Breaking News Israel strikes Doha

[Yasar_TR]

One last thing to add:

This is the most important fact.

Turkiye has the second largest army of NATO.
It means we are one of the most important parts of NATO.

If Israel were to attack Türkiye militarily in any form or shape, NATO would have to respond and help Türkiye defend herself. That includes US too. If they don’t then NATO is dead. If article 5 does not become operable then the main reason for the treaty’s purpose is gone.

So forget about Türkiye-Israel military conflict directly!!

 

[IC3M@N FX]

No, Article 5 does not say that an attack on one is an attack on all with military support.
But the support you give as a NATO partner is your business, be it in the form of political support, economic or goods support, or military support. That's why, for example, we hardly ever support the Baltic states with troops or take part in manoeuvres in the northern countries. It is not our conflict with Russia.

If Russia were to attack, we would and must have to help, but the nature of that help would be up to us.
That's why NATO protection is a joke; after all, it doesn't force anyone to provide military assistance.

 

[Yasar_TR]

No, Article 5 does not say that an attack on one is an attack on all with military support.
But the support you give as a NATO partner is your business, be it in the form of political support, economic or goods support, or military support. That's why, for example, we hardly ever support the Baltic states with troops or take part in manoeuvres in the northern countries. It is not our conflict with Russia.

If Russia were to attack, we would and must have to help, but the nature of that help would be up to us.
That's why NATO protection is a joke; after all, it doesn't force anyone to provide military assistance.

What do you mean NO?

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm

Article 5

“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.”

If any country should refrain from helping us then they will know that they will be treated the same should they be attacked.

Help can be in any form deemed necessary by the individual country. But if they are reluctant or refraining from help then they will be treated the same should they be in same position one day.

It is also important that Turkiye has one of the most capable and active armed forces of the organisation that can fight most efficiently. If you don’t help Turkiye then don’t expect help when Russia invades your country.

Also it is important that the member countries won’t be siding with Israel.

 

[IC3M@N FX]

But that's what it comes down to, the support is a must but the type of help is not.

That's why I say Article 5 is a joke, it doesn't compel military assistance.

Article 5 does not automatically oblige NATO members to provide military support.

The key wording is:

“…such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force…”

Why this wording matters​

• “such action as it deems necessary” → each country decides for itself what kind of assistance to provide.
• “including the use of armed force” → military action is only one possible option, not an obligation.

So, the treaty requires action, but it does not prescribe that action must be military.


This means:

• Every member must provide assistance in some form.
• But each state decides what kind of assistance it considers necessary.
• That assistance may include armed force, but it could also be political, logistical, intelligence, financial, or other types of support.

The essence of Article 5 is political and security solidarity: no NATO member will be left to face aggression alone.
In practice, assistance often involves a combination of military, intelligence, and political measures.

 

[TR_123456]

But that's what it comes down to, the support is a must but the type of help is not.

That's why I say Article 5 is a joke, it doesn't compel military assistance.

Article 5 does not automatically oblige NATO members to provide military support.

The key wording is:

Why this wording matters​

• “such action as it deems necessary” → each country decides for itself what kind of assistance to provide.
• “including the use of armed force” → military action is only one possible option, not an obligation.

So, the treaty requires action, but it does not prescribe that action must be military.


This means:

• Every member must provide assistance in some form.
• But each state decides what kind of assistance it considers necessary.
• That assistance may include armed force, but it could also be political, logistical, intelligence, financial, or other types of support.

The essence of Article 5 is political and security solidarity: no NATO member will be left to face aggression alone.
In practice, assistance often involves a combination of military, intelligence, and political measures.

In this case the wording doesnt matter,the reaction matters.
We need a reason to ''end'' NATO and they will provide that reason which is why we need to invoke article 5.
Not that we need their help but to show their true faces their double standards.
Lets be honest,without Türkiye NATO is just a confirmed white christian racist club without any real power(those days are over)

 

[mehmed beg]

The word of these people ain't worth the paper, on which it is written on.
Turkey, hopefully gets 5 more years and if possible in meantime, engage Jewry in protracted war everywhere in the Middle East. Hopefully by then America will be in more trouble.
In any case , I think that it would be Greece which will instigate the trouble. Probably, as soon as they get F 35s and some other Jewery goodies.

 

[AlperTunga]

One last thing to add:

This is the most important fact.

Turkiye has the second largest army of NATO.
It means we are one of the most important parts of NATO.

