Are you suggesting that NATO would break and the soldiers there would immediately lay down their guns and surrender to the US? Like Trump has just found one weird trick that NATO hates?
NATO would break down, yes.
Soldiers would lay down guns: I didn’t say anything about that.
It’s so weird people cannot see that a mutual protection treaty ends, once there’s fighting WITHIN the group - especially if it involves the strongest party. It’s so logical and clear it doesn’t even make sense to discuss.
That said, I’m outta here. Let’s hope it won’t happen.
I didn’t realize we were arguing about whether NATO would dissolve… of course it will. Frankly I didn’t think that question was really all that contentious, in fact it’s fairly obvious isn’t it?
NATO will instantly be invalidated, dissolve, whatever, and the Allies will switch over to other mutual defense agreements.
And even if it was against US, I ment combat. There is no combat in Greenland so far. As soon as this started, NATO would break.
Are you suggesting that NATO would break and the soldiers there would immediately lay down their guns and surrender to the US? Like Trump has just found one weird trick that NATO hates?
NATO would break down, yes. Soldiers would lay down guns: I didn’t say anything about that.
It’s so weird people cannot see that a mutual protection treaty ends, once there’s fighting WITHIN the group - especially if it involves the strongest party. It’s so logical and clear it doesn’t even make sense to discuss.
That said, I’m outta here. Let’s hope it won’t happen.
I didn’t realize we were arguing about whether NATO would dissolve… of course it will. Frankly I didn’t think that question was really all that contentious, in fact it’s fairly obvious isn’t it?
NATO will instantly be invalidated, dissolve, whatever, and the Allies will switch over to other mutual defense agreements.