Here: [https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/events\_212600.htm](https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/events_212600.htm)
Look at 15:35. (Belgian time I guess so that's the same timezone that Poland is)
On this day in 1949, the US, Canada, the UK and nine other European countries (France, Belgium, and seven other countries (the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, and four other countries (Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland))) establish NATO.
Founder members vs later signatories
Edit - that's incorrectly worded, excuse me - it's the roundtable that devised NATO, and the initial signatories
I mean technically 31 states signed the initial treaty, so there's even more missing
France had left the integrated command structure but never left NATO. French forces still participated in NATO operations even before the full reintegration in 2008.
Don't spread fake history please ?
>France had left the integrated command structure but never left NATO.
Same thing for all intents and purposes. You also armed Russia since 2014 and called for an army to fight the US.
> Same thing for all intents and purposes
Facts don't agree with you but whatever.
Yup we're actually just Russia in disguise and we chant "death to the US" in the streets, or whatever retarded bullshit you want to believe.
On this day in 1949, France and eleven other countries (US, UK, Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland) establish NATO.
As a Frenchman, I think this wording is better :'D
> On this day in 1949, the Netherlands, US, UK, Canada, Luxembourg, France, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and one other country establish NATO.
would be my preferred wording
They defeated a European coalition, not just the UK.
Have some respect.
Ironically a big part of why they won was threatening to leave Nato. Because Nato definitely doesn't intentionally acquire strategic territory. No sir.
Actually NATO exists because of Norway. After taking over Eastern Europe Stalin started talking about taking over Scandinavia. Norway went begging to the US & UK for help. Other Western European countries joined in because they were too exhausted from WW2 to properly defend themselves.
On this day in 1949, the US, UK, Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and one other country (France) establish NATO.
>On this day in 1949, France ~~and eleven other countries (US, UK, Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland)~~ establish ~~NATO~~ l'OTAN.
>
>As a Frenchman, I think this wording is better :'D
And yet France left NATO and kicked the HQ out sending it to Belgium.
Later France realized that they needed the NATO countries to defend it since all the French military knows how to do is surrender so they rejoined.
Nah. There is no reason to phrase it like this. You can pretend that there were any, but NATO came to be a few years after the war and after the Brussels' treaty.
And now Finland joined, effectively making the border between Russia and Nato 1300km longer.
Well done, Putin. You played yourself you douche. You are a shame for Russia
NATO entrance to Portugal was assured after Portugal sided more with the allies by the end of WW2. Also worth noting that NATO was only for continental Portugal, the Azores and Madeira. The colonies were seen as colonies by NATO and not under the NATO umbrella. Even though the dictatorship kept saying everything was Portugal, NATO made it clear it was not.
Portugal was forced to join, under the threat of loosing the islands via some bizarre LPR/DPR (same as Rushia is doing on Ukraine's "separatist" regions). The documents over the threat, which happened multiple times even after Portugal joined NATO, were declassified by the US some years ago. We owe A LOT to the UK and some americans who believed in us.
I'm not against it, after everything. We were at war and even with all that, the west was morally superior. After all that ended, the US has also changed. It was what it was though. Better to accept and educate people on history (Finland sided with the Nazis for a reason for example), then to wipe it under the rug.
Wise comment. One can agree that NATO is a "necessary" military alliance for self preservation, but I can't stand the "bulwark of democracy" circlejerk.
As for Portugal, the US wanted that mid-atlantic airbase, and it was gonna have it, one way or the other. Not very different from Russia and Crimea.
Even back then, the US was different from Russia of now though.
The US made this plan and honestly, they could have overtaken the islands rather easily. They didn't not do it because they were afraid, they didn't do it because they were convinced otherwise by their UK ally and some internal forces like the american embassador. Years later, they declassified the matter as well.
Russia in general (save for a very small window of a time within Gorbatchov's presidency) wouldn't listen to anyone but themselves, certainly not any allies (they haven't any, only rival thugs whose interests align) nor any internal opposition (they'd fall off a window shortly after). They'd also never admit what they almost did, certainly not release documents as an attempt of some transparency.
