Why is Turkey in NATO?

[CWSmith]

Both Turkey and Hungary are blocking the admittance of Finland and Sweden into NATO. I think the lesson we are learning today with Russian aggression is teaching us a lesson that we want both Finland and Sweden in NATO.

I can see an advantage to having Hungary in NATO, but why did we admit Turkey?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...0441f0b0&ei=38

[skuthorp]

Because they were not Russia. And administrations have changed………. they do that……….

[Mcjim]

Because the USA wanted a place to put missiles. (and then complained when the USSR put missiles in Cuba)

[RFNK]

Yes, a place to launch missiles and bombers and human rights only matter when the USA, UK etc. need excuses to demonise someone, so no reason to exclude them.

[Mcjim]

Because the USA wanted a place to put missiles. (and then complained when the USSR put missiles in Cuba)

Yes I know that happened ten years after they joined NATO.

[Ted Hoppe]

It happened as the Soviets tested their first nukes in 1949 while holding on to half of Germany and Poland under complete domination. The Russian aggression and expansion in Hungry in and Czechoslovakia only ensured Turkey remain in NATO. Also worked to secure an uneven peace time between Greece (a solid NATO Ally) and Turkey which applied pressure on the Bosporus keeping the Russians navy bottled in the Black Sea. Joseph Stalin (responsible for the deaths 10s of millions of people) was not a man to be trusted and all the former western Allies knew they needed Turkey as a counter to the Russians expansion.

[George.]

Turkey controls the Straits, which are Russia's only way out into the med. That's the reason, then and now.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Because the USA wanted a place to put missiles. (and then complained when the USSR put missiles in Cuba)

That is wrong. Try Wikipedia.

Turkey applied because of pressure applied to Turkey by the USSR to overthrow Turkey’s position under the Montreux Convention.

[Garret]

Turkey controls the Straits, which are Russia's only way out into the med. That's the reason, then and now.

This is how I've understood it. Turkey has gotten (reluctant) support for 100's of years because of this.

[sandtown]

Why is Turkey in Nato ??

The Greeks have also wondered about that, as have the Kurds.

[CWSmith]

Why is Turkey in Nato ??

The Greeks have also wondered about that, as have the Kurds.

You can argue that NATO lessens tensions between the member nations, but when you combine Turkey with the one-vote-to-reject rule, it gives them way too much power over the future of NATO.

[JimD]

Turkey controls the Straits, which are Russia's only way out into the med. That's the reason, then and now.

Yup. Just look at a map. Location, location, location.

[Stiletto]

I think Turkey is in NATO because it would be a much bigger problem if she was allied to the other side.

[CWSmith]

I think Turkey is in NATO because it would be a much bigger problem if she was allied to the other side.

Turkey is trying to have one foot in each camp.

[Osborne Russell]

Why is Turkey in Nato? Because, Russia? Why in the F is there NATO? Because . . . Russia? What in the ever-loving F do you think is going on? For real? NATO is because . . . Germany? Because . . . Hitler? Mussolini? GTFOOH.

The Russo-Circassian War (Adyghe: Урыс-адыгэ зауэ, romanized: Wurıs-adığə zawə; Russian: Русско-черкесская война; 1763–1864; also known as the Russian Invasion of Circassia) was the invasion of Circassia by Russia, starting in July 17, 1763 (O.S) with the Russian Empire assuming authority in Circassia, followed by the Circassian refusal, and ending 101 years later with the last army of Circassia defeated on 21 May 1864 (O.S), making it exhausting and casualty-heavy for both sides. The Circassians fought the Russians longer than all the other peoples of the Caucasus, and the Russo-Circassian War was the longest war both Russia and Circassia have ever fought.

-- wikipedia

The longest war and it ain't over, wake the F up! Abkhazia -- recognized by bull S countries such as Nicaragua, and no others -- is the homeland of the Circassians! Are they, is their claim to identity, to simply disappear?

