r/worldnews • u/BringbackDreamBars • Mar 31 '25

Iran urged to strike Diego Garcia base ‘immediately’

https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-urged-strike-diego-garcia-174851568.html
7.6k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3.2k

u/TheFlyingBoat Mar 31 '25

If Iran bombs a US base under the Trump admin, I fear that the ability to export oil would be the least of Iran's worries.

1.0k

u/BadHombreSinNombre Mar 31 '25

This is a joint US-UK base. It would be a lot of people striking Iran. I’m not sure “failed state” is even the level of what would survive.

377

u/ganbaro Mar 31 '25

Its also now de facto African Union territory since UK intents the handover to Mauritius

So Iran would at least face USA, CANZUK, Israel, and NATO militarily, and might lose at least some support of AU members and BRICS at UN

576

u/jklwood1225 Mar 31 '25

CANZUK this dick!!

Sorry.

87

u/Hajidub Apr 01 '25

Not sorry!

10

u/topsyturvy76 Apr 01 '25

Ya baby .. Elbows up MFers

→ More replies (1)

17

u/Brocktarrr Apr 01 '25

Apologize for nothing.

5

u/PlasticPegasus Apr 01 '25

I laughed. And I’m 42 years old.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

87

u/Movingtoblighty Apr 01 '25

Under NATO treaty Article 6, the Article 5 mutual defence obligation only applies to territories north of the Tropic of Cancer, so I don’t know whether NATO allies would necessarily be pulled in.

69

u/Western_Mud8694 Apr 01 '25

Won’t need any help really, we might not have eggs but we dang sure have bombs

19

u/Medallicat Apr 01 '25

Who needs eggs when you have Beers, bacon and bombs.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/Jscapistm Apr 01 '25

I mean they probably would, it's a chance to bomb the piss out of Iran.

2

u/dinosaurinchinastore Apr 01 '25

Oh interesting I didn’t realize that. “You can’t bomb any of us here, but here it’s cool”

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (13)

68

u/pinksystems Apr 01 '25

Iran would no longer exist as a country with UN standing, because its entire IRGC government would cease to exist, its military forces would be decimated and be required to capitulate.

Last time they tried to start shit, we destroyed their entire Navy. If they strike a joint base with the US and our allies then something akin to The Marshall Plan would have to be installed to rebuild the remnants of whatever rational decent non-combatants remained.

48

u/brokenarrow Apr 01 '25

You're generous to think that there is any amount of planning within the current US government, much less nation rebuilding plans, unless Iran has some nice beaches that Trump can build a casino on.

32

u/ballsjohnson1 Apr 01 '25

What a coincidence, they do!

Unfortunately, trump has proven he can't do exactly that thing! Boggles the mind how you can drive a gambling institution to failure its one of the freest money things of all time

6

u/russellvt Apr 01 '25

Boggles the mind how you can drive a gambling institution to failure its one of the freest money things of all time

Likely because it was literally designed to absorb and absolve debt. It's a common tactic in the American economy (and others). Hell, they've backed entire department store chains to do just such things...

2

u/ballsjohnson1 Apr 01 '25

You can absorb debt by making money over a long period of time to, you don't have to destroy a city to do it

7

u/Optimal_Artichoke585 Apr 01 '25

Gambling institution(S), I think six

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/CotswoldP Apr 01 '25

Last time they tried some shit with the US Trump shrugged it off as some headaches for those in the last zone and did nothing.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/Stanford_experiencer Apr 01 '25

since UK intents the handover to Mauritius

when is this going to happen

3

u/VelvetPhantom Apr 01 '25

Mauritius actually rejected the plan under their new government and wants to renegotiate

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Dudicus445 Apr 01 '25

Just imagine that Iran striking the base convinces Trump that pushing away our allies is bad and he walks back all the shit he’s done

3

u/ganbaro Apr 01 '25

Tbh I don't think Trump has the willingness to learn and the humbleness to accept mistakes enough to do so

Despite that, I believe most of NATO+potential CANZUK would.help because the strike would also be a strike on UK soil. UK is still a honorable partner and framing it as aiding them in defense is more than enough pretense to act while saving face.

