On August 4th, I wrote an article criticising a NATO video that purported to debunk two “myths” about the organisation. The video claimed that “NATO is a defensive alliance” and “NATO does not seek confrontation”. I described these claims as “false” on the grounds that NATO has carried out several offensive operations.
Logically, if an organisation has carried out offensive operations, it cannot be “defensive” – at least not wholly defensive, which is what “not seeking confrontation” implies.
Ian Rons has criticised my article. He begins by disputing that the invasion of Afghanistan was an offensive operation, noting that 9/11 was “the only time in NATO’s history when the mutual defense clause, Article 5, was invoked”.
What he fails to note is that NATO’s operation in Afghanistan was not based on the invocation of Article 5. The only two NATO operations based on the invocation of Article 5 were Operation Eagle Assist and Operation Active Endeavor – as explained on the organisation’s website. Having said that, it is true the US invasion of Afghanistan (and the subsequent NATO operation there) were launched in response to the 9/11 attacks.
Does this make them defensive? Arguably not. The 9/11 attacks were carried out by a transnational terrorist organisation, Al-Qaeda, not by the state of Afghanistan. (Neither Osama bin Laden nor any of the 9/11 hijackers were Afghans.) Invading and then occupying a foreign country where a terrorist organisation happens to be based is not “defensive”. The NATO airstrikes of June 2007 that killed at least 45 Afghan civilians plainly weren’t.
Note that prior to the invasion, the U.S. refused to negotiate with the Taliban. As the New York Times noted last year, “some former diplomats say that by repeatedly shutting the door to talks, the United States may have closed off its best chance of avoiding a prolonged and extremely costly war”.
However, even if the NATO operation in Afghanistan was defensive, the other two examples I cited clearly weren’t. Ian suggests they were “legitimate and morally just” but that is irrelevant. As I stated in my article, “you can argue those operations were justified, but you can’t argue they were defensive”. Neither Serbia nor Libya had attacked a NATO member.
I was therefore correct to describe the claims that “NATO is a defensive alliance” and “NATO does not seek confrontation” as false.
Next, Ian disputes my interpretation of a statement made by the U.S. concerning the recent security agreement between China and the Solomon Islands. And he accuses me of “quote-mining and distortion of reality in order to paint U.S. or NATO actions as sinister – or at least hypocritical”. While I don’t accept that I “distorted reality”, I was attempting to show that U.S. actions are hypocritical.
And the statement I quoted is only one rather minor example of this. There are numerous other examples I could have given, such as the invasion of Iraq, various foreign coups, or the Monroe Doctrine.
Ian then cites something Putin said about Kazakhstan in 2014 as if this has any relevance to my article. In any case, I don’t dispute that Putin is an imperialist.
Ian writes, “if Noah believes that Putin’s denial of Ukrainian statehood and the invasions since 2014 were really NATO’s fault, he should have an explanation of why Putin is so clearly unconcerned about Finland joining NATO”. This again is irrelevant to what I said in my article, although it is relevant to claims I have made elsewhere.
My view on exactly what is “NATO’s fault” is more complex than Ian suggests, and to avoid repeating myself I will direct him to an article I wrote back in June.
As to why Putin is less concerned about Finland joining NATO, I would say the following. This is not some startling new revelation. We’ve known since at least 2008 that the Russian elite considers NATO membership for Ukraine to be an absolute red line. As Ambassador William Burns wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice:
Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all red lines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.
Burns also warned that bringing Ukraine into NATO would “create fertile soil for Russian meddling in Crimea and eastern Ukraine”.
Why the Russian elite would care more about NATO membership for Ukraine than for Finland is obvious: Ukraine’s border is less than 500km from Moscow; there are millions of ethnic Russians living in Ukraine; and Russia requires access to its naval base in Sevastopol. Note: I’m not saying these are valid reasons. I’m simply explaining why the Russian elite cares more about Ukraine.
In conclusion, neither of the main points I made in my article has been refuted. It is “mostly false” that NATO is not aggressive; and it is “highly debateable” that NATO made no promise that it wouldn’t expand.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
And the people are kept distracted and divided whilst this madness plays out mostly in plain sight.
One hundred and fifty Tory MP’s on the Nut Zero take. Presumably when many of these are out of work later this year their bribe monies will switch to their incoming Labour counterparts.
