Then There Is The NATO Thing

First of all my thought on NATO……I think that once the USSR collapsed and the ‘republics’ started breaking away then NATO should have been abandoned….after all NATO was suppose to be a deterrent to any expansion by the USSR and once it was gone then NATO was not needed. Replace it with some sort of trade bloc.

Then under Clinton the organization started its Eastward expansion….basically at the behest of the M-IC…..my opinion this started what could be seen as provocation of Russia and they bit at the worm dangled in front of them. (Please notice I said ‘could be seen’…before the idiotic diatribes begin)

Ukraine is dominating the news these but let’s look back at the early days of the 21st century……

A widespread misconception of NATO’s relation to Ukraine has been sustained by silence in news sources and falsehoods by pundits. According to this myth, the NATO-Ukraine connection, prior to Russia’s current horrific invasion, was a matter of Ukraine’s asking to join and NATO’s not saying “No.” In fact, over the last fourteen years, NATO’s conduct has gone far beyond openness to eventual admission, in engagements that have included extensive and expanding joint military operations in Ukraine. This involvement, which was accompanied by US efforts to shape Ukrainian politics, does not in the least affect Putin’s moral responsibility for the carnage he is inflicting. But awareness of this history should affect vitally important assessments of the proper response.

In 2008, William Burns, then U.S. ambassador to Russia and now CIA director, cabled from Moscow, “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin) …I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.” As Burns’ cable suggests, Ukraine has distinctive geopolitical significance for Russia. It is the next-largest country in Europe, after Russia, dominates the northern border of the Black Sea, and has a 1,227-mile land border with Russia. Nonetheless, at the end of the 2008 Bucharest NATO Summit, when expansion to Russia’s borders was virtually complete, NATO, led by the US, declared agreement on its completion: “We agreed today that these two countries [Ukraine along with Georgia] will become members of NATO.” In 2011, a NATO report noted, “The Alliance assists Ukraine … in preparing defence policy reviews and other documents, in training personnel, … modernising armed forces and making them more interoperable and more capable of participating in international missions” — international cooperation that had already included a joint Black Sea naval exercise with the US.

The Backstory of NATO, Ukraine and Putin’s Fears

Now NATO wants to expand even more…this time it is Finland and Sweden.

NATO being a war-hawk institution is pushing for a quick inclusion of these states…..

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Thursday that Finland and Sweden would be embraced with open arms should they decide to join the 30-nation military organization and could become members quite quickly.

Stoltenberg’s remarks came as public support in Finland and Sweden for NATO membership mounts in response to Russia’s war in Ukraine. Media speculation in the two countries suggest the two might apply in mid-May.

“It’s their decision,” Stoltenberg said. “But if they decide to apply, Finland and Sweden will be warmly welcomed, and I expect that process to go quickly.”

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-europe-sweden-finland-jens-stoltenberg-82ae8eb0585656995c9b7041d84828bf

I have a problem once again….this expansion will further act as a provocation and could lead to even more conflicts down the road.

There are reasons that this process should be stopped here and now…..

Almost eight decades have passed since the end of World War II and Europe remains helplessly dependent on America. Yet U.S. officials are celebrating the expected application by Finland and Sweden to join NATO.

The Washington Blob doesn’t seem likely to be satisfied until every country on earth relies on the U.S. for its defense.

The accession of these two nations — which would be rapidly granted as war rages between Ukraine and Russia — is being presented as strengthening the alliance. However, the U.S., alone or in conjunction with its 29 NATO allies, many of which appear to field militaries mostly for show, would handily defeat Moscow in any continental contest.

That was evident even before Russia’s botched invasion of Ukraine. Now, two months into a conflict that was supposed to have overrun the latter in a few days or weeks at most, no one imagines that Moscow retains more than a shadow of the Soviet Union’s conventional military capabilities.

In truth, NATO expansion has never been about American security. Rather, it was meant to expand Washington’s defense dole in the name of promoting regional stability.

So why should Americans increase their defense load now? The U.S. should stop adding new members to the transatlantic alliance and instead prepare to turn Europe’s defense over to Europe. Here are nine reasons to keep the door closed to Finland and Sweden.

Nine reasons why NATO should close the door to Sweden and Finland

Let’s be honest….since the mid-1990s NATO has NOT been about American security but rather to make the world dependent on our defense industry….American weapons are big business.

Time for this expansionist mindset to be put to bed….war is never the answer and preparation for it should be secondary.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

9 thoughts on “Then There Is The NATO Thing

  1. The problem with NATO will resolve itself when Russia lobs the first nuke at either NATO or the U.S., and “Poof” no one will be concerned with the problem any more…. ever.

  2. :et us hope that you never ever actually see the problem. Let us hope that no one ever has to actually see the problem.

      1. yes, I liked the article and thank you. It is scary to be sure. Look at this once again:
        “We can hate what Putin is doing. We can help Ukraine defend itself against Russia’s unjustified invasion, and it is entirely reasonable to consider a range of economic penalties as a means of compelling Moscow to end the war. But it would be the height of irresponsibility for American policymakers to take actions that makes war with a nuclear superpower likely. —- and that is exactly what the sons of bitches are doing and I don’t believe there is any way to stop them. I think some of them are as crazy as Putin is. — There isn’t a damned thing in Ukraine that is worth getting American killed about … but it seems out dear leaders either do not believe that or are unaware of it.

  3. NATO saw the collapse of the USSR as a green light to surround Russia, and suffocate its borders. The war in Ukraine is a direct result of NATO expansion, and they should admit that, and apologise at least.
    Best wishes, Pete.

    1. At least…..like I said….after the collapse NATO should have disbanded…for it was no need for it to continue other than to feed the arms industry. chuq

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.