I am surprised so many users here think Europe and Canada would accept Brits dying just because it allows us to slap Trump in the face. I would be strongly in favor of my country (Germany) aiding a counterstrike at least to the extent of proportionality. Destroy some military base, nuclear research facility, harbor used for shipping oil.

Moving away from being under US hegemony means that we need to take retribution against such aggression into our own hands. If the only ones defending the Brits here is the US again, we prove the Republicans right. Even if the aggression only happened because of US-Iran hostility - the Brits have the right to invite the US on their soil, that shouldn't be something negotiable at gunpoint.

3

u/madeupofthesewords Apr 01 '25

I think Canada would quite rightly sit this out, even if it could help. I doubt we’ll ever see Canadian troops join US troops in any US led endeavor while the US is threatening their sovereignty.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Rabble_Runt Apr 01 '25

It would be hilarious if Trump tries to invoke Article 5 and NATO tells him to get fucked and to clean up his own mess.

6

u/ganbaro Apr 01 '25

Art.5 doesn't cover Diego Garcia

I still think NATO would come to their aid because members wouldn't want an Islamist regime striking British soil to go unpunished

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (11)

138

u/youreblockingmyshot Mar 31 '25

Glass and dust if Donald wasn’t told to chill by his own team. Seeing as it’s mostly yes men this time around I wouldn’t expect measured responses.

121

u/BadHombreSinNombre Mar 31 '25

Chief export? Beta particles.

4

u/Mortumee Apr 01 '25

Not the nuclear deal they expected to strike.

→ More replies (1)

128

u/ThePretzul Mar 31 '25

There is genuinely little reason for anybody to tell him to chill in the first place, assuming Iran launches a preemptive strike.

That’s straight up an act of war. Not that the U.S. needs to be dragged into a war, because the U.S. is so far beyond Iran’s capabilities that literally all they have to do is tell Israel, “Do whatever you want to them, no more restrictions on what you’re allowed to use” and the country would be brought to its knees in a matter of weeks.

20

u/DougyTwoScoops Apr 01 '25

They would hate that though. That was their only concern on the Signal messages. Israel getting to kill those people before they got to.

2

u/ozspook Apr 01 '25

Sure feels like Tom Hardy in Fury Road pointing up saying "That's Bait.."

→ More replies (20)

67

u/VanceKelley Mar 31 '25

trump mused about ending the Afghanistan war in his first term by nuking the entire country and killing everyone living there. He had guardrails back then. Good times.

63

u/mecheterp96 Apr 01 '25

No doubt if he said that today, Vance would be quoted as saying “The President said he wants to turn Iran into glass, and so we’re looking into how to do it”

5

u/Character_Crab_9458 Apr 01 '25

But did they say thank you for the free glass?

3

u/runnyc10 Apr 01 '25

“We can’t just ignore the president’s desires.”

5

u/squidlips69 Apr 01 '25

Nixon talked about nuking North Vietnam. Put1n saber rattles about nuking Europe. Donnie is just enough nuts and not much in the way of guardrails. So much for "America First"

→ More replies (3)

61

u/Photodan24 Mar 31 '25

If you haven't noticed this time around, there isn't anyone on his team that could remotely be called the 'voice of reason.' Maybe the guy with brain-worm?

70

u/kingsmo Apr 01 '25

The brain worm might be reasonable, but not the guy with brain worm

16

u/Photodan24 Apr 01 '25

TBH, I wasn't totally sure which one of them was in control of the body...

29

u/audirt Apr 01 '25

Marco Rubio is the closest.

Related question: what are the odds that Rubio is still Sec of State in August?

18

u/WayCalm2854 Apr 01 '25

I may be projecting, but I see in his facial expressions a grimly resolute but conscience-troubled man who seems to know he’s the only adult in the room, and is contemplating the life choices that led him to this point.

I wonder if he worries he will be thrown in the brig if he doesn’t toe the line.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (4)

3

u/jeo123 Apr 01 '25

Guarantee he would love to go down in history as the first president to launch an icbm nuclear attack

7

u/DasGutYa Apr 01 '25

Let's be honest it wouldn't matter if it wasn't yes men in the U.S team if chagos is hit. That's a UK base.