Yep, the new excited batch of excited but useless MPs will soon be on the gravy train and I suspect a fair few of the outgoing lot will keep their snouts in the troff via lobbying of some description.
Oh the Grand Old WEF/ They had 10,000 lackeys/ They marched them up to the top of the COP/ And they marched them down again/ And when they were all signed up/ when the public were all kept down/ All the UN puppet scum, were neither up nor down
Cheers Varmint – class.
Cheers mate. ——-My wife laughed as well.
If you want to be sure of the outcome of an election, you’ll obviously have to buy all candidates which stand a chance to be elected. That’s the way to control a properly tuned demuckcracy: Eliminate voter choice by suitable candidate selection.
If we got the list in advance we might get to see if Reform / UKIP / other small parties have a chance of getting in?
Their Labour counterparts wouldn’t need bribing as they’re completely bonkers already. As for these Conservative nut jobs calling themselves Conservatives in the first place is beyond belief.
This sums it up.
I’m noticing an increase of commenters on MSM sites slowly coming round to the net zero / climate scams. Whether there will be enough to covert the brainwashed or not remains to be seen.
Sadly I reckon that things have got to get a lot worse before enough people think that stopping net zero is a high enough priority to strongly influence how they vote and these traitors are kicked out of power. Amongst the general population I wonder how many people realise they’re paying sky high prices for electricity due to subsidies and green mandates. Similarly when the cost of ICE cars and gas boilers increase massively because manufacturers are paying millions in fines because they can’t sell enough green crap will the majority of people realise why the prices are going through the roof.
And that pretty much sums up what western democracy has become.
Bureaucrats implement the policies of plutocrats and technocrats.
And politicians are responsible for selling it all to the general population.
Any politician who tries to sell a non-approved policy gets nowhere or taken down very quickly.
“Any politician who tries to sell a non-approved policy gets nowhere or taken down very quickly”——-Like Braverman, or Bridgen. ——–The globalist club members don’t want you in their exclusive club
I will never vote conservative again until and unless they unreservedly drop nut zero.
Conservative support for nut zero is not just plain idiotic but now shown to be venal as well.
Net zero is a financial, eco, social and political disaster. EVs are not ‘green’, eco-friendly nor economically rational. Visit a lithium strip mine for more info. Cobalt garnered with black slave labour seems to be fine with these virtue signalling idiots. Hydrocarbons are abiotic and have nothing to do with rocks or fossils.
As the article insinuates you can buy Pharma-ment or Net Zero-ment with about £50 mn. We saw this during Rona.
No surprise that the corrupt criminals in gov’t and the agencies are on the payroll of ‘big climate’.
We simply need to follow the money trails to find the ‘science’.
Yes we know…….But we are letting them away with it. We believe all the crap. We see a storm or a flood on TV and we just assume it is all climate change. ——-or at least most of us do.
People aren’t really assuming it’s all climate change, they keep being told so. This is really just as with COVID, just in slow-motion. The COVID disaster was always supposed to strike next month. The climate disaster next years, so to say.
These MPs are easily paid for. Any politician who drinks the nut zero koolaid avowedly hates their fellow man. We see the impact of nut zero in Africa, likely far more Africans have been killed by the world bank ban on investing in coal power than Jews were murdered by Hitler. The woke slaughter on the green alter goes unnoticed of course. Look how the Washington post celebrated this slaughter:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/07/17/the-world-bank-cuts-off-funding-for-coal-how-much-impact-will-that-have/
I agree. Africa (and other poor countries) have also been used in experiments with vaccines etc. Thank God so much less of Africa had the Covid jab, but they are being made to suffer for it in other ways.
Time to get Rolls Royce to donate a few SMR’s to these countries, make them independent of the West and keep their population at home as a bonus.
People should now realise if they have not done before that we are all being herded like sheep, and the sheepdogs are the globalist pretend to save the planet eco socialists seeking to control all of the world’s wealth and resources and using fear of a manufactured climate crisis to get us all into the pen. The Climate Industrial Complex controls the entire narrative. (The UN, WEF, Politicians, Technocrats, Liberal Progressive Media and Business Stakeholders). Whenever I hear a friend or relative say things like “Well the climate is definitely changing” I feel like shaking them by the lapels. But the power of the climate propaganda they see everyday on their 6 O’clock News leaves them so thoroughly brainwashed that they actually believe they can see global warming from their living room window. When you attempt to get them to see some sense they stare at you like you are from Mars. They ask “So you think you know more than the scientists”? ————-They are unaware that this has nothing to do with science. There can be little hope that the Climate Charlatans will not succeed as the vast majority of people simply refuse to escape from the herd of sheep. They accept losing their fantastic gas central heating, their car, their beef, their holidays, their affordable electricity, and they let the globalists throw them onto their back and sheer all the wool of them.
