Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H. Res. 525

Should Congress Ask NATO to Collectively Fight ISIS on France’s Behalf?

Argument in favor

If members of NATO aren’t willing to assist their fellow members following an attack, the organization isn’t serving its intended purpose. NATO supported the U.S. in this way after September 11, and should do the same for France now.

BTSundra's Opinion
···
11/25/2015
ISIS is not only the U.S.'s enemy, but also the world's enemy.
Like (13)
Follow
Share
Jack's Opinion
···
11/25/2015
This is obviously a slippery slope to be on. We could be risking the safety of many nations and wasting NATOs resources. However, air strikes clearly are not working, and ISIS continues to be the most potent force in Syria and endangering Iraq. Both nations would do well to remember who's on their side:NATO. At least in theory. NATO could and will dominate ISIS, they won't even pose a significant threat, and as long as we PLAN FOR THE AFTERMATH!! We should be alright, and have a successful NATO mission to save the people of Iraq, Syria, and the world.
Like (5)
Follow
Share
spenceast's Opinion
···
11/25/2015
NATO's purpose is to help defend all member countries. Just as the defended the United States after 9/11, they should be prepared and willing to defend France and any other member country that suffers horrific terror attacks. That being said, it is not okay for NATO to get involved without the member country's explicit approval. We cannot infringe on another state's sovereignty.
Like (5)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The U.S. should allow France to determine if it wants or needs the help of NATO in responding to the attacks in Paris. Congress shouldn’t ask the President to invoke the collective defense of NATO if France doesn’t ask the U.S. to do so.

Leo's Opinion
···
11/25/2015
A resolution to urge the president to prod NATO? Utterly useless! France was attacked and it is they who should invoke NATO. The United States should let France know we will back whatever play they want, not do it for them.
Like (13)
Follow
Share
Diane's Opinion
···
11/25/2015
I agree that NATO could help. However, France is a big girl. She can act on her own behalf. Big ole America needs to mind her own business on this one.
Like (9)
Follow
Share
Caitlin's Opinion
···
11/25/2015
As much as I love France, and as much as my heart goes out to the victims of the terror attacks, the last thing the world needs is another war in the Middle East.
Like (4)
Follow
Share

What is House Bill H. Res. 525?

This resolution would urge the President to work closely with other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. This would be done in response to the terrorist attacks in Paris carried out by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Article 5 requires members of NATO to come to the collective defense of other members under attack, and essentially means that an attack on one NATO member is the equivalent of an attack on all NATO members.

The resolution notes that following the attacks on September 11, 2001 other members of NATO including France invoked Article 5 for the only time in history in a show of solidarity with the U.S., and concludes that the attacks in Paris warrant a similar response.

Impact

Countries that are members of NATO — especially the U.S., and the President.

Cost of House Bill H. Res. 525

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) introduced this resolution in response to the attacks on Paris, saying:

“Friday night’s deadly attack on the City of Lights proves that ISIS aggression has spread from the Middle East to the sleeping West… America should take the lead and urge a joint response as a body of nations. Invoking Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty paves the way for a truly joint and international response to ISIS. All 28 NATO nations need to join the war against our common enemy. The President’s policy of containment has failed. The time to act is now, not after American blood is shed in our homeland.”

After the September 11, 2001 attacks on the U.S., members of NATO invoked the Article 5 collective defense provision within 24 hours of the attacks, carrying out subsequent security operations.


Of Note: Following the attacks, French President Francois Hollande invoked the collective defense provision of the European Union treaty, but has yet to decide whether to call on NATO. The Obama administration has signalled that it would “welcome” efforts to coordinate actions against ISIS through NATO, if France asks.

NATO's role in the fight against ISIS was in the headlines following an incident where Turkey (a member of NATO) shot down a Russian jet that allegedly strayed into Turkish airspace while flying a mission over Syria. The last time a NATO member shot down a Russian jet was 1952 near the end of the Korean War.