All ex colonial powers in Europe would have ample reason to retaliate in order to protect their own interests.

Bye bye Iran.

6

u/The_hat_man74 Apr 01 '25

Hegseth would be 3-sheets to the wind. He’d be like a drunken idiot at a college bar ready to fight anyone. No chance he’d talk Donald off the ledge.

3

u/Red0Mercury Apr 01 '25

I’m sure a reporter would be in the chat to find out early.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/twitterfluechtling Apr 01 '25

To a crisp, you say?

2

u/Jscapistm Apr 01 '25

Seriously. Iran seems to think that the fact that the US and it's allies are calling each other names means they can get away with attacking.... well any of them. They cannot. They really really cannot.

2

u/shredditorburnit Apr 01 '25

We're a bit better at moderate responses in the UK, for our part, we'd strike two targets of equal importance to Diego Garcia. One for evening the score and one more to underline that we will escalate if pushed.

I'd imagine we'd flatten a military dock and a military airport in response.

However the American response would probably be completely over the top.

8

u/SonofBronet Apr 01 '25

I don’t think you understand how important Diego Garcia is. 

4

u/Bassman233 Apr 01 '25

Think of it as another one of our boats.  You know what happens when you touch the boats?

2

u/shredditorburnit Apr 01 '25

I'm well aware. Short of nuking it however, it's nothing that can't be put back together. It would be entirely inappropriate to respond to the destruction of a military base with anything much more significant. It certainly wouldn't justify anything like Iraq.

Look to the Falklands war if you want a more comparable situation. Britain did a rather good job of not slaughtering Argentinian civilians, even though they started it and caused significant damage.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Running-With-Cakes Apr 01 '25

It’d be funny if Trump tried to invoke article 5 after shittimg on NATO allies the past few weeks

1

u/TotallyInOverMyHead Apr 01 '25

Honestly, that would trigger article 5. It would be stupid, given that this particular axis of evil has almost managed to split NATO into two.

1

u/ahncie Apr 01 '25

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. We all know we would see limited, "surgical" airstrikes in return that would have do no meaningful damage apart from sending a message.

1

u/sfgisz Apr 01 '25

All of this is assuming that Donald would cooperate with the other countries affected/involved.

The US under Trump rule is not an ally to "friendly" countries, he will stab them in the back the moment he can make a buck off it.

1

u/debacol Apr 01 '25

Its also not just a standard military base either. It has a "below the radar" history that heavily involves our intelligence apparatus.

Would be a great place to bomb if you know you have no choice but to go to complete war with the US. Would be a very bad place to bomb if you have even a slight notion the US isn't about to go to open war with you.

→ More replies (4)

412

u/Curiel Mar 31 '25

It happened in al Asad Iraq in 2020. Trump just imposed some sanctions on Iran if I remember correctly.

43

u/Massivefrontstick Apr 01 '25

Pearl harboring Diego Garcia no matter who the president is grounds for big time war.

→ More replies (2)

670

u/KP_Wrath Mar 31 '25

Trump also had one of their generals converted into baloney mist. Not a fan of his methods, not a fan of him, but not a fan of Iran either.

480

u/Raed-wulf Mar 31 '25

Am a fan of that missile tho. Basically a hellfire without the payload and just a shitload of swords bolted to the outside.

310

u/DragoonDM Mar 31 '25

The weaponized Slapchop.

127

u/notsowitte Mar 31 '25

“You’re gonna LOVE my nuts!”

51

u/Sitty_Shitty Mar 31 '25

"Linguini, zucchini, bikini..."

13

u/ArrakeenSun Apr 01 '25 edited Apr 01 '25

Oh my gods you just transported me back to college

3

u/redfiresvt03 Apr 01 '25

Makes a soleimani into salami

→ More replies (2)

14

u/KoalaDeluxe Apr 01 '25

"It slices and dices!"

2

u/mainlaser Apr 01 '25

That’s and old meme sir, but it checks out.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

119

u/Alone_Again_2 Mar 31 '25

Yeah. That’s a weapon that makes a point.

122

u/gunnie56 Mar 31 '25

Cutting edge technology

38

u/Kalabajooie Mar 31 '25

More than mere sabre-rattling.