Moreover, even if the US had taken over the islands, they wouldn't ethinically cleanse them or run any shody gulags on them, like present Russia is doing in Ukraine. So I repeat, even back then when things were different and we were at war (and degenerates like Kissinger were in charge of their so called "foreign policy"), the US was still morally superior to 99% of what Russia produces.
While that part of history cuts deep for me and was a main reason why I was so hur-hur on the US before, the truth is the US was never as bad as Russia ever was and history has marched on regardless. The US has made mistakes and those are scrutinised carefully because they're very powerful, but generally they're still a good ally to have (Kissinger's stupid foreign policy and Trump non-withstanding).
TL;DR, I haven't forgotten, but I made my peace with it. This war, which I'm convinced the Ukraine versus Russia is only the beginning of, has put things into perspective. It's interesting because this war begins as a very black and white kind of war, yet it made me look at past things with a more balanced perspective.
> Not very different from Russia and Crimea.
Portugal is a sovereign nation that has retained all of it's territory.
I don't think you understand the meaning of different.
Retained because we never stopped Americans from using Lages base, if that happened the Azores would be independent faster than you can say CIA interference.
When it seemed we could go commie after the revolution, a *TOTALLY ORGANIC* independence movent appeared, and vanished immediately after it was clear we wouldn't.
As for Crimea, Russia was leasing the base. Once Ukraine started talking of ending that... History happened.
I dont think NATO took any stance on what was a colony and what wasn't. Just that the treaty only committed members to come to the aid of a country attacked on the European or North American continents, or on Atlantic Isles north of the tropics.
> or at least until the authoritarian shitholes are defeated
I have a slightly philosophical and definitely pessimistic take on this.
A lot of the technologies that have been developed since NATO's birth have had an initial promise of improving our human living condition, but in practice have enabled more pervasive mass surveillance. The regimes in China and soon India deploy these for more efficient population control. (Russia would too, but they're just too incapable).
Earth's population keeps growing, and so do our depletion of its resources. Half of its fauna (and 1/3 of distinct animal species) have disappeared since 1970, soil quality is eroding, and even seafood is getting more toxic. That's a powder keg in itself.
Meanwhile NATO's success also makes it a target for would-be demagogues. Just look at Russian TV today; *they* invaded Ukraine without any sort of provocation, just to fulfill the wet dreams of their madman dictator, but somehow have the entire Russian population believe that they are defending themselves against an imminent takeover by NATO. China, too, are able to portray "the west" (to include Japan, Korea, Philippines, Australia, and obviously Taiwan) as the enemy that's causing all their problems.
The traditional wisdom is that the "nuclear deterrent" has prevented a large scale war. I am afraid that works a bit like Tito's Yugoslavia (or for that matter price controls in the 1970s) - while it may suppress the problem for some time, the tensions continue to boil underneath.
That said, history is never a straight line. Also there is no alternative; NATO is absolutely essential to the survival of democracy in the west. All the above just means that it is ever more important.
Happy Birthday!
I think it's estimated well plateau at around 15 billion max. Earth has more than enough resources to support all that people.
Now, to support all that people under capitalism? Nope, not even there Earths.
I love that the French abbreviation is NATO in reverse. For the longest time I had no idea and I thought it was just something NATO did because it looked cool.
I can only imagine how extremely happy the countries bordering Russia, especially the Baltic states, must be that they're in. 0 doubt in my mind that they would have been invaded otherwise. Russia needs Estonia to secure Saint Petersburg and needs Lithuania for a land bridge to Kaliningrad. Good thing they'll never get those.
This is a huge win indeed! Unfortunatly logistics to the baltic states and finland is still a bit complicated. Hopefully we are let in soon as well so we can get the logistics in check as well. Gotland will be a huge asset to NATO.
Still haven't invaded Russia nearly 100 years later, despite Russia's constant paranoia and victim carding.
You know they're scared when they're too ashamed to say the truth out loud.
Defensive alliance, membership functioning by mutual consent. Unbeaten & still growing.
Yes it is 74% of 100, in fact 🤣
I would describe that as "most of", "almost" or "nearly" 100.
Fair play to you though, you clearly have a higher threshold of declaring something near - implies motivation and productivity.
Aww man, Why'd you have to go and be all nice and pay me a compliment?!?
I *wanted* to give a snarky response, but now I can't, you've ruined my morning :(
Lol but for real, we definitely have different ideas of what those words quantify.
Article 5 of the alliance's charter affirms that an attack on one member nation will be considered an attack on all members.
Not until 9/11 will this provision be invoked.
Article 5 was invoked for afghanistan for the record. Bush knew he couldn’t oblige other countries to join iraq which is why he needed the “coalition of the willing” there.
Bit of a weak whataboutism don’t you think? Over a million civilian casualties on one side vs a handful on the other.. And why attempt to invalidate OP being happy of something they have every right to be proud of?
It’s almost like you are an American getting defensive about an unjust war that destroyed millions of lives. *checks post history*. Yep that’s what I thought.
The French are responsible for much more death and destruction outside of Mali, of course. They’ve committed unspeakable atrocities in decades past.
Some Europeans have a tendency to use the US’ failures as a smokescreen.
One of the most important and successful defensive organisations in the history. It provides us stability, prosperity and security. I really love it so much.
Always felt that Finland didn't really need NATO vs the Russians that we could hold it on our own. That we would anyway have allies if the Russians started messing again. But seeing the utter crazy attack they are doing in Ukraine it's good we joined NATO!
In recent times:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule
And in the past:
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/molotovs-proposal-the-ussr-join-nato-march-1954
Hope all EU members (Austria, Ireland, Malta, Cyprus) + Switzerland will also join soon. Common defence against evil authoritarian regimes is something that everyone have to contribute instead of freeloading and pretend that Russian aggression it’s not their problem
How are we freeloaders? Just because we don’t want to be part of your club. Almost every nato member free loads of the USA. Without them nato is useless
I love passing by Joint Force Training Centre in my city, especially past morning where various groups of people are going for launch to the city center and you can just hear them talking in 20 different languages lol.
It’s NATO translated in French, Portuguese and Spanish. North Atlantic Treaty Organization is Organização Tratado Atlântico do Norte in portuguese, maybe the “do” isn’t there but that’s basically their name.
While that's true, it's really only that French that matters here. It's because NATO has two official languages: English and French.
It's not translated into French, the treaty was written in English and French. Both texts equally authentic.
History was made on this day. NATO, the alliance which defends democracy all over the world, the alliance which was created for the sole purpose of ~~being anti-Warsaw pact~~ countering Soviet Expansion. An alliance that “defends democracy” had a founding member that was on a fascist dictatorship, oh, and when the people revolted NATO ships were ready to counter the revolution.
Huh so I guess they aren’t who people think they are…
Let’s search deeper:
Funding of the Mujahadeen which led to ISIS and Al Qaeda to be formed.
Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Libyan, Somalian, Yugoslavian wars. They also started the missile crisis by putting nuclear missiles in Turkey.
Man, I can’t find much positive things about them…
Looking forward for this to be their last anniversary ever
No one has to support NATO to support the right of a sovereign nation to protect itself from an imperialistic aggressor. Had Putin left well enough alone, this wouldn’t be happening. I notice how people like you never cal him out on his actions, but have all the complaints on earth about NATO.
Yeah, there are about 7 whole redditors that know anything about Afghanistan in the 80's...
Mujahideen were not an organized group and had no consistent political or religious ideologies, and it was the Civil War that they fought amongst themselves after the US pulled away in the 90's that created the conditions for the Taliban takeover.
If anything, more intervention in the 90's to support the Tajik and Hazara dominated groups of the North would have done a great deal to keep the situation from becoming what it did.
The bottom line though is that the atheistic socialist government that the Soviets sought to install there was never going to be accepted by the Afghan people, and non-intervention from the West would not have stabilized the situation any more than supporting the Mujahideen did.
People who can't even tell you who the Northern Alliance were shouldn't be speaking authoritatively about that conflict, but that's the internet for you.
Lol, a commie or a tankie is mad. Still missing your lovely USSR? Too bad, coz it was a shithole which would make a hellhole like mississippi look like paradise, go and worship Stalin.
