Think Defence
 
  • Delve into Think Defence
    • Tag Map
    • Links
    • Archives
    • About
    • Contact
  • Revolving Doors
  • Categories
    • Land, Sea and Air
    • Business and Politics
    • Thoughts on the Future
    • History, Humour and Culture
    • News, Images, Videos and Brochures
    • Think Defence Admin and Updates
  • Open Threads
    • Open Thread – Land, Sea and Air
    • Open Thread – Rumble in the CVF Jungle
    • Open Thread – Politics and Business
    • Open Thread – Humour and History
    • Open Thread – Anything Else
    • Open Thread (old)
    • Open Thread II (old)
  • Comments
  •  

Home » Posts tagged 'NATO'

  • Dear Bob

    • June 11, 2011
    • By Think Defence
    • Land, Sea and Air
    • 146 comments

    NATO has been a most successful military defence alliance but in seeking to move away from old fashioned territorial defence to defence at arms length its very clear mission has become blurred. Instead of a military alliance with a very clear purpose and significant support it has now become synonymous with dubious overseas military adventurism. In his parting shot the [...]

    continue reading »

     
     
  • The NATO Comfy Seats

    • February 8, 2011
    • By Think Defence
    • Business and Politics
    • 3 comments

    In the news today is the UK’s £105m contribution to the £841 million new NATO building in Brussels. John Glen, the Conservative MP for Salisbury and a member of the House of Commons defence select committee, expressed “frustration” at the spending of hundreds of millions of pounds on a building while British armed forces faced severe reductions. “I find it [...]

    continue reading »

     
     
  • A French Affair

    • November 1, 2010
    • By Think Defence
    • Land, Sea and Air
    • 27 comments

    For several years there has been a slow and steady drift into greater collaboration with European allies in matters of defence. Collaboration then becomes resource sharing, then integration and before you know it we will have slid into a state of affairs that leaves us unable to deploy military capabilities alone. The carriers are an obvious case in point. Since [...]

    continue reading »

     
     
  • Sharing with the French

    • July 17, 2010
    • By Think Defence
    • Land, Sea and Air
    • 37 comments

    In principle, I think sharing carefully selected defence capabilities with the French makes sense. The French forces are extremely professional and despite the unfair characterisation of them in various UK and US quarters, do get involved in international operations. Beyond the banter and jokes about Wellington and Roast Beef, at a tactical and operational level, relations are very good and [...]

    continue reading »

     
     
  • NATO 2020 – Assured Security; Dynamic Engagement

    • May 17, 2010
    • By Think Defence
    • Land, Sea and Air
    • 2 comments

    NATO have just published a new Strategic Concept, the first for a over decade. With a commitment to the same core values of collective defence but a recommendation to improve missile defence and cyber capabilities it makes an interesting read. Where do they get the names of these reports though? Download from here

    continue reading »

     
     
  • Weight Pulling – A Response

    • December 12, 2009
    • By Mark Nixon
    • Land, Sea and Air
    • 10 comments

    Another contributor to our little blog, this time ripping one of my previous posts to pieces, the bloody cheek! This is a riposte to my post about Afghanistan from Mark Nixon I will drop my response (along with the dummy) in comments. On December 9th, ADMIN posted Afghanistan, Who is Pulling Their Weight and concluded his piece with: “It is simply too [...]

    continue reading »

     
     
  • Afghanistan, Who is Pulling Their Weight

    • December 9, 2009
    • By Think Defence
    • Land, Sea and Air
    • 15 comments

    There is a widely help opinion that some NATO nations are not pulling their weight in Afghanistan. NATO is a political and military alliance, therefore it should act as a collective if one nations security is threatened. Article V of the NATO charter states; The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or [...]

    continue reading »

     
     
 

 

Recent Posts

  • Vital Defence Equipment
  • Reasons for Rafale
  • A Think Defence Piece About Think Defence
  • Parliamentary Answers – to 8th February 2012
  • Select Committee – Operations in Libya
  • Magic Bullets
  • It Was Different in My Day
  • Nothing New Under the Sun
  • The Post Afghanistan Vehicle Lottery
  • UK Military Bridging – Look Back Look Forward
  • UK Military Bridging – Equipment (Trackway)
  • UK Military Bridging – Equipment (Air Portable Bridges)
  • UK Military Bridging – Equipment (BR90 and REBS)
  • Industrial and Technology Matters
  • Consultants on Five Grand a Day at the MoD
 

Advert

 

Search Think Defence

 

Recent Comments

  • martin on The Post Afghanistan Vehicle Lottery500 million is a hell of allot of money when not actually getting any vehicles. We can talk about 15%
  • wf on A Think Defence Piece About Think Defence@jed: Last time I was subscribed it had a scrollback of 20 posts. Very easy to burst over that, on
  • jed on A Think Defence Piece About Think DefenceWF I already subscribe to an RSS feed for all comments! Just need to hunt around to find it I
  • Gareth Jones on Magic BulletsSome interesting figures in the link I posted above. "Today 45% of the worlds population live in cities. 470-85% are
  • wf on A Think Defence Piece About Think DefenceRSS feed for comments. Make it for all comments, and have a 200 comment buffer: we all mix between threads
  • wf on Reasons for RafaleRe the Mirage 2000, it's noticeable that both Taiwan and the UAE are trying to get rid of their 2000-5's,
  • Ant on A Think Defence Piece About Think DefenceShort wishlist: 1) Edit function for those "oh bolloks" moments. 2) Comment box larger and wider so you can see
  • Brian Black on The Post Afghanistan Vehicle LotteryBob, you've asked that we compare the half billion cost of the ASCOD-SV development contract with other AFV programmes, notably
 

Upcoming Posts

  • Mini Missiles and Guided Bombs
  • A Soft Maritime Underbelly
  • Winding Down the Air War in Afghanistan
  • Leafblowers, Talisman and Old Ideas
  • The Future of the British Army – Fuel and Power
  • Another Look at Pluto
  • San Carlos FOB and Black Buck What Ifs
  • Throw it off the ramp
  • Being Serious About Piracy
  • Another Look at Recce

Subscribe to Think Defence Don't miss it - Subscribe by RSS.

 
 
 
  • Delve into Think Defence
  • Revolving Doors
  • Categories
  • Open Threads
  • Comments
  •  

WPZOOMDesigned by

Copyright © 2012 Think Defence. All rights reserved.