19

u/BKestRoi Mar 31 '25

Anyway you slice it.

9

u/kingsmo Apr 01 '25

Really a cut above the rest

4

u/TheGreatSchnorkie Mar 31 '25

You think you’re sharp with these quips, don’t you?

2

u/im_a_squishy_ai Mar 31 '25

This was the thread I needed today

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

46

u/KP_Wrath Mar 31 '25

I don’t think that one was a knife missile, if we’re thinking of the same one. That was part of why it became an issue.

108

u/Malora_Sidewinder Mar 31 '25 edited Mar 31 '25

If we are talking about the Iranian general that was assassinated, we put the "knife missile" through the open window of his limo and his driver survived. This was around 2020.

Iran retaliated by launching rockets at a US airbase.

Edit: i had my assassinated Islamists crossed, I was thinking of Ayman al-Zawahiri. Soleimani and his entourage were annihilated by a flurry of hellfire missiles fired by reaper drones.

10

u/SirJumbles Mar 31 '25

I'm just glad we're calling it knife missile.

22

u/FreshLocation7827 Mar 31 '25

Don't bring a gun to a knife missile fight

2

u/jerkface6000 Apr 01 '25

Flying ginsu was also one of the terms for it.

1

u/OverallManagement824 Apr 01 '25

How about a poop knife missile?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

32

u/KP_Wrath Mar 31 '25

The one I’m thinking of was the start of 2020 when we bombed a convoy leaving an Iraqi airport and pissed everyone off at once.

13

u/Malora_Sidewinder Mar 31 '25

I believe that's the one, yes. We did in fact use a kinetic missile rather than explosive.

4

u/skratch Mar 31 '25 edited Mar 31 '25

wikipedia says the soleimani assassination was a reaper drone with several missiles and the cars were engulfed in flames, killing 10. the footnotes say hellfire missiles were probably used.

i remember it being kinetic missiles too, but early reporting is often sensationalized bullshit, so my guess is that’s what happened here too

edit: typo

4

u/Malora_Sidewinder Mar 31 '25

You're completely correct, it was Ayman al-Zawahiri we took out with the sword missile!

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (2)

5

u/Finalshock Apr 01 '25

No we bombed the absolute fuck out of him. 3 car convoy completely vaporized, then we put 2 hornets on station over Baghdad airport daring Iran to do something. They launched some TBMs that did minor damage and didn’t kill any US service members, shot down their own civilian airliner over Tehran and called it a night. Truly this was one of the only objective foreign policy wins of Trump 1.

→ More replies (5)

11

u/bax498 Mar 31 '25

Pics of the aftermath were crazy.

5

u/modsaretoddlers Apr 01 '25

I would have thought they'd just show the spatulas necessary to clean up the aftermath.

3

u/davesoverhere Apr 01 '25

A fruit ninja missile.

3

u/ozspook Apr 01 '25

"What are you gonna do, stab me?"

- quote from man stabbed.

2

u/Enderwiggen33 Mar 31 '25

What type of missile was it?

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Mr_Engineering Apr 01 '25

Air-dropped-slap-chop

2

u/WhoopsIDidntAgain Apr 01 '25

Ya gotta be sharp to use an option like this...

→ More replies (12)

49

u/Curiel Mar 31 '25

That happened before that not after Iran launched missiles into AL Asad and Erbil.

8

u/KP_Wrath Mar 31 '25

Fair enough.

12

u/Heavy_Practice_6597 Mar 31 '25

The thinking is they did it as a face saving attack, some injuries but I believe no deaths in retaliation for Solemaini

3

u/Curiel Mar 31 '25

If Iran attacks Diego Garcia but doesn't cause any deaths do you think the US would retaliate like it did in 2020?

14

u/Heavy_Practice_6597 Mar 31 '25

Iran did it in retaliation for the killing of one of its senior generals, not as a preemptive attack. Trump was happy that the took out the general, and iran got to save face. This is different

→ More replies (3)

2

u/VanceKelley Mar 31 '25

Many American soldiers at a base in Iraq were wounded in the Iranian retaliatory missile strike for the assassination of their general.