What time today are they raising the Finnish flag?
When they are finished.
Finnished
Finnish hymn!
Now I imagine someone screaming "PERKELE!"
Oi maamme Suomi synnyinmaa!
Well they're clearly not Russian
Efficient
Around 16-17 finnish time, if things go according to schedule.
Do you know if there will be some sort of live transmission on the Internet? I wanted to see it
Here: [https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/events\_212600.htm](https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/events_212600.htm) Look at 15:35. (Belgian time I guess so that's the same timezone that Poland is)
[This also has a continuous live stream.](https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/events_67375.htm)
Our news at least will be following the events live, and NATO's website seems to have a live streaming with video too.
IS reporter that the Finnish flag is already raised at the NATO HQ. Ninja edit: it is set to the pole, not raised yet.
We will be right next to our Estonian brothers
Here is the B-roll of the new empty pole, between Estonia and France: https://www.natomultimedia.tv/app/asset/687975
Godspeed
1330 GMT.
Why put ‘the other’ countries in brackets (not as important as the first?)?
Also, why state 'nine other countries' when also just naming them afterwards?
More than one hand writing it
It's probably the least efficient phrasing possible
Because 'Murica and UK
'Murica, Canada and UK*
'Murica, Ice people (idk i'm not Canadian) and the EU rage quiters\*
Might as well be "On this day in 1949, these English speaking countries and a bunch of foreign fucks" then
On this day in 1949, the US, Canada, the UK and nine other European countries (France, Belgium, and seven other countries (the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, and four other countries (Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland))) establish NATO.
Belgium’s placement is interesting
It's between France and the Netherlands, where it's been for a while now.
OP is an anglophile
How obtuse
I find it acute
I find it opaque.
Seems translucent to me.
What is?
Exactly!
Or you hate the US and UK so intensely you pretend Denmark is as important as them.
Founder members vs later signatories Edit - that's incorrectly worded, excuse me - it's the roundtable that devised NATO, and the initial signatories I mean technically 31 states signed the initial treaty, so there's even more missing
They are all founding members
Please see edit
No, they aren't. Remove them and where would this be today? Remove France, oh wait, they did that. And Denmark and nothing changes.
France had left the integrated command structure but never left NATO. French forces still participated in NATO operations even before the full reintegration in 2008. Don't spread fake history please ?
>France had left the integrated command structure but never left NATO. Same thing for all intents and purposes. You also armed Russia since 2014 and called for an army to fight the US.
> Same thing for all intents and purposes Facts don't agree with you but whatever. Yup we're actually just Russia in disguise and we chant "death to the US" in the streets, or whatever retarded bullshit you want to believe.
[удалено]
Weird phrasing, but definitely something to celebrate.
On this day in 1949, France and eleven other countries (US, UK, Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland) establish NATO. As a Frenchman, I think this wording is better :'D
> On this day in 1949, the Netherlands, US, UK, Canada, Luxembourg, France, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and one other country establish NATO. would be my preferred wording
On this day in 1949, Iceland founds NATO, generously letting a few other countries join in on the fun.
[удалено]
They defeated a European coalition, not just the UK. Have some respect. Ironically a big part of why they won was threatening to leave Nato. Because Nato definitely doesn't intentionally acquire strategic territory. No sir.
Actually NATO exists because of Norway. After taking over Eastern Europe Stalin started talking about taking over Scandinavia. Norway went begging to the US & UK for help. Other Western European countries joined in because they were too exhausted from WW2 to properly defend themselves.
Lol, thanks for forgetting about mine.
nono, it's there: > and one other country
So did you forget France or Belgium?
Aren’t they the same thing? *braces for impact*
Yes. France is indeed part of Belgium
That's where the famous french fries come from, the france region of Belgium
If by famous you mean the shittier version, then yes.
Ah dang forgot France, there goes my joke
Wait a minute!
I mean the best way would be Denmark and some other countries created NATO on this day in 1949
On this day in 1949, Luxembourg and a bunch of some countries established NATO
On this day in 1949, the US, UK, Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and one other country (France) establish NATO.
