NATO & Invoking Article 5

Skip to comments.

Posted on 12/31/2024 7:36:46 AM PST by delta7

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 recognized 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." This article is complemented by Article 6, which stipulates: Article 6' "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?, on the territory of Turkey 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.

COMMENT: Martin,

I must admit, I have never read NATO article 5 until this morning while reading your post from yesterday. Looking at the actual wording, it seems to me that the whole article revolves around one little word, namely “it”. In this case, it refers to each NATO member nation in the case of an attack on any other member nation. To summarize: “…each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence…will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking…such action as IT deems necessary…” Thus, each member nation is neither bound nor sworn to join into any attack, but only bound to take whatever action it feels necessary. For example, a member nation could limit its support to humanitarian aid. Furthermore, if a member nation believes any NATO nation provoked the attack, or believed the attack was a false flag, then the member nation could “deem” that no action was necessary at all except to discuss terms of peace. You certainly have more experience in the law, but am I mistaken here? -DB

REPLY: That is very correct. Trump would not be bound to join WWIII. That is why they are scheming to try to delay his inauguration so they can invoke Article 5. Just for the record, the last time Article 5 was invoked was 911 to justify invading Iraq, which had nothing to do with 911 and never had weapons of mass destruction. It was Dick Cheney who schemed to invade Iraq, and then they intended to go right into Tehran.

It was Dick Cheney who crafted the intelligence, and to cover his ass, he invoked Article 5 to start his war, which was, I believe, to conquer the Middle East. The US pitched it in October 2001, and as this article quotes, they provided “clear and compelling” evidence. Everything presented to justify this quest to conquer the Middle East was a lie, as always. They are preparing the very same strategy to conquer Russia and divide the spoils of the wealthiest nation on earth in terms of natural resources.

They have lied to start every single war because they get to expand the government and line their pockets. They have no remorse for the people who die in these actions. These people who constantly push for war are Psychopaths and are classified as people with little or no conscience but can follow social conventions when it suits their needs. They are far more dangerous than a mere Sociopath who cannot feel empathy and remorse but possesses merely antisocial personality disorder (APD) rather than a deliberate and conniving Psychopath.

Here is Lyndsey Grachm for once telling the truth. This is not about democracy, and nobody cares if any Ukrainians remain. This is about strip-ming Russian assets. They will invoke Article 5, and the main country NATO is pushing to be the attack-dog is Poland.

1 posted on 12/31/2024 7:36:46 AM PST by delta7

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson