Upload logo
NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Share this page
NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Posted on Apr 4, 2019
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) pact signed
2.04K
29
9
15
15
0
On April 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) treaty was signed in Washington, D.C. From the article:
"North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) pact signed
The United States and 11 other nations establish the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a mutual defense pact aimed at containing possible Soviet aggression against Western Europe. NATO stood as the main U.S.-led military alliance against the Soviet Union throughout the duration of the Cold War.
Relations between the United States and the Soviet Union began to deteriorate rapidly in 1948. There were heated disagreements over the postwar status of Germany, with the Americans insisting on German recovery and eventual rearmament and the Soviets steadfastly opposing such actions. In June 1948, the Soviets blocked all ground travel to the American occupation zone in West Berlin, and only a massive U.S. airlift of food and other necessities sustained the population of the zone until the Soviets relented and lifted the blockade in May 1949. In January 1949, President Harry S. Truman warned in his State of the Union Address that the forces of democracy and communism were locked in a dangerous struggle, and he called for a defensive alliance of nations in the North Atlantic—U.S military in Korea.NATO was the result. In April 1949, representatives from Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Great Britain, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Portugal joined the United States in signing the NATO agreement. The signatories agreed, “An armed attack against one or more of them… shall be considered an attack against them all.” President Truman welcomed the organization as “a shield against aggression.”
Not all Americans embraced NATO. Isolationists such as Senator Robert A. Taft declared that NATO was “not a peace program; it is a war program.” Most, however, saw the organization as a necessary response to the communist threat. The U. S. Senate ratified the treaty by a wide margin in June 1949. During the next few years, Greece, Turkey, and West Germany also joined. The Soviet Union condemned NATO as a warmongering alliance and responded by setting up the Warsaw Pact (a military alliance between the Soviet Union and its Eastern Europe satellites) in 1955.
NATO lasted throughout the course of the Cold War, and continues to play an important role in post-Cold War Europe. In recent years, for example, NATO forces were active in trying to bring an end to the civil war in Bosnia."
"North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) pact signed
The United States and 11 other nations establish the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a mutual defense pact aimed at containing possible Soviet aggression against Western Europe. NATO stood as the main U.S.-led military alliance against the Soviet Union throughout the duration of the Cold War.
Relations between the United States and the Soviet Union began to deteriorate rapidly in 1948. There were heated disagreements over the postwar status of Germany, with the Americans insisting on German recovery and eventual rearmament and the Soviets steadfastly opposing such actions. In June 1948, the Soviets blocked all ground travel to the American occupation zone in West Berlin, and only a massive U.S. airlift of food and other necessities sustained the population of the zone until the Soviets relented and lifted the blockade in May 1949. In January 1949, President Harry S. Truman warned in his State of the Union Address that the forces of democracy and communism were locked in a dangerous struggle, and he called for a defensive alliance of nations in the North Atlantic—U.S military in Korea.NATO was the result. In April 1949, representatives from Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Great Britain, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Portugal joined the United States in signing the NATO agreement. The signatories agreed, “An armed attack against one or more of them… shall be considered an attack against them all.” President Truman welcomed the organization as “a shield against aggression.”
Not all Americans embraced NATO. Isolationists such as Senator Robert A. Taft declared that NATO was “not a peace program; it is a war program.” Most, however, saw the organization as a necessary response to the communist threat. The U. S. Senate ratified the treaty by a wide margin in June 1949. During the next few years, Greece, Turkey, and West Germany also joined. The Soviet Union condemned NATO as a warmongering alliance and responded by setting up the Warsaw Pact (a military alliance between the Soviet Union and its Eastern Europe satellites) in 1955.
NATO lasted throughout the course of the Cold War, and continues to play an important role in post-Cold War Europe. In recent years, for example, NATO forces were active in trying to bring an end to the civil war in Bosnia."
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) pact signed
Posted from history.com
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 4
Posted 5 y ago
Some say it's a useless organization now? Let's see what happens
(5)
Comment
(0)
(0)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
5 y
The utility of NATO is unclear to me as there are an infinite number of variables. I will try to make a reasonable assessment using the Principle of War: Mass, Maneuver, Simplicity, Surprise, Security, Unity of Command, Objective, Offensive, Economy of force as the overarching way we will fight.
However we need to consider:
- Military capabilities, tactics, and doctrine of other nations.
- Compatibility of equipment, tactics, vehicles, aircraft, ships, and planes.
- Logistics for supplies, military movement, Ports of Entry, beachheads, and maintenance.
- Attrition during war, production capabilities, and flexibility to innovate.
- Deep thinking leaders like Eisenhower who developed the American campaign plan for Africa and Europe. Nimitz and Macarthur for the pacific campaign.
- Multi National training and exercises.
I am sure others can add to this list.
However we need to consider:
- Military capabilities, tactics, and doctrine of other nations.
- Compatibility of equipment, tactics, vehicles, aircraft, ships, and planes.
- Logistics for supplies, military movement, Ports of Entry, beachheads, and maintenance.
- Attrition during war, production capabilities, and flexibility to innovate.
- Deep thinking leaders like Eisenhower who developed the American campaign plan for Africa and Europe. Nimitz and Macarthur for the pacific campaign.
- Multi National training and exercises.
I am sure others can add to this list.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Posted 5 y ago
It would not surprise me if China tries to influence Europe by getting access to infrastructure and economies.
(1)
Comment
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
5 y
That's already happened/happening.
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/regional-integration/brief/belt-and-road-initiative
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/regional-integration/brief/belt-and-road-initiative
(1)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
5 y
MAJ (Join to see) - Thanks for the great picture. Add in the Philippines for giving sovereignty to the seas around her and Australia for a 99 year lease of the Port of Darwin. I totally find it repulsive for out "allied countries" to give in to the Belt and Road Initiative. To me they are Blue Falcons.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
5 y
Well, we're not in a state of "declared war" with China/PRC. "Allies" literally means you've signed a mutual defense treaty stating that if another country declares war on a nation-state, you agree that you're obligated by international law to come to the defense of your "Ally." That's it. You don't have to support jack squat short of declared war.
While I would almost be inclined to agree in general principle, countries act in their own self-interest. Hell, we are probably the single largest export market for Chinese goods. Would you support a 100% trade ban on products made in China? I think not. Prices would double overnight on a large section of consumer goods we currently get from PRC.
While I would almost be inclined to agree in general principle, countries act in their own self-interest. Hell, we are probably the single largest export market for Chinese goods. Would you support a 100% trade ban on products made in China? I think not. Prices would double overnight on a large section of consumer goods we currently get from PRC.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Read This Next