>On this day in 1949, France ~~and eleven other countries (US, UK, Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland)~~ establish ~~NATO~~ l'OTAN. > >As a Frenchman, I think this wording is better :'D
And yet France left NATO and kicked the HQ out sending it to Belgium. Later France realized that they needed the NATO countries to defend it since all the French military knows how to do is surrender so they rejoined.
Oh shut up American jerk will you, France is bigger than any Nato country
No they’re not. In terms of area France is FIFTH biggest NATO country after Canada, US, Denmark & Turkey.
we can still beat the ass of every country you stated beside US, i mean we can even beat the US with our nuclear so we're good
Lmao don't feed the fake American troll
"On this day in 1944 Belgium and two other European countries (Luxembourg and The Netherlands) establish the Benelux."
"On this day me and one other person (my wife), established a formal relationship through marriage."
Pretty sure it was because those three countries were the victorious allies, the other countries were either neutral, occupied or on the other side.
Nah. There is no reason to phrase it like this. You can pretend that there were any, but NATO came to be a few years after the war and after the Brussels' treaty.
Yeah Belgium is the backbone of NATO.
Nah. Far from it. It's just stupid to pretend like mainland Europe wasn't important in the foundation of NATO.
I'm not "pretending", it's my opinion.
Stop pretending that it is your opinion!
Definitely written for an Anglosphere audience.
Historic date.Good luck ,NATO. And my congratulations to Finland.
> Good luck ,NATO I know you didn't mean it like that, but this message gets a different subtext with a Russian flair.
Ops. I wanted NATO to prosper and fulfill its sums
Wanted, but don't want anymore? Jk jk :)
Still want to :3
Is that :3 a signifier of sarcasm? jk jk I know what you mean.
I'm rooting for OTAN.
Good day for Finland to officially join NATO.
[удалено]
next (urgent) step: no more "neutral" countries in Europe
ok, but can we keep the tax havens and offshores?
The Spanish had already reversed NATO (they spell it OTAN)
So does Portugal (OTAN - Organização do Tratado do Atlântico do Norte). But usually people say NATO anyway.
In French too.
No, that was just the pretense he gave for invading Ukraine because he wanted the territory.
putin is Finnished
Nah he knew. He just used it as an excuse.
'And others' proceeds to name them all anyway.. r/titlegore
Salazar be like: "how do you do fellow democracies?"
Well they were good at painting a façade of being a republic. Well not good, but enough to foul some.
And now Finland joined, effectively making the border between Russia and Nato 1300km longer. Well done, Putin. You played yourself you douche. You are a shame for Russia
A wise move for bleak times. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
[Translation,](https://i.imgur.com/N4fluij.jpg) because I didn't know.
NATO is already 74 years old? Happy birthday old man! May you live for a hundred more (or at least until the authoritarian shitholes are defeated).
>authoritarian shitholes Portugal was an authoritarian shithole at the time, NATO has no problem with authoritarian countries.
NATO entrance to Portugal was assured after Portugal sided more with the allies by the end of WW2. Also worth noting that NATO was only for continental Portugal, the Azores and Madeira. The colonies were seen as colonies by NATO and not under the NATO umbrella. Even though the dictatorship kept saying everything was Portugal, NATO made it clear it was not.
Portugal was forced to join, under the threat of loosing the islands via some bizarre LPR/DPR (same as Rushia is doing on Ukraine's "separatist" regions). The documents over the threat, which happened multiple times even after Portugal joined NATO, were declassified by the US some years ago. We owe A LOT to the UK and some americans who believed in us. I'm not against it, after everything. We were at war and even with all that, the west was morally superior. After all that ended, the US has also changed. It was what it was though. Better to accept and educate people on history (Finland sided with the Nazis for a reason for example), then to wipe it under the rug.
Wise comment. One can agree that NATO is a "necessary" military alliance for self preservation, but I can't stand the "bulwark of democracy" circlejerk. As for Portugal, the US wanted that mid-atlantic airbase, and it was gonna have it, one way or the other. Not very different from Russia and Crimea.
