? please do explain. Or in other words, which HQ do you think commands e.g. the Bundeswehr in case of a NATO alliance issue? Are you familiar with SHAPE - ACO, NAC, SACEUR and right down to CONOPS and NMR's?
Or in e.g. Putin's mindset; The entire European NATO (incl. Canada) is a payed for mercenary unit under US command.
The only common thing NATO countries share is the military command and control system, military planning included. The risks are evaluated, necessary capabilities estimated, and then there will be a discussion between NATO member leaders about who does what. When Estonia joined NATO, we had little to offer to strengthen the capabilities of this alliance, but there was a lack of maritime mine countermeasures. We still have a lot of those since WWI and WWII, so we bought two wooden hull ships relatively cheap, equipped them with all necessary bits and pieces, and send them to the service under NATO HQ. Notice, that the crew members are still Estonian military servicemen, commanded by Estonian officers, ships are operated by Estonian taxpayer's money etc. The difference is that their supreme commander during the mission is not the Estonian President as written in our constitution, but NATO HQ top officer.
Why do we do this? Because one cannot only take, it is good to give something valuable back to be taken seriously. So the question of whether Germans want to die for Estonia has already an answer before. 62 servicemen from Bundeswehr were killed during the Afghanistan war during 2001-2021, 53 from Italy, 90 from France, 9 from Estonia. If they were willing to die in Afghanistan, they will be willing to die for Estonia.
No not at all - just as in the 5000 years before - the treasure box was just a side effect, the war's were about controlling someone others lands (which include people, sheep's and therefore it's RESOURCES).
You think that Saddam and then the USA occupied/attacked Kuwait and Iraq because of their Swiss bank accounts?
What do you think this whole South-China-Sea issue is about?
Aside from NATO membership, the by far largest issue in regards to Ukraine is their wealth in human and natural resources (latter basically untapped) A free EU/NATO controlled Ukraine, could economically displace Russia in regards to gas, oil and foreign investment.
Well, give it time, it will come to you. No hurry, just relax...
I never said it would be easy, but it is possible to trust a former enemy. For example Germany and France after the end of WWII. Millions of lives were lost, how much bloodshed, how many broken families, and how much hatred was generated not just during this war but over the centuries before. So what they did do to overcome that?
They decided to trust each other and give a little sovereignty away in order to take shared control over the most valuable military resources: the steel and coal industries. European governments concluded that pooling coal and steel production would – in the words of the Declaration – make war between historic rivals France and Germany "not merely unthinkable, but materially impossible".
So the European Coal and Steel Community was born in 1951 and had six members originally: Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg. Six years later they had such a good experience that they decided to go on with this and signed
two more treaties about the economy and nuclear power. One year later they formed a European Parliamentary Assembly, the forerunner of European Parliament. 1960 European Free Trade Association (
EFTA) is created, to promote free trade and economic integration between certain countries not in the EEC: Austria, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. Estonia joined EU in 2004, 14 years after liberation and after being 2 years as a Candidate Member.
Why did we want to do so? We had this agrarian way of thinking, robbing and killing in the east; an industrial way of thinking and emerging digital opportunities in the west. The first means constant suffering and fighting for survival because of somebody else's vague reasons, second means freedom of making one's own choices, a surplus of resources and participation in whatever one can find interesting. I am not fully sure, but I think Ukrainians feel the same.
I understand this does not fit everyone. Controlled societies are easier for simple people: you open the news portal and everything you need is there: what happened, who is to blame, who is the enemy and who you should hate for your shitty life. Never the ruling class, usually it is the US or NATO or whatever. USSR had actually five enemies: spring, summer, autumn, winter and international imperialism. These things always managed to take the country's management by surprise. Nevertheless, if not think too much, life was stable and everyone had a job, a home, a purpose, and perhaps even a car.
Ok, sorry for being too chatty. The truth is out there, Jagdflieger! We believe in you!