“Shaking them by the lapels”? Shaking them by the throat, more like!
“But the power of the climate propaganda they see everyday on their 6 O’clock News leaves them so thoroughly brainwashed that they actually believe they can see global warming from their living room window.”
Eloquent and sadly funny:
“global warming from their living room window.”
And that’s the truth of the matter.
Well maybe they should go upstairs and have a look out of their bedroom window for a clearer look. They might be able to see that the Polar Bears are doing just fine
Since I think this everytime I’ms scrolling past it: I absolutely love this picture, although I’m not convinced of the health benefits of Coca-Cola.
Except the Bear isn’t really drinking the cola. The photo is about as realistic as the Polar Bears demise. Whoever heard of an endangered species whose numbers have gone up 5 fold in the last 50 years?
The Coke bottle is obviously there because of its symbolic value as “American way of life” icon the other guys really despise. They’d almost certainly be calling teaching polar bears to drink Cola a cruel and unsual way of furthering their extermination. As always with these Americanisms, I find myself in disagreement with both sides. But I nevertheless really like the picture.
Good point about the cola as symbol of capitalism. And that ties nicely in with the fact that climate change isn’t actually about the climate, and is really an anti capitalist eco socialist agenda with climate as the excuse
But I think many are waking up, perhaps most among what we used to call the ‘working class’. In my experience with Lower Traffic Neighbourhoods (we have just had one installed in our area of south London), many are furious and not complying. They are not just furious about the LTNs, but about ULEZ, the bicycle lanes, the constant road works, the electric car fiasco, etc etc. They definitely see that it is an anti-motorist agenda. There are many more who are seeing all this now, as with the cash versus cashless stuff. We must keep fighting where and when we can.
They are not “green” billionaires, they are grifter billionaires and megalomaniacs
I wonder how many of them are on Mr Epsteins list
Most if not all is my guess.
The big con is persuading people that “climate change” is new, rather than educating them that the climate has never been stable for long. Avoiding investment in things that provide protection against weather related problems and taking the opportunity to blame someone else is on the agenda as well.
Very well put.
It is “climate” that isn’t new. ————-“Climate Change” is new since this actually means changes to climate allegedly caused by humans, and ofcourse it allows for all manner of policies to be put in place, and all manner of rent seekers holding out their hands for money from the western world who caused this manufactured crisis.
“…chaired by London Mayor and fireworks impresario Sadiq Khan” Love it!
One word..Traitors .
They really do not give a toss about the country or us.They all have their noses and more in the corrupt trough.
Retribution is coming !
I hope Retribution comes real soon for these parasites.
We need more psychopaths with access to weaponry. Maybe the yanks could spare a few?
Retribution for them will not come in this world, but one day we all have to face God on Judgement Day!! There, true justice will be dispensed!
I seem to recall UK taxpayers provide funds for WWF which is a charity. They should not be able to join political campaigns.
I hope Reform advertise the strong links between the Tories and these fanatical political campaign groups. As the economy implodes and people shiver following power restrictions their votes will evaporate (or maybe they will boil away).
The Labour and Lib Dem Parties plus SNP/ Greens are all fully onboard with this eco impoverishment crap as well. It just happens to be the tories in government at the moment. —-If anything the impoverishment will happen even faster under those other parasites.
They hate us and everything British. They should be strung up from the nearest tree.
Oh, they absolutely love us. That just want (and work to this end) that we hate ourselves so that our guilty consciences make us part with our money more readily.
That might be working with some in the middle classes, but I don’t think it’s working on here. I hate them more with every article I read, and I don’t feel guilty about anything.
You should lobby your Government officials – invest in an election and buy some politicians.