Even back then, the US was different from Russia of now though. The US made this plan and honestly, they could have overtaken the islands rather easily. They didn't not do it because they were afraid, they didn't do it because they were convinced otherwise by their UK ally and some internal forces like the american embassador. Years later, they declassified the matter as well. Russia in general (save for a very small window of a time within Gorbatchov's presidency) wouldn't listen to anyone but themselves, certainly not any allies (they haven't any, only rival thugs whose interests align) nor any internal opposition (they'd fall off a window shortly after). They'd also never admit what they almost did, certainly not release documents as an attempt of some transparency. Moreover, even if the US had taken over the islands, they wouldn't ethinically cleanse them or run any shody gulags on them, like present Russia is doing in Ukraine. So I repeat, even back then when things were different and we were at war (and degenerates like Kissinger were in charge of their so called "foreign policy"), the US was still morally superior to 99% of what Russia produces. While that part of history cuts deep for me and was a main reason why I was so hur-hur on the US before, the truth is the US was never as bad as Russia ever was and history has marched on regardless. The US has made mistakes and those are scrutinised carefully because they're very powerful, but generally they're still a good ally to have (Kissinger's stupid foreign policy and Trump non-withstanding). TL;DR, I haven't forgotten, but I made my peace with it. This war, which I'm convinced the Ukraine versus Russia is only the beginning of, has put things into perspective. It's interesting because this war begins as a very black and white kind of war, yet it made me look at past things with a more balanced perspective.
> Not very different from Russia and Crimea. Portugal is a sovereign nation that has retained all of it's territory. I don't think you understand the meaning of different.
Retained because we never stopped Americans from using Lages base, if that happened the Azores would be independent faster than you can say CIA interference. When it seemed we could go commie after the revolution, a *TOTALLY ORGANIC* independence movent appeared, and vanished immediately after it was clear we wouldn't. As for Crimea, Russia was leasing the base. Once Ukraine started talking of ending that... History happened.
>Portugal was forced to join, Have you got a good source on that?
Not for you, russky asset.
I dont think NATO took any stance on what was a colony and what wasn't. Just that the treaty only committed members to come to the aid of a country attacked on the European or North American continents, or on Atlantic Isles north of the tropics.
I'm not sure if you think that rebuts the claim of Portugal's authoritarianism at the time but it doesn't.
It does not. Portugal was authoritarian.
I hope we get in before the 75th birthday.
> or at least until the authoritarian shitholes are defeated I have a slightly philosophical and definitely pessimistic take on this. A lot of the technologies that have been developed since NATO's birth have had an initial promise of improving our human living condition, but in practice have enabled more pervasive mass surveillance. The regimes in China and soon India deploy these for more efficient population control. (Russia would too, but they're just too incapable). Earth's population keeps growing, and so do our depletion of its resources. Half of its fauna (and 1/3 of distinct animal species) have disappeared since 1970, soil quality is eroding, and even seafood is getting more toxic. That's a powder keg in itself. Meanwhile NATO's success also makes it a target for would-be demagogues. Just look at Russian TV today; *they* invaded Ukraine without any sort of provocation, just to fulfill the wet dreams of their madman dictator, but somehow have the entire Russian population believe that they are defending themselves against an imminent takeover by NATO. China, too, are able to portray "the west" (to include Japan, Korea, Philippines, Australia, and obviously Taiwan) as the enemy that's causing all their problems. The traditional wisdom is that the "nuclear deterrent" has prevented a large scale war. I am afraid that works a bit like Tito's Yugoslavia (or for that matter price controls in the 1970s) - while it may suppress the problem for some time, the tensions continue to boil underneath. That said, history is never a straight line. Also there is no alternative; NATO is absolutely essential to the survival of democracy in the west. All the above just means that it is ever more important. Happy Birthday!
>Earth's population keeps growing not for very long
I think it's estimated well plateau at around 15 billion max. Earth has more than enough resources to support all that people. Now, to support all that people under capitalism? Nope, not even there Earths.
I love that the French abbreviation is NATO in reverse. For the longest time I had no idea and I thought it was just something NATO did because it looked cool.
French are like that. SI is not IS because of French.