If Israel were to attack Türkiye militarily in any form or shape, NATO would have to respond and help Türkiye defend herself. That includes US too. If they don’t then NATO is dead. If article 5 does not become operable then the main reason for the treaty’s purpose is gone.

So forget about Türkiye-Israel military conflict directly!!

Dear members, forget about NATO! I cannot believe that you believe NATO will help us. NATO will still stay among themselves as NATO. It won't end because they don't help us against Israel. We should be happy if they don't help Israel, but US and Greece will certainly do. Greece can become active with high probability. Our ballistic missiles may damage some of their air fields but in that case they will land in US carriers. And they will repair them fast. We won't have enough numbers (at least half will be eliminated by their ADs) to do a second or third round. This is is our problem. We are always too late and have too few. Our large land force (will you attack them with M48s or Leo 1?? and without air support??) won't mean much in a conflict with Israel. I can guarantee you if Israel attacks Hamas in Istanbul we will just protest and condemn it. Although in my dreams and when I get angry at Israel, I (wish to) think otherwise and concoct scenarios to believe in, in reality it will be different, all because of insufficient preparation and habitual procrastination.

 

[AlperTunga]

I forgot to add, Spain can send us some patriots. But by that time most damage will be inflicted.

 

[Huelague]

I think an attack on Türkiye is only a matter of time.

If this will happen, Türkiye shout starts a Great War. Purchasing nukes from Pakistan or „whom ever“, immediately.
Turkish people in Europe should also be prepared, together with their ‚allies‘.

At this time, it’s important to evacuate all Arabs from this region, because of possible nukleare strike to destroy whole Israel.

 

[Huelague]

No! NATO will not help Türkiye if Israel or any other „Western“ country attack us.

 

[Eurofighter]

Help can be in any form deemed necessary

SAMP(T) - easy to underestimate the depth of feeling at what is going on in Europe. I think Macron for example does want to help Gaza (although the EU also needs the US for Ukraine), and supplying SAMP(T) could be his way to do so.

If Turkey is willing to buy 40 Eurofighters from the UK to help keep British production lines open, that would be genuinely appreciated and would result in some form of assistance in return (eg naval support for defensive purposes). UK is seriously worried about losing highly skilled engineers if its production lines close.

European NATO can also provide support to Turkey by increasing sanctions on Israel - which have finally reached the stage of freezing Israel out of the UK's prestigious officer training program for example (Israelis are furious and call it treachery).

Yasar_TR mentioned that the US can restrain Israel because Israel depends on US technology and intelligence. I think that is very true, but it is desirable to shift dependence from the US to the UK, France, European NATO, and Pakistan right now because the US continues to backfill Israeli munitions for free. With much of the Israeli government's extreme ideology they are almost stupid not to use munitions at the highest possible rate under this arrangement. I do not think their behaviour will reduce in intensity until the US reduces support, and for that to happen countries need to find ways to reprimand the US.

I do think Turkish air defence is not ready yet from what I read. An F-15, if it starts at mach 2.5, can zoom as high as 80,000 feet - above the maximum operating altitude of Siper Block 1 - so it cannot provide true area denial in the same way as a ring of Siper Block 2. Israel has a few standoff weapons with a range of up to 250km, and it would not need to enter within the range of Siper Block 1 to fire them. I think Turkey will be ready when it has 13+ Siper Block 2 batteries, with which it could encircle an area containing Ankara and Istanbul to prevent Israeli jets getting within range to fire these particular standoff weapons. (15 could be enough to encircle Western Anatolia). Didn't Russia at one point have 56 S-400 batteries - so 13 Siper Block 2 batteries is not unrealistic, Turkey just needs to buy time to manufacture them.

Right now Turkey can outmatch Israel on land and at sea, but not in the air or in terms of nuclear arsenal. Imagine Israel struck Istanbul and Turkey retaliated successfully with a naval barrage - the extremists in charge of Israel could then destroy what is left of Hamas in Istanbul with a nuclear weapon as a "warning" against further Turkish retaliations. If Turkey then took the Golan Heights to show what it thinks of Israeli threats, Israel could fire ten more nuclear weapons at other Turkish cities as a second "warning" - there is only one way that ends even if Turks fought as tenaciously as the Japanese. That is why I would want Pakistan as involved as possible, for example if they could send HQ-9B batteries to Nakchavan, Bara Khware (Iraq), and north of Mosul - as long as Azerbaijan/Iraq agree.