Ask Lemmygrad

Plus, thankfully, no other neighbour has been stupid enough to think it could defeat Russia in a conventional war on its own turf.

Speaking of. Comrade @[email protected], what's the state of war propaganda like in your neck of the woods? I heard of the army size increase and some things that smell of preparation for annexing western Ukraine, but not much else.

Why do you say that Ukraine had a good military? I was under the impression that it was a poor military before the war began.

Later used to asset strip the country?

More like currently stripping assets. They started almost half a year ago.

I mean, we could say the same of the Korean War, but that didn't stop the U.S from bombing the hell out of the DPRK...

They absolutely could and would refuse to be dragged into a direct war over some backwater Eastern European states.

Firstly "Article 5" not some kind of automatic call to arms, it is sufficiently vague that the "aid" which it calls for to be provided by other alliance members (if that is even deemed necessary, which is another thing the article leaves open to interpretation) doesn't have to look like boots on the ground. More likely it would look exactly like what Ukraine is currently receiving: weapons, money and intel. It's why a lot of people have been saying that Ukraine is a de facto NATO member.

Secondly, it also wouldn't apply if a NATO state actually was the one who attacked first, which would arguably be the case if they chose to get involved in Ukraine.

And lastly, all NATO members are not equal. The Eastern Europeans may like to believe they are equal and that the entire West would come to their defense but that is highly unlikely. Western Europeans have no desire to go fight and die for Eastern Europeans and neither do Americans if it means a risk of taking significant casualties. Oh sure if the enemy was a sufficiently weak country then they would all jump at the opportunity, but against a peer adversary like Russia you will see most of NATO chicken out finding excuse after excuse for not having to send their own soldiers.

So yes, if the disincentinve is strong enough, states can absolutely refuse to honor any treaty requirement which is against their interest. They will simply apply a "creative interpretation" of the treaty or claim extenuating circumstances. Treaties aren't magic, they don't bind sovereign states unless said states want to be bound by them. Of course Europe is vassalized to the US so they don't really have the ability to make a sovereign choice; the choice will be made for them in Washington.

I agree completely, if the number of people actively in the military was way higher they’d make the Baltics join. Currently things are too normal to warrant people joining the military out of desperation

Balticshits combined have armed forces that number in around the population of my city block.

All three have around 50000 military personnel combined including non-combat being probably majority. All three also have zero proper combat aircraft and ships. They also have (combined) zero tanks, few hundreds APC and similar armed vehicles, around 150 artillery pieces (including self-propelled mortars) and barely any anti-air defenses.

You could try fighting it outside the borders, now that there's a convenient battleground available

But you can help its enemy (Ukraine) regain its territory, tho...

using nuclear weapons or intercontinental missiles that could easily hit the US.

If that happens, USian submarines retaliate and it's game over for the planet

In other words, they didn’t help the United Kingdom during the Falklands/Malvinas

Argentina attacked then and there's article 6, looks like it's explicitly written so that NATO countries didn't had obligations to participate into each other's colonial wars.

I mean, yes

I think I'm going to rephrase the question, to not make it about invasion necessarily.

Then what part of the defensive pact did Libya violate to get a reprisal by NATO?

Nonsense. They could and would if they thought they could get away with it. The real reason why they haven't is because they know they would get absolutely wrecked and take horrendous casualties that their countries are simply not prepared for.