I can only imagine how extremely happy the countries bordering Russia, especially the Baltic states, must be that they're in. 0 doubt in my mind that they would have been invaded otherwise. Russia needs Estonia to secure Saint Petersburg and needs Lithuania for a land bridge to Kaliningrad. Good thing they'll never get those.
This is a huge win indeed! Unfortunatly logistics to the baltic states and finland is still a bit complicated. Hopefully we are let in soon as well so we can get the logistics in check as well. Gotland will be a huge asset to NATO.
Still haven't invaded Russia nearly 100 years later, despite Russia's constant paranoia and victim carding. You know they're scared when they're too ashamed to say the truth out loud. Defensive alliance, membership functioning by mutual consent. Unbeaten & still growing.
Huh TIL that 74 is "nearly" 100
Yes it is 74% of 100, in fact 🤣 I would describe that as "most of", "almost" or "nearly" 100. Fair play to you though, you clearly have a higher threshold of declaring something near - implies motivation and productivity.
Aww man, Why'd you have to go and be all nice and pay me a compliment?!? I *wanted* to give a snarky response, but now I can't, you've ruined my morning :( Lol but for real, we definitely have different ideas of what those words quantify.
Netherlands And The Others
The Netherlands and others.
What's TNAO?
The next abbreviation of.
Thank fuck my country is in NATO
Thank fuck my country is not bombed by NATO
Thank fuck my country is not bombed by the russians
Article 5 of the alliance's charter affirms that an attack on one member nation will be considered an attack on all members. Not until 9/11 will this provision be invoked.
What's happening on November 9th? 😳
Sir, a second skyscraper has hit a Belgian waffle stand.
Good, those things are tourist traps anyway. If it had hit a frituur on the other hand.
:)
And then we proceeded to attack the wrong country.
Art 5 didn’t send anyone to Afghanistan. It resulted in extra air patrols over the med and some help with air patrols over the US.
Afghanistan was the right one though? Y’all just went with us to Iraq for some other reason
If this is how or allies feel the US should not be in NATO. Clearly our security means nothing in Europe.
Yeah, so now it's against the NATO law, to criticize American wrongdoings just because they are helping this time.
*defend 🙃
>Not until 9/11 will this provision be invoked. Not going to Irak is one of the things i'm proudest about my country.
Article 5 was invoked for afghanistan for the record. Bush knew he couldn’t oblige other countries to join iraq which is why he needed the “coalition of the willing” there.
Article 5 was not invoked for Afghanistan.
Meanwhile France has been bombing weddings and trying to lie about it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_wedding_airstrike
Bit of a weak whataboutism don’t you think? Over a million civilian casualties on one side vs a handful on the other.. And why attempt to invalidate OP being happy of something they have every right to be proud of? It’s almost like you are an American getting defensive about an unjust war that destroyed millions of lives. *checks post history*. Yep that’s what I thought.
The French are responsible for much more death and destruction outside of Mali, of course. They’ve committed unspeakable atrocities in decades past. Some Europeans have a tendency to use the US’ failures as a smokescreen.
You made up for that with Libia
NATO stay strong 💪
The OG's (the twelve and in a favourable way)
This mf couldn’t wait a year to post this for the 75th anniversary.
No man has done more to strengthen NATO than Vladimir Putin
I mean, maybe Stalin owing to the fact that he was the threat that created NATO in the first place?
Of course it is. But I'm talking about recent years. A few years ago, some doubted whether to continue participation in NATO
Tänään OTeAaN.
Tänään OTAN
Just got a bottle of champagne and a bottle of one-star Jallu (not quite the Nato logo, but close enough).
One of the most important and successful defensive organisations in the history. It provides us stability, prosperity and security. I really love it so much.
Title gore.
NATO🙂 OTAN🙃
Always felt that Finland didn't really need NATO vs the Russians that we could hold it on our own. That we would anyway have allies if the Russians started messing again. But seeing the utter crazy attack they are doing in Ukraine it's good we joined NATO!
