Posted on 04/25/2022 5:34:42 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Everyone wishes to argue "Article 5" of the NATO treaty, which is the mutual-defense pact. You get attacked and we all get attacked.
Ok.
What does Article I say?
The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.
Shipping arms into an area where armed conflict is either occurring or threatening to occur, where the destination is NOT a NATO member and thus is NOT subject to NATO's mutual defense obligations is a clear violation of Article I. It is escalatory, it is a threat to use force or enables the actual use of force, and thus is a clear violation of Article I.
How about Article 8?
Each Party declares that none of the international engagements now in force between it and any other of the Parties or any third State is in conflict with the provisions of this Treaty, and undertakes not to enter into any international engagement in conflict with this Treaty.
Providing arms to a belligerent not a member of NATO violates this provision in that it can cause a mutual defense obligation to arise that would otherwise not. Therefore NATO members are obligated to stay out of non-member conflicts except with the unanimous consent of all members.
Intervening in a non-member's conflict, in short, by other than unanimous consent is a violation of the treaty.
How about Article 11?
This Treaty shall be ratified and its provisions carried out by the Parties in accordance with their respective constitutional processes. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited as soon as possible with the Government of the United States of America, which will notify all the other signatories of each deposit. The Treaty shall enter into force between the States which have ratified it as soon as the ratifications of the majority of the signatories, including the ratifications of Belgium, Canada, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States, have been deposited and shall come into effect with respect to other States on the date of the deposit of their ratifications. (3)
For the United States to engage in the elements of a proxy war, which it did at Maidan and now through the provision of arms without a declaration of said war by Congress is a direct violation of the US Constitution and thus a violation of the treaty.
Fraud vitiates all agreements.
Therefore no nation is obligated under any other provision of the NATO Treaty and each and every nation at this time that has in any way violated the above provisions, which includes the United States, is not entitled under its provisions to anything, including mutual defense under Article 5.
Agreements stand and fall on the integrity of the parties so-involved, and when repeated, blatant and outrageous violations of same, with intent and to disadvantage others take place that has a name in both law and common practice.
FRAUD.
Fraud vitiates all agreements, whether in handshake, contract, treaty or otherwise.
Go ahead and try to change my mind.
You are correct of course. But we far beyond the rule of law anymore. NATOs war against Serbia was not UN sanctioned, neither was Syria. The 2020 election violated a raft of laws. The CIA is forbidden from domestic spying. Biden and Hillary are eyeballs deep in bribery and are beyond prosecution. The January 6 protesters are being held in violation of all their rights, they may not have effective counsel, they are held uncharged for over a year, they are tortured in solitary.
The “extraordinary rendition” might be satisfying but it’s illegal as hell. Grabbing Russian gold and currency on deposit is illegal.
The list is endless and mostly aimed at us.
They are authoritarians who do as they please and use sophistry to “legalize” it.
The USSR was that way. They had a decent constitution. The problem is that is was not the law of the land in reality. It was a veneer to make Stalin’s dictatorship seem legitimate to the rest of the world. That is why that had those sham trials that resulted in “confessions”.
That is how our Constitution and international law is used today. As a hammer against us, and a shield for the authoritarians.
“If there was ever a time where he ever ‘hawked’ any programs of his or his daughter’s, it’s been literally years. I certainly can’t recall such within recent memory.”
Well, it’s been years since I saw or read any of his stuff, as he struck me as being too unhinged. This thread is the first thing I’ve seen of his in years. I actually assumed he had died.
I just looked him up on Wikipedia. It sounds like he’s still alive and currently selling his daughter’s artwork on his blog. It does mention one of the things that had turned me off: He said the Republican Party is only interested in “guns, gays, and God.” That’s exactly what the left say about conservatives, word for word.
But Ukraine is on your team? Vindman and Biden appreciate your support.
This was from just yesterday:
The U.S. and its allies say Beijing’s security pact with the Solomon Islands could threaten stability in the strategically important region.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/solomon-islands-china-security-pact-rcna25692
I get my news from people [The Duran] who actually share real information - not the regurgitated neocon Narrative.
I just got the update on this today. I fished up the NBCIA story because it communicated the gist of the globalists in DC soiling themselves about the Solomons.
“The United States told China today that their moves on the Solomon Islands are a “red line” - half a world away.”
Who exactly said that. I read earlier that was said by Australia. Who on behalf of the US said that? That Austin idiot?
You're going to learn a very hard lesson this winter when your heating bill doubles because of the games being played by the neocon scumbags who are puppeting the DiaperLoad.
The agreement I know of between the Tea Party and OWS was their aversion to banker bailouts.
Because when Republicans get into office, they never do anything meaningful about it. Have they downsized government? Have they decreased spending? Have they tried to get the crazy medical entitlements under control? Have they actually tried to minimize the unconstitutional powers of the executive branch and the regulatory regime?
He's never disguised his libertarian sympathies, and is disdainful of the Libertarian Party for similar reasons.
His overall opinion of both political parties — as two different flavors of the same Washington D.C. establishment — became rather solidified after the Supreme Court saved Obamacare by extra-judicially recognizing its mandated fee for non-compliance into a 'tax.'
I hate to bring more bad news, but those aren’t quotes.
Those are parantheses, or in your case a parenthesis.
Scott Morrison says China building a military base on Solomon Islands would be the "red line" for Australia and the United States, but did not say how Australia would respond if it happened.
Actually we said it too, yesterday.
Well, Australia is kinda next door. The closest point on the Russian border to Paris is about as far away as the Aussies are to the the Solomon islands. Or New York City to Omaha Nebraska.
TOTALLY right next door.
You’re going to learn a very hard lesson this winter when your heating bill doubles because of the games being played by the neocon scumbags who are puppeting the DiaperLoad.
_________________________________________________________
Exactly, people act like to be on “Team America” you have to support every self-righteous act of militarism/intervention that comes down the pike.
“He’s never disguised his libertarian sympathies, and is disdainful of the Libertarian Party for similar reasons.”
Which was my point. He is all over the place in his positions and beliefs, and embraces ideas one minute that he will condemn a minute later. He doesn’t believe in anything. He is what someone had once described as a reckless iconoclast; someone who tears things down just to do it, without conscious thought or care about consequences.
He has no principles other than he has no principles. I think he’s like Glenn Beck in many ways, and I stopped listening to Beck probably around the same time I last heard anything from Denninger.
Anyway, that’s my opinion. If you like or admire him, good for you.
This!
I do not support putins militarism and interventionism.
NATO bombed Serbia in 1999!!!!
That was the clintons’ NATO, which is what NATO still is now. That’s different from Truman’s NATO (which was also Eisenhower’s and Reagan’s NATO)—a defensive alliance!
I get free gas from a well on land I own. I’m good but thanks for your concern
Actually, if Pootpoot tried to invade poland, they wouldn't even need our help to kick their crappy army all the way back to moscow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.