7 ms·

I am biased here, as somebody who grew up next to an American military base in Iceland and had a pro-communist upbringing and learned to hate NATO (as well as t

I am biased here, as somebody who grew up next to an American military base in Iceland and had a pro-communist upbringing and learned to hate NATO (as well as the American imperialist agenda as a whole) from an early age. I don‘t see a difference. I was told this when I was a child, and as I’ve grown up and seen more of the world (including by immigrating to the USA) I am more convinced then ever. In my eyes, there is no meaningful difference between USA and NATO.

Waterluvian 10d ago
There clearly is. Because NATO isn’t getting involved in America’s idiotic war of aggression and Trump is very upset about this. They’ve spent years being very upset about every other NATO nation’s spending, too. So even if you don’t believe it, the U.S. clearly cares about NATO member behaviour and therefore recognizes a distinction.
- deleted 10d ago
  [deleted]
- selfhoster1312 10d ago
  They have been involved in pretty much all previous USA "idiotic wars of aggression", so while it may become useful in the future to make a distinction, it's also fair to appreciate that this distinction doesn't make a lot sense to a whole bunch of people.
  - Waterluvian 10d ago
    The one time NATO was called on to defend a member was the U.S. asking for help after 9/11. And nobody but the UK followed them into Iraq, shortly after the Afghanistan war began. So there’s certainly strong history of NATO not just doing whatever the U.S. is up to. I recall this time as a very strong refusal of the above miscategorization of NATO. Bush and his cronies had a whole “you’re with us or against us” tantrum when NATO didn’t follow. I think Americans even did some proto-Trump trolling with “freedom fries” and other nonsense.
    - Sharlin 10d ago
      And making nude statues wear clothes. Because freedom or something, I guess.
    - runarberg 10d ago
      This is simply false history. Every NATO member went to Afghanistan with the USA. Even Iceland despite not having a traditional army participated in the invasion. As for Iraq: UK, Poland, Spain, Portugal, and Denmark provided soldiers to partake in the illegal invasion. Even Iceland participated in the propaganda war by putting them self on the farcical “Coalition the willing” along plenty of other NATO countries. It is very hard to see NATO as anything other then an extension of USA‘s imperial ambitions. It is as if in the year 1986 you would look at the Warsaw pact and claim this is a pact of independent nations and has nothing to do with the interest of the Soviet Union.
      - Waterluvian 10d ago
        I think your personal beliefs fit reality if you ignore the parts of reality that strongly refute it. That kind of mentality is getting popular these days. I'll leave you to it.
        runarberg 10d ago
        Which parts of my “personal believes” are wrong? And maybe this mentality is getting more popular because it is true. People are tired of being fed propaganda for Western imperialism and capitalism more broadly. My last attempt to convince you: Ask your self, why did Iceland not vote in favor of a ban on nuclear weapons at the UN general assembly 2016? Why has Iceland still not signed and ratified the treaty? Why has no NATO member done so? Why are Austria and Ireland one of very few European nations to do so? Aside from France and the UK, it is hard to find an answer here which does not include American imperialist agenda.
        vintermann 10d ago
        I think it's true that NATO is for most practical purposes an instrument of the US. But it's also true that there's a distinction between NATO and the US, and some other NATO members do have influence on NATO policy - most notably Turkey, which really complicated things for the US in relation to the Syrian civil war and the Azerbaijan - Armenia conflict.
- aa-jv 10d ago
  >There clearly is. Because NATO isn’t getting involved in America’s idiotic war of aggression Smoke screen. The USA launches its attacks from the territories of NATO members. NATO has been involved in every war crime the USA has committed this century.
  - disgruntledphd2 10d ago
    > NATO has been involved in every war crime the USA has committed this century. NATO countries, yes (mostly the Brits and Polish). NATO as an organization, only for Serbia and Afghanistan.
    - aa-jv 9d ago
      Brits, Polish, Germans, Italians, French, Turkish. NATO bases are used without discretion to launch atrocities.
      - disgruntledphd2 9d ago
        Not always, specifically not for the most recent war (gulf war 3).
        aa-jv 9d ago
        This is false. NATO bases have been used every single day to attack Iran. https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-mark-rutte-italy-us-bases-iran-war/ https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-mark-rutte-italy-us-bas... NATO Chief, Rutte: "Europe is a platform of power projection for the United States." Of course, the local political cover story in Italy is that these bases are 'only used for logistics, never direct attacks', but that's just a cover story to deflect any retribution Italy may receive from Iran and its allies, for Italy's participation in the US' heinous acts, and to keep the internal messaging politically correct within Italys' current circus ... https://en.lasicilia.it/news/italy-world/3052391/the-us-iran-war-and-the-500-planes-that-took-off-from-italian-bases-sigonella-always-at-the-center-of-the-crisis.html https://en.lasicilia.it/news/italy-world/3052391/the-us-iran... This is just posturing to avoid retribution. Everyone in Europe knows that NATO bases have been used almost every day since April 2003 by the US to commit its crimes. Lets also admit that NATO-aligned bases in Poland and Germany are also essential to the US' crimes. See also, Camp Darby near Pisa, actively supporting NATO and U.S. European and African Command operations.

