Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 34

Thread: Iceland & Nato

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,617

    Default Iceland & Nato

    Thoughts? Should they be kicked to the curb?

  2. #2
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,496
    What has Iceland done to earn Breitbart's fury?
    Hope is the denial of reality

  3. #3
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,615
    Did they make warning noises about Russia?
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  4. #4
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,542
    They seem to have rescinded their astute and principled criticism of pineapples on pizza. So... yes.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  5. #5
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,607
    What!?

    Why on Earth should they? They are of major strategic importance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  6. #6
    Resiste et Mords! Steely Glint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    What has Iceland done to earn Breitbart's fury?
    They made one of those videos mocking Trump, but lots of European countries have done that, so I don't know why Iceland would be singled out for a Lewk Thread™.

    Lewk, what has Iceland done to annoy Steve Bannon recently?
    If you tolerate this, then your children will be next.

  7. #7
    I'll throw copyright stance and military funding into the pot too. I've seen complaints for both from circles lewk would be drawn to.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  8. #8
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,542
    It's not surprising. It's a small country that Lewk knows nothing about and it doesn't maintain a standing army. Lewk views Iceland the same way he views eg. the EPA.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  9. #9
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,496
    Next Lewk will call for giving Gibraltar and the Bosphorous Strait to Russia because Breitbart's Russian plant(s) said it would be a good idea.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  10. #10
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,768
    Well it wasn't nice of then to beat the Netherlands during the European cup qualifiers but kicking them out of nato seems extreme.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  11. #11
    Resiste et Mords! Steely Glint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,438
    I just wanted to say, Estonia and Latvia can go and fuck themselves as well.
    If you tolerate this, then your children will be next.

  12. #12
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,607
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    I'll throw copyright stance and military funding into the pot too. I've seen complaints for both from circles lewk would be drawn to.
    Except that Iceland is not committed to spending 2% of GDP on NATO funding. Rather uniquely as a small, strategically important island that has no standing army but has been used as a military base for NATO . . . Iceland brings something completely different to the alliance than simply spending 2% of a fisherman's wages on a pathetic and meaningless military.

    Iceland are founding members of NATO and it was founded with the agreement that Iceland would be under no obligation to form a standing army. Anyone looking at Iceland and wondering why they're not spending is just an ignoramus pure and simple.

    PS citizens from Iceland who want to serve in a standing army do so as part of Norway's army.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Anyone looking at Iceland and wondering why they're not spending is just an ignoramus pure and simple.
    Absolutely. Thats why I included it. Seems to be right up Lewk's alley.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Except that Iceland is not committed to spending 2% of GDP on NATO funding. Rather uniquely as a small, strategically important island that has no standing army but has been used as a military base for NATO . . . Iceland brings something completely different to the alliance than simply spending 2% of a fisherman's wages on a pathetic and meaningless military.

    Iceland are founding members of NATO and it was founded with the agreement that Iceland would be under no obligation to form a standing army. Anyone looking at Iceland and wondering why they're not spending is just an ignoramus pure and simple.

    PS citizens from Iceland who want to serve in a standing army do so as part of Norway's army.
    While I agree in principle (and certainly that is the historic reality with Iceland), I do think that the underlying logic is not as simple as you present. Iceland obviously should not try to duplicate a full military given their very small population base (~350k IIRC) and relatively small budget (~$4 or 5 billion?), but there's no reason they couldn't develop niche capabilities to contribute to the alliance. To an extent, they already do so - they have coastal patrol boats and some air defense systems, and they also have specific individuals with specific skill sets (e.g. EOD) who have been deployed on NATO deployments even they are not official servicemembers of the nonexistent Icelandic army.

    Iceland's opt out has more to do with the reality of Iceland when the alliance was first conceived, not the reality today (which has a GDP of some $63k per capita, largely based on high energy refining of silicon/aluminum and industrial scale fishing). Spending 2% of GDP to contribute to a niche ability is not an unreasonable ask nowadays. It would work out to around $300 million I believe, which is enough to do something useful. I think they currently spend about 10% of that amount on their coast guard et al.

    I have no interest in making a big issue out of this, of course - Iceland's role in the alliance is indeed unique from a historical perspective, and $300 million more or less in alliance defense spending isn't going to affect anything. Our political capital is much better spent on getting the big boys in NATO to (a) spend more, and (b) stop wasting money on stupid stuff that doesn't enhance their capabilities. But viewed from an objective current perspective, rather than the one from the early 1950s, suggests that it's not an unreasonable thought for Iceland to meet the 2% level in some way. Not to say that whatever ridiculous corner of the internet this current 'issue' of Lewk's came from appreciates this.

    (As an interesting aside, to emphasize the distinction between 1950 and 2017 Iceland - during the 1950s and continuing in a smaller degree into the 1960s, there was a secret ban on black US servicemembers from being stationed in Iceland as part of the Icelandic Defense Force. Different, indeed.)
    "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)

  15. #15
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13,542
    Hey Lewk, would you mind providing a link to whatever discussion it was that inspired this thread? Some background/context?
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  16. #16
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Hey Lewk, would you mind providing a link to whatever discussion it was that inspired this thread? Some background/context?
    I was gonna ask the same, but he has appeared to have forgotten this thread.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,617
    Was on youtube and Iceland made the list of 10 weakest armies.

  18. #18


    (you're such a predictable joke)
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 03-02-2017 at 01:41 AM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  19. #19
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,607
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Was on youtube and Iceland made the list of 10 weakest armies.
    No Shit Sherlock, it's an island of ~300k fishermen. The entire country has less population than Tampa in Florida.

    But Iceland wasn't a founding member of NATO for its non-existent military.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  20. #20
    ======== Timbuk2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Was on youtube and Iceland made the list of 10 weakest armies.
    oh christ

    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  21. #21
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,615
    It's not fair. We're paying so much money into NATO and Andorra is just getting a free ride, defended by us without having to spend a dime!
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  22. #22
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,607
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    It's not fair. We're paying so much money into NATO and Andorra is just getting a free ride, defended by us without having to spend a dime!
    Especially with the rising tensions in Agrabah. How is NATO going to bomb Agrabah if Andorra doesn't provide missiles?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  23. #23
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,615
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Especially with the rising tensions in Agrabah. How is NATO going to bomb Agrabah if Andorra doesn't provide missiles?
    Agrabah isn't real, it's fiction.

    Andorra is real. It's a sovereign state in the Pyrenees.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  24. #24
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,607
    I know that! I'm currently [co-incidentally] watching Aladdin with my daughter but I was referring to this shocking piece of ignorance by [actually more than just] Trump supporters: http://www.snopes.com/2015/12/18/agrabah-aladdin-republican-poll/

    I suspect a Venn Diagram of "bomb Agrabah" and "kick out Iceland" and other lunacy will find a lot of intersection.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,617
    Pay your 2% or pay 2% worth of your GDP to countries that do. Seems fair.

  26. #26
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    14,607
    Or you do something else as agreed since you helped found the organisation. Seems fair.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  27. #27
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,496
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Pay your 2% or pay 2% worth of your GDP to countries that do. Seems fair.
    Except the founding NATO treaty doesn't requires this.

    Allies whose current proportion of GDP spent on defence is below this level will:
    halt any decline in defence expenditure;
    aim to increase defence expenditure in real terms as GDP grows;
    aim to move towards the 2% guideline within a decade with a view to meeting their NATO Capability Targets and filling NATO’s capability shortfalls.

    ...the 2 percent pledge is not a legally binding commitment by NATO’s member states...
    http://carnegieeurope.eu/2015/09/02/...rope-pub-61139

    Just like the US promised to move towards nuclear disarmament in the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,617
    You are arguing it from a legalistic definition. I'm talking about foreign policy here. America can (though I doubt it should) simply say "Ya know NATO either you get your shit together and start making Iceland free loaders pay up or we'll leave." NATO is not an eternal agreement. America spent billions in the Cold War and Europe reaped the benefit. Why should we continue to pay for their defense? I'd like to be clear here - I think NATO is absolutely a great thing for America to be a part of however I don't think we should have pacifist freeloaders along for the ride. If they want mutual protection they should pay up.

  29. #29
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,496
    Yeah, it's not like America reaped the benefit of winning the Cold War.

    Incidentally, what do you want the Europeans to arm for? I thought Russia was a friend.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  30. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,617
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Yeah, it's not like America reaped the benefit of winning the Cold War.

    Incidentally, what do you want the Europeans to arm for? I thought Russia was a friend.
    Russia isn't our friend.

    I don't necessarily want Iceland to arm itself, it certainly wouldn't matter in any sort of war. I want them to pay up to nations who have been keeping the world safe. They can arm up to 2% GDP or they can pay 2% GDP. I suspect it will be easier to pay up. Alternative if they don't want to continue to free load they can depart from the alliance.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •