Denmark's Mette Frederiksen said "everything would stop" in the event of a US attack on another NATO country. European leaders have backed Frederiksen while saying the US "is an essential partner."
The global south. NATO is the millitary alliance of the world’s imperialist powers, a destruction of millitary unity among imperialists would severely weaken imperialism. NATO is “defensive” in the same way the Iron Dome is, it gives imperialist countries free reign to treat the world like something to be looted and plundered without fear of genuine blowback.
Considering they are aligned with the west, who plunder the world’s wealth through export of capital and unequal exchange, that’s not really surprising. Opposition to NATO is pretty basic among anti-imperialists and the global south in general.
God damn it, I hate my education system. I thought NATO was the peacekeeper of the world — a valuable residue of WWII. One sided propaganda-based education developed to fuel a belief in American exceptionalism and nationalistic egoism. This education-level propaganda is pretty effective because you don’t actually know what details to question, and so you grow up with some pretty bold assumptions about how the world works (and don’t even realize it). They had me believing Christopher Columbus was some kind of messiah-explorer too.
How does this happen? My anti-conspiracy brain wants to believe there’s no such thing as an evil man behind the curtain, twisting his mustache and orchestrating these details like ”meh, we need to make sure all the kids believe in this propaganda such that we have an imperialistic society.” So, short of that, how does this happen so effectively?
2 major factors: In any given society, the mode of production is reinforced by the culture, laws, and ideology of said mode of production. Secondly, people license themselves to believe that whatever they think benefits them is good. Capitalism reinforces ideas like individualism, NATO is good, etc, and we go along with it until our material conditions force us into seeing a new reflection of reality, be it at the workplace, or seeing hard evidence online, being the victim of a bombing campaign, etc. It isn’t a man behind the curtain, but capital and the capitalist class.
Nato is an imperialist alliance that was created to fight imperalist USSR. Many of the funding countries was still colonizing other countries when it was created. Nato also destroyed Lybia which is the clearest example of it not being just a defensive alliance. Nato also collaborate with Israel who hold the longest current occupation, again has nothing to do with Europe protection.
The US could leave Nato today, attack a Nato country and Nato will do nothing about it
One major correction, the USSR was anti-imperialist, which is why the imperialists collaborated to oppose them. Their colonies were in danger of liberation due to the soviets aiding anti-imperialist movements.
That’s not what socialists mean by imperialism, by that vibes-based definition defeating Nazi Germany was “imperialism.” Imperialism is instead a form of international exploitation characterized by dominance of monopoly finance capital, export of capital, and super-exploiting the global south for super profits. Spreading socialism is anti-imperialist.
It’s not what anyone means by imperialism. If “extending your influence through diplomacy” is imperialism, then there isn’t a non imperialistic country out there
Comparing Afghanistan to 500 years of European colonialism is an interesting strategy.
Especially since it send to ignore the fact Russia became involved in Afghanistan due in part to Western nations sponsoring a series of coups to take control of their former colony in the first place.
I never said that 500 years of European colonialism is better than what happened in Afghanistan. European colonialism in India alone by the British alone was 100 millions death. Of course European colonialism is the worst thing that ever happened to the world.
None of them. I think they are all equally capable of committing the crimes, but a gang is more dangerous than individual criminals acting on their own. So the gang [NATO] disbanding is a net positive.
It’s not difficult (except for Europeans and their settler counterpart) to understand that the world would be better off without NATO, your whiteness. “If it weren’t for NATO then it would’ve been anyone else!” isn’t the convincing claim you think it is. The burden of supporting such chickenshit non-claim is on you.
Yes, what’s your point? A terrorist organization ceasing to exist makes it slightly more difficult for European imperialist countries spearheaded by the largest imperialist, European settler-colony to collaborate and carry out their imperialist endeavors.
Would be one of the most internationally positive outcomes of 2026 if NATO dissolves.
For whom
The global south. NATO is the millitary alliance of the world’s imperialist powers, a destruction of millitary unity among imperialists would severely weaken imperialism. NATO is “defensive” in the same way the Iron Dome is, it gives imperialist countries free reign to treat the world like something to be looted and plundered without fear of genuine blowback.
I’m sure Ukraine, the Baltic trio and Poland agree with you.
Edit: shit, so many opinions of me based on a less than 15 word comment. I’m sure y’all are fun at parties.
Considering they are aligned with the west, who plunder the world’s wealth through export of capital and unequal exchange, that’s not really surprising. Opposition to NATO is pretty basic among anti-imperialists and the global south in general.
