I’m mostly pro NATO but that is litteraly the worst single argument possible anyone ever made. Here’s a one word answer that totally shred its credibility: Lybia.
It’s only for defense until we decide to invade a country… but anyway, the real strength of NATO as a weapon is political influence. It allows the US to impose their security objectives to all the other members, and currently their main competitor is China and that was transcribed into NATO’s official strategy in 2022 with the stated objective to expend into the Indian and Pacific ocean specifically to counter them.
Lybia is not a NATO thing. UK, France and USA bombed some ships and ports in Libya, but I still remember the headlines and news that Germany didn’t want anything to do with that.
So it was a coordinated action between some members of NATO on their own.
NATO doesn’t need Germany to approve anything for something to be a NATO operation.
The operation was conceived by french/UK and was handed over to NATO as a condition for Italian participation.
Here:
NATO’s North Atlantic Council (NAC) in Brussels, Belgium exercised overall political direction of OUP, while Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium, carried out NAC decisions with military implementations through Joint Force Command (JFC) Naples.
Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard was the overall operational commander of the Combined Joint Task Force Unified Protector. Under his leadership, NATO Maritime Command Naples directed naval operations in support of OUP. Although NATO’s Air Command Headquarters for Southern Europe, in Izmir, Turkey (AC Izmir) managed air operations, the air campaign itself was conducted from NATO’s Combined Air Operations Centre Poggio Renatico in Italy. For this reason, major elements of AC Izmir were moved during the course of the OUP.
Italian Vice Admiral Rinaldo Veri from NATO Maritime Command Naples led the maritime arms embargo, while Rear Admiral Filippo Maria Foffi served as the Task Force Commander at sea.
I’m mostly pro NATO but that is litteraly the worst single argument possible anyone ever made. Here’s a one word answer that totally shred its credibility: Lybia.
It’s only for defense until we decide to invade a country… but anyway, the real strength of NATO as a weapon is political influence. It allows the US to impose their security objectives to all the other members, and currently their main competitor is China and that was transcribed into NATO’s official strategy in 2022 with the stated objective to expend into the Indian and Pacific ocean specifically to counter them.
Can’t really expect them to like it.
Lybia is not a NATO thing. UK, France and USA bombed some ships and ports in Libya, but I still remember the headlines and news that Germany didn’t want anything to do with that.
So it was a coordinated action between some members of NATO on their own.
NATO doesn’t need Germany to approve anything for something to be a NATO operation.
The operation was conceived by french/UK and was handed over to NATO as a condition for Italian participation.
Here:
NATO’s North Atlantic Council (NAC) in Brussels, Belgium exercised overall political direction of OUP, while Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium, carried out NAC decisions with military implementations through Joint Force Command (JFC) Naples.
Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard was the overall operational commander of the Combined Joint Task Force Unified Protector. Under his leadership, NATO Maritime Command Naples directed naval operations in support of OUP. Although NATO’s Air Command Headquarters for Southern Europe, in Izmir, Turkey (AC Izmir) managed air operations, the air campaign itself was conducted from NATO’s Combined Air Operations Centre Poggio Renatico in Italy. For this reason, major elements of AC Izmir were moved during the course of the OUP.
Italian Vice Admiral Rinaldo Veri from NATO Maritime Command Naples led the maritime arms embargo, while Rear Admiral Filippo Maria Foffi served as the Task Force Commander at sea.
I’m not a secret.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_71652.htm
deleted by creator