Is NATO imperialist?

[TheReckoning]

Many people have claimed that NATO, or the countries that are a part of it, are imperialist, making NATO an imperialist organization. Do you agree?

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

If you read the NATO charter, in particular Article 5, it makes pretty clear that NATO is a defensive military alliance.

And as long as it is defensive in nature, then it ipso facto can't be imperialist, since there is nothing imperialist about self-defense.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Some of its members practice or have recently practiced forms of neo-imperialism, but NATO itself is just a framework, and not coherent enough to pursue a unified imperialist policy.

[HillGoose]

no only the damn reds say that

[DaleCooper]

Yes because imperialist means when western countries do things.

[Pericles]

It's totally imperialist to protect the small nations in the Baltics and other historically oppressed nations in Eastern Europe like Poland from being subjugated again, especially by the huge nation next to them that clearly has aggressive goals.

[Mr. Smith]

Yes.

But so was Warsaw Pact in the day, so's the Eurasian Council, so's pretty much any alliance with China.

It's just the price of doing the bidding for a superpower.

[John Dule]

Yes because imperialist means when western countries do things.

Speaking of which, where has BigAbraham been?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No, under most definitions that you would see.

[It’s so Joever]

Yes because imperialist means when western countries do things.

Speaking of which, where has BigAbraham been?

Still cleaning up the all stains on his pants.

[CumbrianLefty]

Some people really do have "imperialism" on the brain.

[MABA 2020]

Imperialist? No, there should certainly be space to criticise NATO over the last twenty years, but recent events have proven NATO's use and trying to claim that the organisation is Imperialist is silly in light of Russia's actual Imperialism

[RodPresident]

The NATO role should be replaced by European Union to disarm Cold War feelings. Take US off game can help to give another NATO image.

[ingemann]

The NATO role should be replaced by European Union to disarm Cold War feelings. Take US off game can help to give another NATO image.

The lesson from the Ukraine invasion is that NATO is a stabilizing force, which keep deranged Russian leaders from invading countries and the members from attacking each other. So I see no reason to mess with a winning formula.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The NATO role should be replaced by European Union to disarm Cold War feelings. Take US off game can help to give another NATO image.

The lesson from the Ukraine invasion is that NATO is a stabilizing force, which keep deranged Russian leaders from invading countries and the members from attacking each other. So I see no reason to mess with a winning formula.

Indeed, there is no need to mess with the winning formula right now. Removing the US out of the equation also weakens the alliance to the point of making it more vulnerable overall to pressure from Russia. EU vs Russia is much less unbalanced than  EU+US vs Russia.
Of course, Ukraine in the EU makes quite a considerable difference in this regard...

[Person Man]

You can believe that the power of any one group of elites can be minimized, even if by creating another set of elite,  without endorsing that any one group of elites should be superior to all others. So no.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Imperialist, depends how the tool is used

But can de facto be at least expansionist, and what can make people ask such questions about its imperialism (besides...eveeeenntuuuaaallllyyyy...the fact that its...maaaaaiiiinnnnn...member is the USA, which had its very own touch at imperialism...) could be de fact that this group of countries make a military alliance, that can expand, and that gathers around...what...exactly?

Some principles? Some values? Some goals? Some strategies?

Any clear answer about that?

[brucejoel99]

NATO is a defensive alliance that primarily North Atlantic countries can willingly join for threat protection if they so choose. Tell an Estonian, Latvian, or Lithuanian that they're in NATO to be imperialists & you'll get a nice punch in the face for your attempt to deny their right to self-determination by asking them to surrender to the adjacent sphere of influence instead.

[Big Abraham]

Countries attacked by NATO since 1991: Serbia & Montenegro, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

[John Dule]

Countries attacked by NATO since 1991: Serbia & Montenegro, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

It is indeed interesting that NATO attacks only bad countries and Russia attacks good ones.

[Big Abraham]

Countries attacked by NATO since 1991: Serbia & Montenegro, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

It is indeed interesting that NATO attacks only bad countries and Russia attacks good ones.

Santander would be disappointed.

[vitoNova]

Nah.  The chow would be better.

NATO dining facilities = the same slop, every single goddamn day.  Stale eggs, sauerkraut, and weird-ass schnitzel.  It's the same menu if you were stationed in Germany, Italy, or on deployment to the Balkans. 

USA/KBR (yes, there was an absolute distinction, and they ARE NOT the same) = got them grills going bruh....burgers, fries, hot dogs, and bottomless sodas.

USA #1

[TheReckoning]

Countries attacked by NATO since 1991: Serbia & Montenegro, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

It is indeed interesting that NATO attacks only bad countries and Russia attacks good ones.

Imperialism is imperialism, regardless of who it’s against.

[Badger]

Countries attacked by NATO since 1991: Serbia & Montenegro, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

More Unapologetic disingenuousness from our resident tankie.

Trying to compare the extent of involvement, such as the single day border Skirmish with Pakistan, or the instigation of the conflicts such as retaliating for the Taliban support and protection of al-Qaeda for the 9/11 attacks, compared to the full on unprovoked invasions of Georgia and Ukraine, is laughable propaganda level garbage that no one with three function brain cells would buy as comparable.

Also cute how we decide to arbitrarily include 1991. Conveniently leaves rush off the hook for Afghanistan, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, East Germany, etc etc etc Lolol!

[ingemann]

Countries attacked by NATO since 1991: Serbia & Montenegro, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

Correction

Countries attacked by NATO in its entire history: Afghanistan.


The question here is whether NATO is imperialist, not whether its member states could be called imperialist. NATO article 5 have invoked once. As such NATO has only waged war once and that was after unprovoked attack on one of its members.

So based on the military history of NATO, it's not an imperialist organization.