Putin's North Korean Soldiers

[Ray1990]

The NATO membership and structure was specifically established and engineered to deal with a singular political and ideological antagonist.  That antagonist is effectively gone.

What NATO is operating against now is not the same at all. 

Russia is a nation run by oligarchs and 'channeled' money... not "soviet" political will... their ideology is one of profit, not sovereign pride. 

As a result NATO changed it's modus operandi, intending to chip away at the former Soviet sub-entities and use capital gains as motivation... NATO was willing to exploit greed and corruption in former satellite states to achieve their ends... and here we are.  Hundreds of thousands dead or injured, infrastructures decimated or destroyed.  "Profit" has become too important to NATO... they have become as their very enemy now.  "Peace" is not their aim... "victory" is.

The US spent too much propping up NATO, who make their policy as informed by "other" institutions of an "international" nature... and as usual... those other clubs see U.S. tax-payer funding as an "entitlement" based upon their notional "good works" of the past.

NATO is not a nation... so the word 'expansion' is a metaphorical compromise to represent their fervor, zealotry, and pride to 'spread' through the world as "the" club to belong to.

I never resisted the idea of the promotion of economic and civil freedoms... but I do feel that profiteering from the effort is demonstrably counter-productive... in commerce their are only 'winners and losers' and this is what the former communist puppets railed against about 'capitalism,'  where one wins... their is always a 'loser.'  In the human world, an exploiter always stand over the exploited.

We will eventually work it out... and we keep trying to do just that,...

but meanwhile NATO is engaging in the games of the "economic hitman" based upon the motive of "winning, and getting rich in the interim."  It is a broken strategy that may have worked to some degree in the late 20th Century... but it cannot and should not become an entrenched manner of international conduct any longer.  It costs too much... it's too damaging... it ends too many lives. 

Russia is no saint here either.  It would appear that half of their operations are about 'posture' and 'roaring.' 
A perfect counter to NATO's pretense of "harmony and peace" being their goal.

Insofar as the economic games of the day... none of it is anything less than a banking illusion... no nation is 'self-sufficient' (or can ever be) as long as the "one" bank has a global monopoly on currency and monetary policy...  but NATO is entrenched in the banking world... and Russia's oligarchs are as well...

"In short, NATO is a lot more than am entity built for war, I'd also say it's a preferable entity that offers more security for the nation and individual compared to the alternatives."

I do apologize for that simplistic utterance, I admit that what NATO is "now" is a far cry from what it was ever said to be when the Soviets were knee-deep in their side-show of 'international politics.'  Even if it was directly constructed in specific response to 'Soviet/Communist military pressure.'

I stop short of saying that NATO (among other organizations) is just one of a number of political/marketing arms for the military industrial complex, and the weapons black market... only because it will never be proved to be true...  but I think that we need to be clear...

NATO isn't now what NATO says it is.

The NATO membership and structure was specifically established and engineered to deal with a singular political and ideological antagonist. That antagonist is effectively gone.

That is true although the nature of threats has evolved over time. In some theatres the scope has changed completely, plus there's plenty of new theatres being constantly built too. What individual nation in the west can compete with the likes of China in cyber warfare? America? Even your nation is vulnerable and this world is ever-changing.

As a result NATO changed it's modus operandi, intending to chip away at the former Soviet sub-entities and use capital gains as motivation... NATO was willing to exploit greed and corruption in former satellite states to achieve their ends... and here we are. Hundreds of thousands dead or injured, infrastructures decimated or destroyed. "Profit" has become too important to NATO... they have become as their very enemy now. "Peace" is not their aim... "victory" is.

NATO isn't an economic entity within itself so we're drifting into the idea of cabals and secrets of which can only amount to conjecture. Personally I don't see that level of control from any power, it's chaos behind the scenes even in nations where the majority fall in line.

NATO is not a nation... so the word 'expansion' is a metaphorical compromise to represent their fervor, zealotry, and pride to 'spread' through the world as "the" club to belong to.

Neither is WHO, the UN, WEF, WTO or any other institution that focuses on international issues. Yet, they're the clubs to belong to because they offer a lot more than they cost. Is there an element of compliance? Definitely, would you expect anything else within rules based order? I wouldn't. NATO has frame works that sovereign nations can choose to follow and given the choice between the actual meaning behind 1st, 2nd and 3rd world nations I reckon the majority of nations would choose to be number 1 if given half the chance.

Honestly? I'm not a fan of entities that are too big for their boots but I've been accused of being a realist too so I tend to prefer these international groups and norms simply because the alternative is a lot worse. They have compasses that almost point north whereas there's so many countries pumping out compasses that point West... Maybe I'm biased.


I never resisted the idea of the promotion of economic and civil freedoms... but I do feel that profiteering from the effort is demonstrably counter-productive... in commerce their are only 'winners and losers' and this is what the former communist puppets railed against about 'capitalism,' where one wins... their is always a 'loser.' In the human world, an exploiter always stand over the exploited.

I'm genuinely not a fan of capitalism but as I've aged I've come to realise there'll never be man-made system that'll negate our impulses. The human condition is probably best left for another thread although I would say we're only competing with ourselves these days and we're pretty damn good at it. We'll lose eventually with that attitude.

but meanwhile NATO is engaging in the games of the "economic hitman" based upon the motive of "winning, and getting rich in the interim." It is a broken strategy that may have worked to some degree in the late 20th Century... but it cannot and should not become an entrenched manner of international conduct any longer. It costs too much... it's too damaging... it ends too many lives.


It's not NATO though, it's nations within NATO which are actually using every institution they can to get one over their adversaries. It's human nature. Civilised modern nations is a myth and there'll always be exploitation, that said at least the West keeps up the semblance of civility whilst private hands are unfortunately weighed down with more and more wealth. Which is why I mentioned Russia's ultimatum before it went to war. Those "drafts of negotiation" were akin to a stinking lifting fart shot in our general direction. It only addressed the US and NATO which was a huge reflection on the kind of backwards 19th century thinking Putin has become so fond of. A militaristic outlook where only the strong matters where territory and resources are the only currency worth a damn. Backwards and cannibalistic if you ask me.

What do you expect the West to do when a nation like Russia pisses on accords it signed whilst showing blatant disregard for various rules of engagement and human rights?

I do wish to see change, these days I don't think we're ready for change since so many are invested, I also wouldn't have much hope on any system that replaces the ones we already have in place. My main reason?

We're hardly living up to the world we inherited, tomorrow will be as dull as the minds we find leading us today. It's like desecrating 20th century war graves whilst uttering "you never mattered you pointless #!" Which is absolutely deplorable... We're deplorable.

Why Ukraine and not the other countless conflicts around the world? White privilege innit?