And that ain't that the half nor the tenth nor the one % of it all. To you that is remote? 1864? The American Civil War was underway. The issue was in doubt. You don't think that was remote, I fervently hope. Your Aunt Tillie and her POS P-licking traitorus dogs carrried the banner into the US Capitol, 6 Jan 21. Your lifetime. Within the lifetime of The Bilge, for F's sake. You were alive. Is that already "remote" to you? IT AIN'T F ING REMOTE. Your oceans, in your imaginations, may shield you physically; but not historically. Why is NATO? Trebizond? Was a country. Not now. Who cares? Who shall rule Crimea? The Dardenlles? The Black Sea? The Hellespont? Please continue to prate about "democracy" as you imagine it.

F ing Americans, so ignorant. So determinedly ignorant.

[CWSmith]

^ Osborne, every single person who has provided an answer to my question has shown more insight, greater discipline, and a better ability to express themselves than you. Why is that? You said nothing and threw random insults in the process. Why did you waste the electrons?

[Osborne Russell]

Russia's war against the Circassians was not the longest war in Russian history. The longest war in everyone's history -- yes, in yours -- is the Enlightenment. And yes it it is a war. With killing and dying. Killing is necessary. 500 years. What do you believe is going on?

[gypsie]

There's why NATO has admitted Turkey and then there's why Turkey is in NATO.

NATO wanted Turkey - I dare say Turkey felt it was better in than out. At the moment it's using NATO for domestic political reasons. Playing with Sweden and Finland so he can continue his dumb-assed populist agenda and keep power.
Hungary joined genuinely for its own defense I dare say. Now it uses its veto as a political stick. Hungary is also playing the bad faith actor in the EU. Bad faith is a term that fits contemporary Hungary all round - is my impression. Problems with rule of law, problems with bigotry and repression - all that Liberal Democracy stuff is a bad fit. The nation just doesn't seem to 'get it'.

Turkey is still important to NATO - as said; geography.
Hungary.... not so much. Maybe its border with Ukraine .... meh

Also as said, administrations change - watch that space. I bet it gets worse before it gets better.

[CWSmith]

^ gypsie, I think you are right as are others here.

So maybe the question becomes "Why was NATO structured so that a single veto could keep a desirable nation out?" Right now Finland and Sweden look like important additions to NATO and Turkey looks to be in Russia's pocket. I'm going to guess that the US wanted that power in case things got dicey, but now we have regime change in Turkey that is cutting NATO off at the knees.

It seems to me that NATO needs to transition to something closer to a two-thirds majority rule.

[Osborne Russell]

^ gypsie, I think you are right as are others here.

So maybe the question becomes "Why was NATO structured so that a single veto could keep a desirable nation out?"

Power. We overestimated Russia, morally -- we thought they wanted in on The Enlightenment. Shall we make the same mistake again?

Russia has such power as we allow them to have. Shall we allow them to have power over Bakhmut? Donbass? Crimea? Ukraine? That's the limit, peace in our time? F that. Not a millimeter.

[David G]

^ gypsie, I think you are right as are others here.

So maybe the question becomes "Why was NATO structured so that a single veto could keep a desirable nation out?" Right now Finland and Sweden look like important additions to NATO and Turkey looks to be in Russia's pocket. I'm going to guess that the US wanted that power in case things got dicey, but now we have regime change in Turkey that is cutting NATO off at the knees.

It seems to me that NATO needs to transition to something closer to a two-thirds majority rule.

Sometimes the reason for such a structure is... because no one, or too few, would join without that sense of control. And sometimes, in governing structures, such a veto - when viewed historically - turns out to be a blessing. Though it's hard to see such a reading eventuating from the current instance.

And why? For a whole matrix of reasons, some of which have been touched on here. Has anyone mentioned Sweden's sympathy for the Kurds? Anyone mention Turkish domestic deterioration which might be distracted from by loud yammering about Scandanavian perfidy? You might want to read 'Defense of the West' by Sloan for more.