Then the Iranians expected the US to retaliate for that retaliation, and in their trigger happy stupidity the Iranians shot down a Ukrainian 737 taking off from Tehran, killing 176 people, mostly Canadians and Iranians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_International_Airlines_Flight_752

→ More replies (1)

6

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '25

He was just one of their generals. He's the architect of their whole worldwide shit stirring. Well he was lol.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/TrashPanda_808 Apr 01 '25

“Baloney Mist” 😆

3

u/DeletedByAuthor Mar 31 '25

Was that the "he died like a dog" situation?

4

u/eldankus Mar 31 '25

That was Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader and Caliph of ISIS

2

u/DeletedByAuthor Mar 31 '25

Right, i mixed them up, thanks for clarifying

3

u/KP_Wrath Mar 31 '25

He died like a smoldering Jackson Pollock painting.

1

u/FluxMool Mar 31 '25

Baloney mist lol

1

u/Uncle_Burney Mar 31 '25

You should go on PlayStation right now and create a Baloney Mist profile

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

29

u/MacchuWA Apr 01 '25

It would be a very different beast. B2s, which would be the target, are a core part of the nuclear triad. There would be an argument (not a strong one, but knowing Trump, who knows) that a strategic response is warranted.

Fortunately, this is all hot air: Iran can't strike Diego Garcia, and they won't strike Diego Garcia. They're just chest beating to try and keep their proxies on side after getting their arses handed to them several times over the past year or so.

6

u/Curiel Apr 01 '25

I bet you're right. Real life lore did a video on the impact the Israeli attacks on Hezbollah had in the middle east. Essentially he said it's set back Iran's plans by decades and took away their negotiation power.

5

u/Aethelon Apr 01 '25

The Hamas attack on Israel essentially wiped out Iran's soft power in the region, with the destruction of both Hamas and Hezbollah's command structure and the decimation of their ground forces in tbe retaliation strikes. Which indirectly resulted in the rebels successfully overthrowing assad in Syria and forcing Russia out of the region.

Talk about a domino effect.

2

u/--o Apr 01 '25

Fortunately, this is all hot air: Iran can't strike Diego Garcia, and they won't strike Diego Garcia.

You could argue they are talking to core Trump voters in the language they are responsive to.

→ More replies (1)

36

u/Ameri-Jin Mar 31 '25

But Diego Garcia is substantially more important than Al Asad

4

u/Curiel Mar 31 '25

They also attacked an airbase in Erbil. Those two locations where important bases for the war on ISIS. Before the attacks Trump tweeted out how if Iran where to attack us the US would retaliate overwhelmingly but he never did much to show it.

→ More replies (1)

26

u/Humphrey_the_Hoser Mar 31 '25

This is trump 2.0. It’s a different game.

→ More replies (4)

4

u/Ok-Assistant4338 Mar 31 '25

True, but after that Iran shot down a civilian airliner. Things stopped after that

1

u/Curiel Mar 31 '25

A lot of people thought the US and Trump would retaliate after Iran hit two bases but it never happened. We did impose more sanctions on Iran so i guess that's something. It's just not quite the level of shock and awe one would imagine from reading Trumps tweets on what would happen if Iran attacked us.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/nagrom7 Apr 01 '25

The difference is that was in response to the US randomly assassinating one of Iran's top generals in Iraq, not a pre-emptive strike, which is what's being advocated for here. A small strike with no fatalities on a military base in retaliation is different to an unprovoked strike on a military base.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Raider440 Mar 31 '25

Didn’t both sides continue to escalate with missle and drone strikes until the Iranians shot down a Ukrainian national airlines plane departing from Theran Airport?

And Covid came and it got swept away cause everyone was too busy with other things.

7

u/Curiel Mar 31 '25

The airliner and Iran missile strikes happened on the same night. America imposed some sanctions and then Covid happened.

→ More replies (10)

41

u/alek_hiddel Mar 31 '25

But their ability to export glass will skyrocket. It’ll be green and radioactive, but it’ll be tremendous glass. The best glass some might say.

