- cross-posted to:
- canada@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- canada@lemmy.ca
You must log in or # to comment.
If I’m drafted, I will literally kill myself before I go to slaughter people in Iran.
WHAT?
Mark, what the hell?
Take him at exactly what he said, not the editorialized headline.
“One can never categorically rule out participation”
That’s not the same as we will be. But I can give you a specific example of when we would. If Iran attacks a non-combatant NATO country, and they activate article 5, then we would be a party to that.
Technically, that would even apply to an attack on the US…and that seems increasingly likely, given the circumstances. We may not have to attack everyone that the US attacks…but we are obligated to defend them.
It does not. The US attacked. This war is a US action, and any counter attacks would not be covered.
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
Even if the US did invoke article 5, NATO members don’t have to participate, because the US started it. You cannot be the aggressor and then claim self-defence.
That doesn’t say what you say it does, though. There’s no exception regarding “who started it” included in that passage. It simply states that any attack against a member nation is considered an attack against all of them, etc.
The only condition implied is that the attack must occur in Europe or North America…so, if Iran decides to attack a NATO member directly, Article 5 could be invoked.
It says exactly what I say it does. The US is the attacker. Unless Iran attacks a country which is not the US, Article 5 doesn’t apply.
It explicitly says in self-defence as per the UN charter. The US is not responding in self defence, they are the belligerent nation.
Which part actually says that? You quoted two paragraphs, and nowhere in there does it condition Article 5 based on how the conflict started. It’s only based on whether or not a NATO member is attacked. If a member nation requires defending, then Article 5 takes effect
You’re also ignoring the fact that Canada would have to get involved if Iran attacked any NATO member…not just the US. There were already concerns yesterday over a missile that ended up in Turkey, but so far they haven’t invoked Article 5. If Iran continues to fire missiles at them, that may change…and the rest of NATO will be obligated to come to their defense.
The US may have started this, but that doesn’t negate the terms of the treaty. If anything it puts those terms on the table, ready to activate at a moment’s notice. So far, thankfully, no one else seems that eager to get involved. But that will change if Iran actually targets a member state directly.
It entirely does. NATO is a defence pact, not a mandatory requirement to go to war just because. It was specifically designed to be defensive, so no NATO country could be the aggressor and have the others forced to support them. Exactly as is happening now.
It’s only based on whether or not a NATO member is attacked.
Yes. And if Iran defends itself, that is not an attack, it’s a defence.
The NATO charter also specifically calls out article 51 of the UN charter which states that while a country can defend itself, it cannot “affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security”.
Not only can the US not claim that article 5 would apply, that have violated the UN charter.
Again, the US cannot be the victim of an attack it started. Any military assets of the US that Iran attacks, are not covered by article 5. Any non-military assets are war crimes and the UN charter and the Geneva conventions, which Iran is a signatory of and would be dealt with by the UN, and not NATO.
The title do not suggest he will definitely join. It means maybe yes, maybe no. We reject canada involvement completelt
deleted by creator
