And here will come the Russian sympathizers using this as an example of "NATO aggression"
Maybe Gran Colombia will rise again?
Only if they invaded Panama, then sure.
Accusing person who have critical view about NATO is "Russian supporter" is laziest way to shut down flaws with organization.
And actually this more pissed off self-subscribed Anti-American Imperialist naives and Nicolás Maduro supporters than them.
"North" Atlantic
What reason is there to be Anti-NATO
Well, NATO was originally created by US as response to Warsaw Pact made by Soviet Union and defending weak democratic nations from converting into Soviet's Communism.
But after Cold War ended, Most people used be want NATO to disbanded after Soviet Union collapse for years (especially US) before Russia returning into International stage by Intervening Syrian Civil War, "reliberating" Georgian provinces as 'nations' and illegally take Crimea as Russian populated area wish to be returning to Motherland.
And those reasons are exactly why NATO is still around so i don't get why this is a reason to be anti-nato
Well basically, Since NATO is US made International alliance, and right after Cold War ended. Instead of disbanding it, they just used it to intervene countries with or without justification. This made countries like Bosnia or Assad's Syria in Slavic and Islamic regions to be either short-lived or permanently hate both NATO and United States.
They will possibly renamed it as "Atlantic Ocean Treaty Organization" in near future.
The NATO bombings and intervention in Bosnia against the Serbs was justified and Bosnia isn't anti-NATO at all. Are you thinking of the angry and annoying Serb minority in Bosnia?
Also NATO hasn't invaded Syria
at this point it's probably just nato because that's what everyone knows it as
Well, technically they just intervening as sided with Syrian rebels (either Moderate and Islamist types) with occasional Kurdish militias (if depends which NATO member supporting them).
And also Turkey is also member of NATO, which adding help 'justification' part to destroying country part.
How is this a criticism though
You've mentioned that different NATO countries support different things so why try and use Turkey as an example of how NATO is destroying Syria
Well, They hate Kurdish people more than any country in region and by so they invading them and Syrian gov. territory months ago with Afrin region.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_military_operation_in_Afrin
Yes a majority of people agree Turkey's attacks on the Kurds are evil but what does this have to do with NATO
Turkey's actions are nothing to do with NATO
Again, Turkey is member of NATO and their help of aiding with Syrian Moderate and Islamist rebels will eventually get into Islamic terrorist groups to torn region like ISIS, even without rest help from NATO.
While other NATO members will play helping different groups that can be either Kurdish and Syrian rebels who are less extremists.
Turkey's actions have nothing to do with NATO
NATO's supporting of various groups is also being done by every single faction in the entire war. The Russians are supporting extremists, the Iranians are supporting extremists, NATO, America, Britain, Israel, they're all supporting extremists.
Whilst that is a criticism of NATO its not a criticism of NATO as a whole and instead their delaings with the Syrian War itself. Its not even a proper NATO deployment.
Nato: The only supernational entity that republicans do approve of.
I'm not exactly sure that having a NATO member in a place as unstable as south america is exactly a good idea, but the issues with south america have been mostly internal rebelions not external wars I guess.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