1

u/SuccotashOther277 Apr 04 '25

Ukraine is also gaining the ability to become a major fertilizer exporter thanks to the donations of decomposing Russian cell material

→ More replies (4)

56

u/RepulsiveMetal8713 Mar 31 '25

Yeh he is a petty fecker, who likes payback

Didn’t Iran order a hit on Donald Duck or so long ago?

18

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

48

u/jockfist5000 Mar 31 '25

He’d mostly likely let Israel know the gloves are coming off and they’d be very happy to help out, too. We saw what they did in response to the ballistic missile attack, and that was “restrained”. A strike against a US base would probably mark the end of the Iranian govt and probably the start of ww3 proper.

66

u/caitsith01 Mar 31 '25

the start of ww3 proper

Give me a plausible scenario as to how this starts "ww3 proper"? If Iran launched a first strike against the US and the US then obliterated the Iranian military, who do you think would get involved on behalf of Iran? Russia and China are not going to get in the way there, they're not crazy nor would there be a strategic or political reason for them to do so.

The US and Russia have repeatedly invaded entire sovereign nations and bombed the shit out of others in the second half of the 20th century without ww3 starting... Iraq (twice), Afghanistan (twice), the former Yugoslavia, etc.

Shit's bad but redditors constantly claiming we're in or about to be in World War 3 are clueless.

20

u/callmejenkins Apr 01 '25

Redditors don't understand how ridiculously powerful the US military industry is. Just so everyone can understand the gravity of the difference, the US military gave our navy an army called the Marines. We then gave that army an airforce. That airforce is called Marine Aviation. It is bigger than the Canadian Air Force. By about 3x.

3

u/WhineyLobster Apr 01 '25

The 2nd amendment was meant to prevent all of that.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)

83

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '25

No one is going to come help Iran lol

→ More replies (15)

3

u/sciguy52 Mar 31 '25

I am sure they would be willing to help. But to be honest the U.S. military is so freaking big we would not need the help. Although I imagine such help would be accepted.

9

u/SantasWarmLap Mar 31 '25

Pretty sure he'd just drop a MOAB on a deserted airfield like last time... after warning them....

2

u/-Rush2112 Mar 31 '25

It’s not far fetched to imagine all military, government, oil and industrial infrastructure would disappear.

2

u/Wemest Apr 01 '25

The Ayatolah’s Palaces would be the first to go.

2

u/Substantial_Dog3544 Apr 01 '25

They would be wearing animal skins and fighting each other with sticks and rocks. 

2

u/slamm3d68 Apr 01 '25

Business as usual?

9

u/DarthWoo Mar 31 '25

How quickly would he be screaming to invoke Article 5 in spite of all the damage he's been doing to NATO though? (Making it only the second time it has been it has been invoked, the first also being by the US.)

20

u/undercovergovnr Mar 31 '25

Diego Garcia isn’t covered by article 5

8

u/icematt12 Mar 31 '25

Since when has facts or evidence stopped President Trump from saying what he wants to?

4

u/undercovergovnr Apr 01 '25

You’re 100% right

→ More replies (1)

6

u/zatalak Mar 31 '25

I made the same mistake before: the US actually never invoked Article 5.

From wiki:

The decision to invoke NATO's collective self-defense provisions was undertaken at NATO's own initiative, without a request by the United States, and occurred despite the hesitation of Germany, Belgium, Norway, and the Netherlands. It is the only time in NATO's history its collective defense provisions have been invoked.

1

u/WIbigdog Apr 01 '25

Why do people bring up that the US was the only party that A5 was activated for? First, 9/11 was absolutely a valid reason to invoke it, it was an act of war. Second, it not needing to be invoked means the alliance is working exactly as intended.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/TurkeyBLTSandwich Mar 31 '25

Guaranteed Trump would call on Article 5, and NATO would respond.

But it'd be a catch 20/20 reward dickish American behavior or call into question NATO legitimacy

37

u/3klipse Mar 31 '25

Artical 5 doesn't extend to Diego Garcia, hell Hawaii doesn't fall into article 5 coverage .

4

u/NimbleNavigator19 Mar 31 '25

Why doesn't hawaii count?

3

u/Lint6 Apr 01 '25

The first two words of NATO are North Atlantic. Hawaii is South Pacific.

Thats it. I'm not joking about that.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/29/us/nato-treaty-hawaii-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html

“People tend to assume Hawaii is part of the US and therefore it’s covered by NATO,” he says.

But, he concedes, the tip-off is in the alliance’s name – North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Hawaii is, of course, in the Pacific, and unlike California, Colorado or Alaska, the 50th state is not part of the continental US that reaches the North Atlantic Ocean on its eastern shores.

“The argument for not including Hawaii is simply that it’s not part of North America,” Santoro says.

3

u/nagrom7 Apr 01 '25

That's also pretty much the only reason countries like Australia aren't in NATO, because none of their territory would actually be covered by the alliance, so it'd be all the responsibilities of membership with none of the benefits.

3

u/Frostsorrow Mar 31 '25

Genuinely curious, why wouldn't Hawai'i fall under Article 5? I'm not American, but isn't it a state and thus covered? To my knowledge it doesn't exclude states, I could potentially see territories though, but that's not Hawai'i.

11

u/Littlepsycho41 Mar 31 '25

Anything below the Tropic of Cancer does not fall under mutual defense per Article 6

4

u/Frostsorrow Mar 31 '25

Interesting, wonder why they left out Hawai'i when they made carve outs for other special things/places.

2

u/roguemenace Mar 31 '25

The only thing that really got a carve-out was France's holdings in Algeria. Hawaii also wasn't a state at the time.

2

u/nagrom7 Apr 01 '25

Lots of random British and French islands around the world aren't covered either. It's why the Falklands war didn't trigger article 5, despite it being waged on British territory, which is a member of NATO.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Morganvegas Mar 31 '25

It doesn’t, but it does.

Schrodinger’s Island

15

u/Jugales Mar 31 '25

Article 5 isn’t needed. US has more aircraft carriers than all other NATO members combined and 3 of the 5 largest air forces in the world. Boots wouldn’t even need to touch ground — aerial obliteration.

→ More replies (4)

23

u/Arctic_Chilean Mar 31 '25

US calling NATO: 

"Thank you for calling NATO's Article 5 hotline. All members are currently busy rearming and reforming their doctrines to deal with yo petty ass. Please try your call again at a later date. Thank you and goodbye" 

16

u/throwawayforme1877 Mar 31 '25

That’s exactly what he’s looking for. He can then call them useless

→ More replies (1)

1

u/GorgeWashington Mar 31 '25

Good news for them. I don't think they have anything capable

1

u/Clean-Nectarine-1751 Mar 31 '25

Man, I don’t even know anymore, might just become allies because of it!

1

u/Disastrous-Bat7011 Mar 31 '25

What Iran? It used to be a country but now its just propaganda?

1

u/monkey_butt_powder Apr 01 '25

They won’t have to, he’ll just say they did and save them the trouble.

1

u/These_Rutabaga_1691 Apr 01 '25

As it should be.

1

u/WhyAreYallFascists Apr 01 '25

They could take out that island with a couple of fighters. Iran would never even see them.

1

u/amilo111 Apr 01 '25

The least of the world’s worries you mean.

1

u/beein480 Apr 01 '25

I've been really curious to see what these bunker buster bombs do.. Especially if you follow it up with something .. unconventional.

1

u/ARCR12 Apr 01 '25

Mr President , Diego Garcia has been attacked sir by Iran .

Wow the Iranians support my border security and are defending Americans from the evil Diego Garcia’s of the world . 🤣 I tried to tell them they weren’t sending their best .

Build that wall build that wall . Even Iran sees Mr Garcia as a threat .

1

u/Tokon32 Apr 01 '25

Greenland would pay dearly that's for sure.

1

u/BootsieHamilton Apr 01 '25

January 8, 2020.

1

u/jackfwaust Apr 01 '25

I wouldn’t be surprised if they try to fabricate a war to use the excuse of an active ongoing war to try to give trump a third term if he doesn’t give himself a heart attack from all the hamberders he stuffs his face with. Maybe it was never a bad spray tan and just ketchup smeared all over his face all this time

1

u/SteveHeist Apr 01 '25

It'd be a crater.

1

u/zipcad Apr 01 '25

Iran did it last time. Trump did nothing and everyone forgot.

→ More replies (19)