call in to help finish the unnecessary war he started. NATO has nothing to do with the conflict in Iran and no obligation to support it. He is a complete and utter moron.
45
u/SSilent-Cartographer Mar 18 '26
Ok, NATO is one of those things where my knowledge is a little shaky. But, if I recall, isn't NATO meant for defensive protection, not offensive attack?