It's just that nobody is voluntarily signing up for a war if they don't have to. Not sure if we'll see NATO sink to ignoring a real attack on a member followed by article 5 or maybe pressuring such a member not to invoke article 5, seems unlikely, but frankly humans are the same everywhere.

Ah, I'm not impartial, but it's actually good news for NATO that Ukraine is not getting accepted. It would get a member in which high-ranking officials can be sold and bought almost openly, with mass media culture similar to that of Russia, with still quite chauvinistic and uneducated population, similar to that of Russia.

And to a lesser extent it's good news for Ukraine that it's not getting accepted into an alliance which doesn't seem sufficiently agile to accommodate modern threats. In terms of technical cooperation with NATO countries they don't really need it, and in terms of actual military participation - ah, there's a long way from an obligation to an action.

[–] ProcurementCat@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not sure if we’ll see NATO sink to ignoring a real attack on a member followed by article 5 or maybe pressuring such a member not to invoke article 5, seems unlikely, but frankly humans are the same everywhere.

I've been asking myself the very same question ever since

Frankly, North Stream and the missile strike in Poland convinced me that NATO will do everything, even lying and cover ups, to prevent having to intervene in this war. Even though in the beginning, the US loudly proclaimed that the U.S. and its allies will “defend every inch” of the NATO territory and would respond even in the event of an accidental or unintentional strike by Russia.