Up until a few months ago, I took the US obligation to the treaty as immutable, but we seem to have suddenly become "more fickle and selective".


There is a thing going around about NATO Article 5 which is some kind of logical fallacy that I don't know the name of that fallacy. Maybe something about confirmation bias?

Article 5 is not long. It starts out with "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" People stop reading right there.
Although the words "in Europe or North America" usually are replace with ellipsis (three dots). First error.

The major error is completely ignoring the last part of that SAME long sentence: "by taking ... such action as it deems necessary.


Musing on a hypothetical, if country R (with a 5,000,000 man army) attacked its nextdoor country F (with a 22,800 man army) what might country U (with a 450,000 man army) (which is 4,000 miles away) likely to deem necessary?

Excuse me, now I have to go change my underwear.

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.