Another argument for outlaw supraregional electioneering clubs aka political parties. There’s principally nothing wrong with the Grantham Foundation fielding candidates in elections. But these should stand as Grantham Foundation candidates. Some people who very much believe in elected(!!1) would probably be suprised to learn that all of their so-called choices end up as vote for a Grantham Foundation candidate, ie, that they really don’t have a political choice at all, just one for their preferred hairdo.
Many organisations fund both sides, just to hedge their bets and guarantee influence. We need to check who is bankrolling the people we vote for and vote accordingly.
So the choice at election time is really between 2 bunches of pretend to save the planet socialists. ——Take your pick. Perhaps if we all voted for the Monster Loony Party the eco socialists might wake up
We need to cross through the names on our ballot paper and write ‘none of the above’. If enough did that, it might make an impact. I am not hopeful, but we must do something. Actually, I believe that at local councils level is where we could make most impact – I am too old, but younger people should seriously think about becoming independent councillors and start to make a difference (not just protest).
I’m not sure the OMRLP have enough cash to field candidates in all seats, unless you think Reform are one of their branches
The Tories need to be destroyed at the next election. It’s a bit of a stuck record, but this lot really are a shower of sh!t. Fully bought and paid for by Rockefeller and the rest. This is a great article, well written, factual and concise. Just follow the money to see who is in charge of the country. That’s the link that needs to be broken, how politics is paid for. This corruption needs to end. The vast transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich over the last few years is being weaponised to keep the poor in check. To take away genuine democratic choices.
I’m not voting for these globalist puppets anymore. They can all crash and burn as far as I am concerned. I will no longer comply!
This is not a problem limited to Tories. It seems like most MP’s are in the pay of people, or groups pushing their agenda’s and a few ‘donations’ is all it takes to get a change of policy, or vary voting intentions. We quite literally have the best parliament money can buy.
See if your MP is a supporter of the conservative Environment Network. Mine is and I have written to lambast him about it. The more that we harass the better!
https://www.cen.uk.com/our-caucus
Thank you, Chris. Superb reporting and analysis. Again.
I told my super marginal Tory MP (Felicity Buchan, who had a majority of 150 votes) that her membership of CEN guarantees I’m voting Reform.
The not-Conservative Party needs to burn to ash next general election if we’re going to have any chance whatsoever of getting an actual small-c conservative party worth voting for in the election after next.
I would say a good half of my family and friends usually vote Tory. Asking them now I can’t find a single one who is going to turn out for them. They seam to assume its not going to be as bad as predicted. I think that they are wrong, they will be ash.
Voting Reform won’t help anyone since they don’t stand a chance – it just gives more votes to Labour and we’ll have an even more appalling lot under Keir Starmer (of the Trilateral Commission). You need to put a cross through your ballot paper and write ‘None of the above’. But it’s important to go to vote and do this, otherwise they’ll simply say that non-voters don’t care or are too lazy or apathetic to vote.
At least voting reform means you are voting for a candidate, spoiling your ballot won’t change who get’s in, it just decreases the vote. It would need a large number of spoilers (who would all be voting for the same candidate normally) in your constituency to change the outcome.
But I don’t want to vote for Reform!! I don’t trust them any more than the other parties. I believe, for instance, that Richard Tice no more stood up against the Covid jabs than any of the other politicians. In any case, our area is a Labour stronghold and it is extremely unlikely that that will change.
And here’s the massive impact that Ed “The Moron” Miliband’s “Climate Change Act (Destruction of the Economy)” of 2008 has had on global emissions.
F….ing W…ker. ——–Remember Miliband gave us the climate change act but a tory (Teresa May) gave us the net zero amendment to that in 2019——-So we can see there isn’t much difference between a piece of crap like Miliband and a so called tory.
The dirty Tory Traitors are being bribed to trash our country. Pure filth.
What a nest of vipers! I will have no regrets about the Tories losing an election. However, Starmer and his equally awful brood will be as bad if not worse over Net Zero, so we’re in a cleft stick. As I’ve replied to someone below, our only option is to cross through all the names on our ballot paper at a GE and write ‘none of the above’. But we must go to vote so that ‘they’ can’t say we didn’t care.
Thank you, Chris, for consistently excellent articles in the DS.
A list of the member MPs?
https://www.cen.uk.com/our-caucus
Internal combustion cars versus spontaneous combustion cars.
Who are these politicians? Name names.
‘I know every man has his price, I just didn’t expect it to be so low’. Napoleon.