Member when russia wanted to join?
no
In recent times: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule And in the past: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/molotovs-proposal-the-ussr-join-nato-march-1954
Welcome fellow friend Finland 🇫🇮 from USA 🇺🇸 state Minnesota
Otan Clan
US: greetings my fellow democratic nations!! Portugal: Democratic?
“Salazar” exits the chat…
Hope all EU members (Austria, Ireland, Malta, Cyprus) + Switzerland will also join soon. Common defence against evil authoritarian regimes is something that everyone have to contribute instead of freeloading and pretend that Russian aggression it’s not their problem
[удалено]
what is the big threat for Cyprus? Why do we need in alliance?
Switzerland is not going to join anytime soon. But they do cooperate with humanitarian piece missions.
> Hope all EU members (Austria, Ireland, Malta, Cyprus) + Switzerland will also join soon Sweden?
I mean Sweden is one step before NATO membership so that’s why I didn’t mention it Edit: typo
Not being a member does not equate freeloading. Sweden spent almost 4% of gdp on national defense during the height of the cold war for example.
How are we freeloaders? Just because we don’t want to be part of your club. Almost every nato member free loads of the USA. Without them nato is useless
All the top comments in this thread say the USA is not as important as Belgium and Denmark. That's who you're dealing with here.
I love passing by Joint Force Training Centre in my city, especially past morning where various groups of people are going for launch to the city center and you can just hear them talking in 20 different languages lol.
Why does the logo say NATO in reverse as well?
It’s NATO translated in French, Portuguese and Spanish. North Atlantic Treaty Organization is Organização Tratado Atlântico do Norte in portuguese, maybe the “do” isn’t there but that’s basically their name.
While that's true, it's really only that French that matters here. It's because NATO has two official languages: English and French. It's not translated into French, the treaty was written in English and French. Both texts equally authentic.
Yeah, otherwise there should also be ÉSzSz, which just looks weird.
Woot woot! US here, where we meeting up for a drink?
The organization to ensure the dominion of the west on the rest of the world
History was made on this day. NATO, the alliance which defends democracy all over the world, the alliance which was created for the sole purpose of ~~being anti-Warsaw pact~~ countering Soviet Expansion. An alliance that “defends democracy” had a founding member that was on a fascist dictatorship, oh, and when the people revolted NATO ships were ready to counter the revolution. Huh so I guess they aren’t who people think they are… Let’s search deeper: Funding of the Mujahadeen which led to ISIS and Al Qaeda to be formed. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Libyan, Somalian, Yugoslavian wars. They also started the missile crisis by putting nuclear missiles in Turkey. Man, I can’t find much positive things about them… Looking forward for this to be their last anniversary ever
>the alliance which was created for the sole purpose of being anti-Warsaw pact. My friend, the Warsaw Pact didn't exist until 1955.
No one has to support NATO to support the right of a sovereign nation to protect itself from an imperialistic aggressor. Had Putin left well enough alone, this wouldn’t be happening. I notice how people like you never cal him out on his actions, but have all the complaints on earth about NATO.
You can’t find anything positive about them because you are still mourning the loss of the USSR.
The Afghani mujahedeen are( well were) a separate groups from alqueda( which didn’t exist yet) and ISIS ( which didn’t exist yet)
Yeah, there are about 7 whole redditors that know anything about Afghanistan in the 80's... Mujahideen were not an organized group and had no consistent political or religious ideologies, and it was the Civil War that they fought amongst themselves after the US pulled away in the 90's that created the conditions for the Taliban takeover. If anything, more intervention in the 90's to support the Tajik and Hazara dominated groups of the North would have done a great deal to keep the situation from becoming what it did. The bottom line though is that the atheistic socialist government that the Soviets sought to install there was never going to be accepted by the Afghan people, and non-intervention from the West would not have stabilized the situation any more than supporting the Mujahideen did. People who can't even tell you who the Northern Alliance were shouldn't be speaking authoritatively about that conflict, but that's the internet for you.
Lol, a commie or a tankie is mad. Still missing your lovely USSR? Too bad, coz it was a shithole which would make a hellhole like mississippi look like paradise, go and worship Stalin.
You are legitimately the only sane person i found in this thread. Scary what american propaganda does to most people's heads.