• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Anti-Trade

        What does this mean?

        Anti-NATO

        It’s good to be Anti-NATO, NATO has Nazi origins and serves as a way to maintain Western Hegemony, securing profits via Imperialism and defending said Imperialism through coalition.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          4 months ago

          Lmao

          Mutual defense and deterrent to invasion by hostile world powers both in and outside of NATO is a bad thing? Sure, okay pal.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            It’s an alliance between Imperialist countries, and the alliance itself has Nazi origins and has had Nazi leaders. Yes, it’s a bad thing, because Imperialism is a bad thing.

            It’s a gang of countries that hyper-exploit the Global South in mutual defense against said Global South.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              It’s literally only function is a deterrent to war, including by members against others as they will not gain NATO support unless they are attacked.

              Its members might exploit, but thats a meaningless statement about NATO itself because without NATO there would literally be more war.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                4 months ago

                It’s literally only function is a deterrent to war, including by members against others as they will not gain NATO support unless they are attacked.

                It’s expansionist against the wishes of outside countries, and NATO exerts military pressure on the Global South.

                Its members might exploit, but thats a meaningless statement about NATO itself because without NATO there would literally be more war.

                Bzzzzt wrong. NATO’s only function is to preserve Western Hegemony and dominate the Global South militarily, so that member-States can continue exploiting ruthlessly unopposed. This results in proxy wars, such as the Israeli genocide of Palestinians.

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  It’s expansionist against the wishes of outside countries

                  this isn’t super accurate, joining nato has some pretty strict requirements, and besides yeeting NATO would be like the west completely nuking china and russia because “they did a human rights violation” it’s just a dogwhistle lmao.

                • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Its not expansionist because you have to request to join.

                  The only objecting countries whose wishes you’re referring to are nations who want to invade potential NATO members.

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Its not expansionist because you have to request to join

                    Bzzzzt wrong. NATO is expansionist because it pressures non-member states and routinely starts proxy wars.

                    The only countries whose wishes you’re referring to are nations who want to invade potential NATO members.

                    Bzzzzzt wrong. Western Hegemony damages the Global South and NATO keeps member-states unaccountable.

          • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            .

            Also, don’t send us reports just because you don’t agree with someone. We’re not here to censor people for you.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              4 months ago

              Oh no! So you want to talk about how the mutual self defence pact is somehow oppressing you or will you just keep dodging forever?

              • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                4 months ago

                Nato is as much a “mutual defense” pact as sea lions are lions. These guys bombed Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq and countless other nations. The members of Nato have repeatedly cooperated with each other, using the military networks built through the alliance to wage proxy wars, perform coups, destabilise regions of the world at a scale never before seen in human history.

                You might as well call the axis a mutual defense alliance lmao.

              • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Reason: User threatens me not to report his alt accounts for misinformation again

                What alt accounts? What are you even talking about? That’s two bullshit reports in one day, wasting our time.

                Reason: Claimes NATO forces other nations into subservience.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I’ve got bad news for you: a lot of us are anti-NATO.

        Also, what the hell is anti-trade? Do you want every Westphalian state to build a wall around itself?

        Edit to add: Oh I see, you created this new account because @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today got permabanned from lemmy.ml 😂 Let’s see how long this one lasts…

      • graphene@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Ah yes, free trade, the thing that improved the economies of ex-communist countries after the USSRs collapse and is on the path to fixing almost every African nations poverty.

        Ah yes, NATO, the “we will only call for (and maybe possibly do something to enforce) human rights if it’s convenient for us” alliance. And I’m sure all it’s member nations have squeaky clean track records when it comes to international politics.

        We must ban anyone against these things! That’s dangerous extremist ideology

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          NATO’s only function is mutual defense, NATO support ends when a member attacks.

          Since the only thing NATO does is prevent War, the only anti-NATO stance is a pro-war stance.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Are you referring to the coalition of some NATO members and some non-NATO members (19 nations total) enforcing a United Nations Security Council decision to make an immediate ceasefire and end the civil war in Libya?

              The one with zero troops on the ground?

              Being in NATO had no impact on the events, NATO member support was not mandatory as per the terms of NATO. The only reason they even call it a NATO operarion was because Itally would only vote in favor of the operation if NATO members were in charge instead of France.

              • IAmNotACat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                4 months ago

                The reason for NATO’s involvement is quite irrelevant because they were still happy to step in and do the work. The fact is that it was ultimately NATO-led and their efforts did not lead to peace in the region.

                To call NATO’s involvement in Libya ‘anti-war’ is sheer lunacy.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Well I certainly could make comparisons but thats a little irrelevnt. The core of my statement is that Lemmy doesn’t operate the way Twitter does.

              For me “the fuck is that question” is just a colloquial expression of confusion, not anger.