[Osborne Russell]

Crimea could be regulated. Russia could be regulated. Turkey could be regulated. The United States of F ing America could be F ing regulated.

You know what "regulated" means? I'll tell you: killing is necessary. We are going to achieve peace, Sandtown.

[skuthorp]

Likely NATO was structured that way because America insisted on it. It is exceptional you know…….

[CWSmith]

Power. We overestimated Russia, morally -- we thought they wanted in on The Enlightenment. Shall we make the same mistake again?

Russia has such power as we allow them to have. Shall we allow them to have power over Bakhmut? Donbass? Crimea? Ukraine? That's the limit, peace in our time? F that. Not a millimeter.

Nobody overestimated the moral superiority of Russia except for Russia itself.

The problem with the Cold War was that our own CIA overestimated the ability of Russia to wage war. They broke their own backs for many of the same reasons they are braking themselves now. The Russian government is a criminal enterprise. There is no morality there.

[CWSmith]

Likely NATO was structured that way because America insisted on it. It is exceptional you know…….

I suspect you are at least 70% right.

[Osborne Russell]

Likely NATO was structured that way because America insisted on it. It is exceptional you know…….

America and the rest, of the west your country too, by consent, for good F ing reasons. Withdraw your decison, on better grounds, if you can.

America led the way on independence from Britain (from powdered wig times, as you insist), in WW2, on NATO -- tell me how the Aus position is a whit different. NATO should be different? How, so as to take account of the unique Aus position?

You want to be unique, but you aren't, except as to ecology, the uniqueness of Australian marsupial fauna, that don't mean S in Ukraine. You fail to realize that the marsupials of Aus are at stake. If Russia wins, they are doomed. Particulars on request.

[Osborne Russell]

I suspect you are at least 70% right.

Granted, arguendo . . . [latin for so the F what?]

I know why you resist taking on the mantle of The Enlightenment. I myself would reject so heavy a thing. I would prefer to extol Lexington and Concord. But that is not my choice. Or rather, I'm faced with a new Lexington and Concord. How shall I respond?

[sandtown]

: killing is necessary. We are going to achieve peace, Sandtown.

The blood lust runs strong in this one . . .

anyone's blood but yours.

Colonel Blimpista

[gypsie]

....You fail to realize that the marsupials of Aus are at stake. If Russia wins, they are doomed. Particulars on request.

I'd like a few particulars please....
Genuinely curious.

[Osborne Russell]

The blood lust runs strong in this one . . .

anyone's blood but yours.

Colonel Blimpista

He watches the missiles fly into Ukrainian cities
and his peace is not disturbed
He is Mr. Peace.

[Osborne Russell]

I'd like a few particulars please....
Genuinely curious.

The crushing burden of armaments required to keep these irredentists and religious wackos in line. What's stopping Romania from leaving NATO and forming a new pact with Russia? Including perhaps Azerbaijan, Serbia and whoever else wants to join a "new power center". All of it more likely if the west cannot or will not stop Russia taking Ukraine.

So we'll need vast amounts of resources from Australia, and there goes the marsupial habitat.

[gypsie]

Nah mate, cats will have killed them off before that happens.

Friggin hate cats.

[Lugs]

Nah mate, cats will have killed them off before that happens.

Friggin hate cats.

That's the only redeeming feature you seem to have, given your nastiness exhibited elsewhere on the forum.

[Tom Hunter]

Once again a bunch of Americans answer a question about another country as if the people in that country have no agency.
That’s a really funny thing to think about the Turks.

[CWSmith]

^ I'm not sure that I follow. First, no one has said that Turkey can't answer. Second, the real question isn't why Turkey wants to join, but why NATO would allow them to join? Anyone, especially those from a NATO state, are welcome to answer that question.

I think there have been some excellent answers to that question.