• ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Actually no because Frankenstein’s monster was not evil, just misunderstood, meanwhile, NATO isn’t not evil, just misunderstood (by liberals).

    • supersolid_snake@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It’s not misunderstood either. It’s evil and understood. They know what side their bread is buttered, it’s the imperialism side. It’s just that their narcissism won’t allow them to openly admit it.

  • darkernations@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Thanks for sharing this.

    NATO in reality is far weaker than the SCO in all direct military comparisons. Apart from the already weakened, debt-burdened and militarily wildly overstretched US, the only significant land military power NATO has is medium-sized Turkiye. The SCO, in contrast, can boast of four major thermonuclear military powers all of which have formidable land armies — China, Russia, India and Iran. Turkiye itself, as I have noted, now appears happier associating with the SCO than with NATO.

    That’s a very interesting perspective; not considered a comparison of the SCO with NATO before, with that framing.

    If one hasn’t seen it already, Vijay Prashad on Hyperimperialism: US-NATO’s Dangerous and Decadent New Stage is a good watch:

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=CJDxxkVhlJM

    The full article can be found at:

    https://thetricontinental.org/studies-on-contemporary-dilemmas-4-hyper-imperialism/

  • JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    34
    ·
    6 months ago

    Actually with new members Finland and Sweden, N.A.T.O. is now more relevant than ever. Should the U.S. role become less significant, its existence and viability are more assured than ever.

    • USSR Enjoyer@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Relevant in the sense of being an imperialist danger to all life on earth, sure. Also, bear in mind NATO does not provide any benefit to members, it’s a big financial drain, and basically undermines the nation’s sovereignty by ceding certain political and military controls to a foreign non-state organization. The fact that NATO itself is a deliberate hard power tool of the US to subordinate Europe and Russia – a tool that should have been dismantled back in 1992 at the very least, says a lot about its future if the US did exit. Pretty sure any president who tried to leave would get JFK’d before writing the draft.

    • SadArtemis🏳️‍⚧️@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Agreed, NATO is now a bigger terrorist than ever before (which is big news- as NATO has always been the greatest and most aggressive terrorist in history). And NATO is a bigger target than before, as well, for when justice finally comes, if they are foolish enough to call it upon themselves (which sadly I am certain they are).

      Now formerly ostensibly “neutral” Finland and Sweden have secured their fate. Who’s next to sign up to the Nazi-Atlantic Terrorist Organization? Who else wants to get their countries turned into an irradiated hellhole? If the Europeans want to goosestep their way to hell, then so be it.

  • Saff
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    6 months ago

    Well, thanks china daily for what I’m sure is a totally unbiased serious news piece!