Waterluvian 10d ago

There clearly is. Because NATO isn’t getting involved in America’s idiotic war of aggression and Trump is very upset about this. They’ve spent years being very upset about every other NATO nation’s spending, too. So even if you don’t believe it, the U.S. clearly cares about NATO member behaviour and therefore recognizes a distinction.

deleted 10d ago
[deleted]
selfhoster1312 10d ago
They have been involved in pretty much all previous USA "idiotic wars of aggression", so while it may become useful in the future to make a distinction, it's also fair to appreciate that this distinction doesn't make a lot sense to a whole bunch of people.
- Waterluvian 10d ago
  The one time NATO was called on to defend a member was the U.S. asking for help after 9/11. And nobody but the UK followed them into Iraq, shortly after the Afghanistan war began. So there’s certainly strong history of NATO not just doing whatever the U.S. is up to. I recall this time as a very strong refusal of the above miscategorization of NATO. Bush and his cronies had a whole “you’re with us or against us” tantrum when NATO didn’t follow. I think Americans even did some proto-Trump trolling with “freedom fries” and other nonsense.
  - Sharlin 10d ago
    And making nude statues wear clothes. Because freedom or something, I guess.
  - runarberg 10d ago
    This is simply false history. Every NATO member went to Afghanistan with the USA. Even Iceland despite not having a traditional army participated in the invasion. As for Iraq: UK, Poland, Spain, Portugal, and Denmark provided soldiers to partake in the illegal invasion. Even Iceland participated in the propaganda war by putting them self on the farcical “Coalition the willing” along plenty of other NATO countries. It is very hard to see NATO as anything other then an extension of USA‘s imperial ambitions. It is as if in the year 1986 you would look at the Warsaw pact and claim this is a pact of independent nations and has nothing to do with the interest of the Soviet Union.
    - Waterluvian 10d ago
      I think your personal beliefs fit reality if you ignore the parts of reality that strongly refute it. That kind of mentality is getting popular these days. I'll leave you to it.
      - runarberg 10d ago
        Which parts of my “personal believes” are wrong? And maybe this mentality is getting more popular because it is true. People are tired of being fed propaganda for Western imperialism and capitalism more broadly. My last attempt to convince you: Ask your self, why did Iceland not vote in favor of a ban on nuclear weapons at the UN general assembly 2016? Why has Iceland still not signed and ratified the treaty? Why has no NATO member done so? Why are Austria and Ireland one of very few European nations to do so? Aside from France and the UK, it is hard to find an answer here which does not include American imperialist agenda.
        vintermann 10d ago
        I think it's true that NATO is for most practical purposes an instrument of the US. But it's also true that there's a distinction between NATO and the US, and some other NATO members do have influence on NATO policy - most notably Turkey, which really complicated things for the US in relation to the Syrian civil war and the Azerbaijan - Armenia conflict.
aa-jv 10d ago
>There clearly is. Because NATO isn’t getting involved in America’s idiotic war of aggression Smoke screen. The USA launches its attacks from the territories of NATO members. NATO has been involved in every war crime the USA has committed this century.
- disgruntledphd2 10d ago
  > NATO has been involved in every war crime the USA has committed this century. NATO countries, yes (mostly the Brits and Polish). NATO as an organization, only for Serbia and Afghanistan.
  - aa-jv 9d ago
    Brits, Polish, Germans, Italians, French, Turkish. NATO bases are used without discretion to launch atrocities.
    - disgruntledphd2 9d ago
      Not always, specifically not for the most recent war (gulf war 3).
      - aa-jv 9d ago
        This is false. NATO bases have been used every single day to attack Iran. https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-mark-rutte-italy-us-bases-iran-war/ https://www.politico.eu/article/nato-mark-rutte-italy-us-bas... NATO Chief, Rutte: "Europe is a platform of power projection for the United States." Of course, the local political cover story in Italy is that these bases are 'only used for logistics, never direct attacks', but that's just a cover story to deflect any retribution Italy may receive from Iran and its allies, for Italy's participation in the US' heinous acts, and to keep the internal messaging politically correct within Italys' current circus ... https://en.lasicilia.it/news/italy-world/3052391/the-us-iran-war-and-the-500-planes-that-took-off-from-italian-bases-sigonella-always-at-the-center-of-the-crisis.html https://en.lasicilia.it/news/italy-world/3052391/the-us-iran... This is just posturing to avoid retribution. Everyone in Europe knows that NATO bases have been used almost every day since April 2003 by the US to commit its crimes. Lets also admit that NATO-aligned bases in Poland and Germany are also essential to the US' crimes. See also, Camp Darby near Pisa, actively supporting NATO and U.S. European and African Command operations.