Comment

0x0@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

The point is that “NATO” is an umbrella term for “US’s interests” or “US military”.
The US can and absolutely does wreck shit up for the sake of their own interests, regardless of international law. “NATO” only comes into play when either other countries are willing to step in or the US might need a veneer of legitimacy.

source

Sort:hotnew top

yucandu@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

The point is that “NATO” is an umbrella term for “US’s interests” or “US military”.

Well if we’re just misusing words and making things up, shit, why not say “DPRK” is an umbrella term for “US’s interests”?

I think you might need to engage in some self-reflection and consider whether you may have been influenced by Russian/Chinese propaganda. There is no rational reason to have a problem with the existence of NATO.

source
- noMoreTwat@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  www.dw.com/en/…/a-72562793
  
  You mean beside the fact they’re corrupting our politicians, that the head of the UE is notorious for being in bed with whatever lobby pays her, and that they’re currently throwing their own austerity rules down the drain to get europe to get into debt so we can buy more guns from lockheed?
  
  You’re a deathtrader simp.
  
  source