Dutch= F*** NATO, Afghanistan?

[NATO AIR]

Pres. Bush, PM Blair, Pres. Chirac and Chancellor Merkel MUST bring pressure upon the Dutch to follow through on their promise.

They are about to abandon Afghanistan and scuttle the entire NATO mission there, screwing over the people there and ruining hopes for peace and a bright future there.

I really, really am tempted to call for a fence to hold in the Dutch with their Muslim hordes within and let the Netherlands turn into Holland-stan.

What a pathetic, pathetic bunch of cowards.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0130/p08s02-comv.html
NATO can't blink in Afghanistan

The Monitor's View

Will the Dutch again decline to move Europe forward as a unified group of responsible nations? Last year, voters in the Netherlands rejected the European Union's proposed constitution. Now Dutch lawmakers may disrupt NATO plans to expand international forces which it leads in Afghanistan.
The lawmakers are concerned that if they approve sending 1,200 more Dutch troops to Afghanistan, their soldiers will face serious danger.

That's because the Dutch reinforcements, along with more British, Canadian, and other soldiers, would be deployed to the volatile south, where violence is common and the need for combat far more likely than in Kabul and other areas where NATO forces act more as peacekeepers. Like the Dutch, many Europeans fear being dragged into war.

Blocking the deployment, however, would be a huge blow to the integrity of the NATO military alliance, which still wrestles over mission and resources since it completed its job as the cold-war defender of the West. A Dutch denial could be read as a sign that NATO is unwilling to face an era of new threats that lie beyond Europe's borders and that could require sacrifice of life.

A Netherlands "no" would send a signal of weakness to terrorists who still operate along the Afghan/Pakistan border. And it would let down Afghans, who expect NATO to fulfill its commitment to provide security for rebuilding this struggling democracy beset by warlords, opium, and poverty. Also, Washington would surely be displeased. It's counting on the NATO-led expansion - an increase from 9,000 to about 15,000 troops - to allow a US drawdown in Afghanistan of 2,500 troops this year.

It's astounding, really, that the case for the NATO expansion has to be argued at all. The world can disagree on Iraq, but Afghanistan? The training ground for 9/11, where Taliban fighters still prowl? Afghans just elected their first parliament. Surely, securing their future - and Europe's - is worth the risk of being attacked. (It will still be the US's job to rout out terrorists.)

Step-by-halting-step, NATO is inching out of its defense-only cold-war mind-set, awakening to challenges outside its immediate geography. It has nearly 20,000 peacekeepers in the Balkans, and its presence in Afghanistan is a historic forward deployment. A tangible acknowledgment of its potential global security role is a rapid response force of 17,000. Set to be fully deployable in October, this Ferrari would roar anywhere in the world to handle evacuations, disasters, and counterterrorism.

But will there be the political will to use such a force? The Netherlands debate shows the difficulty of getting public backing for a beefier NATO. Unemployment and welfare costs keep European defense budgets flat or declining. So, too, does a general discomfort with military power.

Adjusting to the political and strategic sea change since the cold war isn't easy. In democracies, leaders can't get ahead of their publics - unless they bring them along through convincing argument. That's the challenge facing Europe's leaders today. If they fail, expect NATO's Ferrari to stay parked in the garage, right next to the stalled constitution, and expect European leadership to be eroded.

Hold up, maybe there's some hope after all.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-02/01/content_4124509.htm

 

[theim]

Oh who gives a crap if the Dutch pull out. Nothing they do can't be done by US soldiers or contractors. The terrorists already know Europe is a bunch of spineless cowards. NATO is dead, a relic of the Cold War, and useless. Europe is going down the garbage chute. I wonder what William of Orange would think of "Dutch lawmakers are concerned that if they send troops, they will be in serious danger." Maybe he's having a tea party in heaven with Admiral Nelson, consoling him over the fact that the British Navy in the Persinan Gulf has been so gutted by lefty peaceniks that their flagship is the American warship U.S.S. San Jacinto.

 

[Hobbit]

This really doesn't surprise me. The Dutch Army is unionized. If you put them in too much danger, they'll go on strike.

 

[theim]

Seriously, paying attention to news from Europe these days is like being forced to watch your parents grow old and senile. It's downright depressing.

 

[Said1]

The Dutch Army is unionized. .

I thought Harm was being rhetorical.

 

[theHawk]

That reminds me....

There are two kinds of people I can't stand in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures, and the Dutch. --Nigel Powers, Austin Powers:Goldmember

 

[Hobbit]

I thought Harm was being rhetorical.

No, the Dutch Army is really and truly unionized. They get extra pay for latrine duty and KP.

 

[NATO AIR]

Seriously, paying attention to news from Europe these days is like being forced to watch your parents grow old and senile. It's downright depressing.

At times. Though good news is finally happening in France and Germany. Too bad Britain is going down the tubes just as they're getting wise to the danger.

 

[taff]

Defence secretary John Reid announced on monday that Britain was deploying an extra 4,150 troops, mainly from the parachute regiment to the Helmond province by July.Bringing our total contingent up to 5,700.I think we are doing our fair share.

 

[Hobbit]

Defence secretary John Reid announced on monday that Britain was deploying an extra 4,150 troops, mainly from the parachute regiment to the Helmond province by July.Bringing our total contingent up to 5,700.I think we are doing our fair share.

I'm glad I'm hearing this from a Brit. Every time I hear the libs talk about how we went in alone, I get pissed on behalf of our allies, like the British, who have done so much, but whose contributions are largely ignored in favor of an image of the U.S. going in with no help.