Media:

Summary by Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: Flickr user U.S. Army Europe Images)

Official Title

Urging the Administration to work with North Atlantic Treaty Organization member states to invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty in response to the Paris attacks.

simple resolution Progress


  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on Foreign Affairs
    IntroducedNovember 16th, 2015
    ISIS is not only the U.S.'s enemy, but also the world's enemy.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    A resolution to urge the president to prod NATO? Utterly useless! France was attacked and it is they who should invoke NATO. The United States should let France know we will back whatever play they want, not do it for them.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    I agree that NATO could help. However, France is a big girl. She can act on her own behalf. Big ole America needs to mind her own business on this one.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    This is obviously a slippery slope to be on. We could be risking the safety of many nations and wasting NATOs resources. However, air strikes clearly are not working, and ISIS continues to be the most potent force in Syria and endangering Iraq. Both nations would do well to remember who's on their side:NATO. At least in theory. NATO could and will dominate ISIS, they won't even pose a significant threat, and as long as we PLAN FOR THE AFTERMATH!! We should be alright, and have a successful NATO mission to save the people of Iraq, Syria, and the world.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    NATO's purpose is to help defend all member countries. Just as the defended the United States after 9/11, they should be prepared and willing to defend France and any other member country that suffers horrific terror attacks. That being said, it is not okay for NATO to get involved without the member country's explicit approval. We cannot infringe on another state's sovereignty.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    As much as I love France, and as much as my heart goes out to the victims of the terror attacks, the last thing the world needs is another war in the Middle East.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    NATO has ceased to be the organization it was intended to be and has created strange "bed fellows". NATO is a tangled web and yet another entity sucking off the American tax payer. Send them packing elsewhere to discuss phony human rights and phony global warming/climate change!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    NATO is suppose to be a united front of countries trying to better world conditions and to stand together against organizations like ISIS,Alqueda,and the Taliban that produce terrorist activities against unarmed defenseless civilians.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    NATO must collectively support and respond to the ISIS threat. It may already be too late. Every nation should be in on this collective, massive undertaking or they should be thrown out of NATO. It is time for NATO, led by the U.S. to step up. If a country refuses to participate, they should be thrown out of NATO or NATO should be disbanded!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This is exactly what the founding father warned us about...We cannot allow an entangling alliance with NATO to drag Americas sons and daughters into another endless war with an ideology.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Not on the behalf of France, we don't need to use propaganda and false patriotism to align the worlds powers towards a common cause. ISIS is bad for literally everyone. They are fighting to invoke an apocalypse, so we should make the conflict about what it really is: eliminating a threat to global society, not getting revenge for events in the past.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    This is not exactly a yay or nay. The President met with Hollande. I think we should do whatever Hollande asked for: to help in ways he asked, not interfering in areas that he doesn't want help. This isn't our rodeo completely. We need to be respectful of his political reality in France. As much as the US likes to think everything is about us & under our control, this is not in it's totality. Paris was attacked, not New York or DC.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Probably not a good idea as long as Obama sits in the White House. France is our oldest ally and SHOULD have our full support. Moreover, ISIS/ISIL/Daesh is not just a danger to France, but to the whole non-Muslim world, and I personally think NATO should throw everything they've got, in the way of conventional weapons, at defeating this scourge! There is, however, the matter of Russia's presence in the region. None of us, I think, wants to go to war against Russia, at least not at this time. For one thing, Obama has weakened our military too much. I also don't think Obama can negotiate effectively at ALL with Putin. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of Putin gaining too much control and influence in the Middle East. I think we need to wait until we have a strong, pro-American Commander in Chief and a stronger military before we get more involved in stomping out the vermin that are the Islamic extremists. I deplore the position that Obama has put us in! He has caused us to lose status and credibility in the eyes of the world. And he is so obviously pro-Muslim, only a person in complete denial would fail to recognize that fact. He is responsible for the rise and growth of ISIS. I don't believe for one minute that it is in his heart to defeat them. He tries to make us believe that it is his intention, but most of what he tells us usually turns out to be a bunch of lies. Our intel gets doctored, and our military has to fight with one hand tied behind their back, thanks to Obama! No, we need a REAL, PATRIOTIC COMMANDER IN CHIEF to join NATO in wiping out ISIS - one who is NOT an appeaser and apologist for the enemy!
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    ISIS is a threat to everyone. They succeed when there's division and we need to work together to win
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    We do not need to babysit France, they can decide to invoke that request.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Wait for France to make the decision. The US has a history of invading countries to institute peace.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Ultimately we do not control France or NATO. For us to speak for France is disrespectful and may make it seem like we're trying to intervene with them. Although we should continue to fight ISIS. If anyone wants to follow they can but we shouldn't force them to do so.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    NATO was created for this sole purpose. And also if we want Isis to be destroyed we need every soldier possibly fighting it. It would be beneficial for everyone in the long run if NATO fought Isis, as long as the United States does the same.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I believe a coalition of middle eastern countries should lead the fight against ISIS, with some support from the west.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    France and every nation needs to be fighting ISIS not just NATO and the USA
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE