If NATO is an alliance between America and the European Union, then why didn't?

Question

everyone go to war with Iraq when they attacked America?

Answer 1

I missed that......When exactly did Iraq attack America?

Answer 2

Several NATO countries did send troops to both Iraq and Afghanistan. However from the beginning the war was unpopular with some countries in the European Union. The honest truth is that NATO has largely outlived it's usefulness. It was originally designed as deterrent to Soviet aggression. The Soviet threat does not exist any longer and currently Europe is not facing any great threat. NATO has become a largely symbolic organization owing it's existence to an ideology which no longer exists. While I do support the war in Iraq, I also feel the need to point out that Iraq never attacked the United States. In the current conflict we are the aggressors without question.

Answer 3

Frankly, Iraq did not attack America. The reason for the war, in the beginning, was suspected violation of UN resolutions, forbiding Iraq from having WMDs. Then, after no WMDs were found, the reason shifted to freeing the Iraqi people from an abusive dictatorship.

As for NATO, it has nothing to do with the European Union. Granted, some of the nations within NATO are a part of the EU, but not all. Great Britain, a staunch ally of the US and member of NATO, went to war with the US against Iraq. A few other NATO members did as well, though in lesser capacity.

Answer 4

I hear the sound of a dead horse being beaten.

Bring up Clinton and you get lashed at, but it's OK to beat this horse over and over again?

Once again this is the War on Terror, not the war because Iraq attacked America. Iraq was/ is a threat the needed dealing with. I don't recall this much complaining about Afghanistan. If Iraq was over as quick as that, would people be complaining? Where were all the protesters at the beginning of the Iraq campaign? They were few and far...now everyone thinks the war is wrong because people won't stop hitting the dead horse.

Come up with your own ideas and try suggesting some solutions rather than jumping on the bandwagon. I don't mind anti-war statements, as long as they are original.

Answer 5

Because under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, none of the members are obligated to, or expected to, support and fight for/with another member unless that member is attacked first.

Iraq did not attack the US, therefore none of the members of NATO had any obligation of any sort to support our invasion and occupation.

Oh, and NATO is NOT an alliance between the US and the EU.

From Wikipedia:

The core purpose of NATO is established in Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty, which outlines the system of collective security:[4]
“ 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. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognised 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. ”

This article clearly limits the collective response to armed attacks against European (including the whole of Asian Turkey) and North American NATO territories. This explains why the article was not invoked, after Argentina attacked and occupied the Falkland islands (U.K.), an event which led to the Falklands War. Article V was invoked for the first and only time in the treaty's history on 12 September 2001, in response to the September 11, 2001 attacks that occurred in the United States the previous day.[5]

Note that "such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force" does not necessarily mean that other member states will respond with military action against the aggressor(s). Rather they are obliged to respond, but maintain the freedom to choose how they will respond. This differs from Article IV of the Treaty of Brussels (which founded the Western European Union) which clearly states that the response must include military action. It is however often assumed that NATO members will aid the attacked member militarily.

Answer 6

NATO replaced into created to counter the former Soviet Union, whose forces have been called the Warsaw %.. NATO's first Commander replaced into customary Eisenhower and Gen Clark a Democrat candidate in 2004 replaced right into a recent commander. Former Soviet Bloc international locations exceedingly those whose dominant language is Russian can no longer connect NATO quickly sufficient in spite of the certainty that the Ukraine needs club of course there is political problems stalling its induction. Please make no mistake that united states of america of almost 40 million has Russian because it dominant language. Now with France and Germany and Korea electing leaders who had a expert-American platform, it escapes me who Hilliary or Obama think of that the U. S. needs to repair kinfolk with, who cares.

Answer 7

Because the terrorists who attacked America were in Afghanistan, not Iraq.

Answer 8

Because the UN didnt back the war. It was/is a self serving unpopular war, and I am sure you mean when the US attack Iraq...Iraq has never attacked the US

Answer 9

I am a Political Scientist and will tell you only the straight facts and reality and not anything to do with political parties.

Europe meaning primary Western Eurperan nations originally in NATO and except for England have (1) No vision and one only has to look historically at why WWII and Naziism with Hitler were allowed to flourish when was obvious in the 1930's what was happening, and (2) France inparticular has a fool as a leader and the entire Eurpoean democracies are largely seeking power and financial monoplies in the Middle East. Also they are not American style republics of democracy but more socialististic as their failed economic policies indicate.

Answer 10

OK you are blond! I'll do this really slowly and put the important words in caps.

Iraq DID NOT ATTACK the US.

Iraqs only crime was selling its oil in EUROS (That is the currency of Europe).

Why would Europe want Iraq to sell its oil again in DOLLARS? (those green pieces of paper you call money).

Europe could see through the LIES!

I hope that is enough. I can't explain the complexities to a blond. I have posted them as answers to more sensible questions.