God damn it, I hate my education system. I thought NATO was the peacekeeper of the world — a valuable residue of WWII. One sided propaganda-based education developed to fuel a belief in American exceptionalism and nationalistic egoism. This education-level propaganda is pretty effective because you don’t actually know what details to question, and so you grow up with some pretty bold assumptions about how the world works (and don’t even realize it). They had me believing Christopher Columbus was some kind of messiah-explorer too.
How does this happen? My anti-conspiracy brain wants to believe there’s no such thing as an evil man behind the curtain, twisting his mustache and orchestrating these details like ”meh, we need to make sure all the kids believe in this propaganda such that we have an imperialistic society.” So, short of that, how does this happen so effectively?
2 major factors: In any given society, the mode of production is reinforced by the culture, laws, and ideology of said mode of production. Secondly, people license themselves to believe that whatever they think benefits them is good. Capitalism reinforces ideas like individualism, NATO is good, etc, and we go along with it until our material conditions force us into seeing a new reflection of reality, be it at the workplace, or seeing hard evidence online, being the victim of a bombing campaign, etc. It isn’t a man behind the curtain, but capital and the capitalist class.
It happens because it makes rich people richer
Yeah but the opinions of pro-Apartheid colonialist sympathizers are nothing but noise contaminated with hitler particles.
“only white europeans matter”
Each one of these countries was in coalition of the willing, no? and zionist bootlicker extraordinaire as we can observe.
Ah yes, Eastern Europe, the leading voices of the Global South.
Nato is an imperialist alliance that was created to fight imperalist USSR. Many of the funding countries was still colonizing other countries when it was created. Nato also destroyed Lybia which is the clearest example of it not being just a defensive alliance. Nato also collaborate with Israel who hold the longest current occupation, again has nothing to do with Europe protection.
The US could leave Nato today, attack a Nato country and Nato will do nothing about it
One major correction, the USSR was anti-imperialist, which is why the imperialists collaborated to oppose them. Their colonies were in danger of liberation due to the soviets aiding anti-imperialist movements.
If the USSR was anti-imperialist it wouldn’t have been involved in Afghanistan
edit: Imperialism : a policy of extending a country’s power and influence through diplomacy or military force.
It was imperialism since the goal was to spread socialism to other countries and I have no issues with socialism.
I think it should be self evident why that definition is bullshit
I am sure if i give the same definition or your definition to Nato countries they would say the same
That’s not what socialists mean by imperialism, by that vibes-based definition defeating Nazi Germany was “imperialism.” Imperialism is instead a form of international exploitation characterized by dominance of monopoly finance capital, export of capital, and super-exploiting the global south for super profits. Spreading socialism is anti-imperialist.
It’s not what anyone means by imperialism. If “extending your influence through diplomacy” is imperialism, then there isn’t a non imperialistic country out there
I stand with the definition I shared which include the socialists definition but goes beyond it
Comparing Afghanistan to 500 years of European colonialism is an interesting strategy.
Especially since it send to ignore the fact Russia became involved in Afghanistan due in part to Western nations sponsoring a series of coups to take control of their former colony in the first place.
I never said that 500 years of European colonialism is better than what happened in Afghanistan. European colonialism in India alone by the British alone was 100 millions death. Of course European colonialism is the worst thing that ever happened to the world.
deleted by creator
The world in general
Many countries around the world
Libya: The forgotten victims of NATO strikes - Amnesty International
Do you that think those strikes wouldn’t have happened without NATO?
Yes, but even if it would have happened anyways the world would still be better off without NATO.
That’s a pretty difficult claim to support because it requires you to make some pretty insane assumptions about what would have happened without NATO.
How so? Didn’t NATO commit crimes? The fact other criminals exist doesn’t mean one fewer criminal gang isn’t an improvement.
Which NATO country do you think couldn’t have committed all those crimes without the rest of NATO?
None of them. I think they are all equally capable of committing the crimes, but a gang is more dangerous than individual criminals acting on their own. So the gang [NATO] disbanding is a net positive.
It’s not difficult (except for Europeans and their settler counterpart) to understand that the world would be better off without NATO, your whiteness. “If it weren’t for NATO then it would’ve been anyone else!” isn’t the convincing claim you think it is. The burden of supporting such chickenshit non-claim is on you.
You now all the countries that joined NATO would still exist without it, right?
Yes, what’s your point? A terrorist organization ceasing to exist makes it slightly more difficult for European imperialist countries spearheaded by the largest imperialist, European settler-colony to collaborate and carry out their imperialist endeavors.
for literally everyone except eurofash
Humanity
Everyone except the shits