• 0x0@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    No, they are an alliance for defense. Nothing peaceful about it, they will fuck you up with military force if you mess with any one of the US’s economic interests.

    There, FTFY

    • yucandu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      But that’s not true. Why do you guys repeat such propaganda without question? Countless nations have messed with the US’s economic interests throughout history, how many times has NATO gotten involved?

      • 0x0@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 days 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.

        • yucandu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days 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.