It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
Given how the NATO charter is set up I am curious what's going to happen if coalition aircraft are attacked by Russian forces.
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 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.
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 .
Article 6 (1)
For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
•on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France (2), on the territory of or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
•on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
originally posted by: markosity1973
a reply to: FormOfTheLord
I worry about Syria. Assad seems like a reasonable man, he knows there is big trouble in his country and he is doing his best to stop it. One thing I will say is that I am really not sure that he is not lying about the barrel bombs though. But he is right in that this is not a conventional war between two armies out in a battlefield.
originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: Xcathdra
I agree, it wouldn't be a clear Article V violation unless Russia attacked Turkey or its forces in Turkish territory.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: spy66
Georgia was not a NATO member. Ukraine is not a NATO member.
Forgetting those facts while acting cocky are dangerous. If an incident occurs inside turkey, as has happened in the past, it becomes a NATO issue at that point.
Russia has stated no ground troops in Syria. Until that happens Russia is behind the curve consider the coalition has more combat resources deployed than Russia does.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: spy66
Considering NATO is a defensive alliance and its charter and self defense posture is based solely on self defense if Russia were to intentionally attack anything inside Turkey it would meet the charter requirements should Turkey choose to invoke article V.
Russia would be playing with complete destruction if it thinks it can attack a NATO country and not get a response from NATO.