Is NATO imperialist?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 21, 2022, 04:53:29 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: Gustaf, afleitch, Hash)
  Is NATO imperialist?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: ??
#1
Yes
#2
No
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: Is NATO imperialist?  (Read 1060 times)
Alcibiades
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,282
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: May 13, 2022, 01:43:57 PM »

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

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

NATO never attacked Iraq. What are you talking about? Quite famously most of its members refused to have anything to do with the American-led invasion…
Logged
Big Abraham
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,928
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: May 13, 2022, 02:16:25 PM »

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

Countries attacked by Russia since 1991: Ukraine and Georgia.

Interesting.

NATO never attacked Iraq. What are you talking about? Quite famously most of its members refused to have anything to do with the American-led invasion…

NATO air and naval combat units were funnelled to Iraq-Kuwait during the Persian Gulf War in early 1991.
Logged
Big Abraham
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,928
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: May 13, 2022, 06:56:02 PM »
« Edited: May 13, 2022, 07:01:15 PM by Big Abraham »

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.  

Simply stunning.

By this metric, Russia isn't doing imperialism in Ukraine right now, since after all it's only a "special military operation." How convenient for the world powers that they only get to call it war when they're not the aggressors.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,237
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: May 13, 2022, 07:12:56 PM »

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.

This reasoning doesn't make any sense. The Warsaw Pact was also avowedly defensive in nature, and of course the only countries it ever invaded were its own members. It would be absurd to allege that the Warsaw Pact was not imperialist because its charter made it clear that it was a defensive military alliance.

The most obvious parallel to NATO is, of course, the Delian League, a grouping of Athens and its allied states. This was also an association of self-defense, and as it happens the term "Delian League" is basically equivalent to "Athenian Empire". It may be that NATO is not an imperialist project (and in fact I am not claiming here that it is), but that argument would have to actually be made rather than ducking behind definitions and making vague associations.
Logged
Alcibiades
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,282
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: May 13, 2022, 07:39:25 PM »
« Edited: May 13, 2022, 08:01:51 PM by Alcibiades »

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.

This reasoning doesn't make any sense. The Warsaw Pact was also avowedly defensive in nature, and of course the only countries it ever invaded were its own members. It would be absurd to allege that the Warsaw Pact was not imperialist because its charter made it clear that it was a defensive military alliance.

The most obvious parallel to NATO is, of course, the Delian League, a grouping of Athens and its allied states. This was also an association of self-defense, and as it happens the term "Delian League" is basically equivalent to "Athenian Empire". It may be that NATO is not an imperialist project (and in fact I am not claiming here that it is), but that argument would have to actually be made rather than ducking behind definitions and making vague associations.

I really do not think that this comparison makes much sense at all. Athens was incredibly abusive, cruel, and controlling to its “allies” in a way that the United States (which I assume you are using as the Athens analogue here) simply is not to its fellow NATO members.

The Delian League was an expansionist project; Athens would coerce other states into joining under threat of terrible reprisals if they did not. By contrast, NATO does not actively seek out new members. Countries wishing to join must apply on their own initiative, and the desire to join is usually rather stronger on their end than that of the US and other existing member states.

NATO has quite simply never done anything remotely comparable to the Athenians’ treatment of the Mytilenians and the Melians; it has in fact never launched a territorially expansionist war of aggression.
Logged
S019
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,631
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -1.39

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: May 13, 2022, 08:26:17 PM »

No (has a functioning brain)
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,237
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: May 13, 2022, 10:00:22 PM »

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.

This reasoning doesn't make any sense. The Warsaw Pact was also avowedly defensive in nature, and of course the only countries it ever invaded were its own members. It would be absurd to allege that the Warsaw Pact was not imperialist because its charter made it clear that it was a defensive military alliance.

The most obvious parallel to NATO is, of course, the Delian League, a grouping of Athens and its allied states. This was also an association of self-defense, and as it happens the term "Delian League" is basically equivalent to "Athenian Empire". It may be that NATO is not an imperialist project (and in fact I am not claiming here that it is), but that argument would have to actually be made rather than ducking behind definitions and making vague associations.

I really do not think that this comparison makes much sense at all. Athens was incredibly abusive, cruel, and controlling to its “allies” in a way that the United States (which I assume you are using as the Athens analogue here) simply is not to its fellow NATO members.

The Delian League was an expansionist project; Athens would coerce other states into joining under threat of terrible reprisals if they did not. By contrast, NATO does not actively seek out new members. Countries wishing to join must apply on their own initiative, and the desire to join is usually rather stronger on their end than that of the US and other existing member states.

NATO has quite simply never done anything remotely comparable to the Athenians’ treatment of the Mytilenians and the Melians; it has in fact never launched a territorially expansionist war of aggression.

Those are all reasonable points, and those are arguments against NATO being an imperialist enterprise. None of them are the argument that Impartial Spectator made, which essentially was that NATO is not imperialist because it says it isn't.
Logged
ingemann
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,438


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: May 14, 2022, 07:26:39 AM »

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.  

Simply stunning.

By this metric, Russia isn't doing imperialism in Ukraine right now, since after all it's only a "special military operation." How convenient for the world powers that they only get to call it war when they're not the aggressors.

Seeing as most of the examples of NATO aggression you used, had several NATO countries staying neutral or diplomatic supporting the other part (Serbia and Montenegro, Libya, 2nd Gulf War Iraq) and one country never having being invaded or at war with any NATO country (Pakistan) and in fact being a American “ally”. The only two example you could use would be would be Afghanistan and 1st Gulf War Iraq (where USSR also was part of the anti-Iraq coalition), that at most what you can use as example of NATO waging war. Yes I know it’s hard for tankies to get that NATO is not the same as USA but try anyway.
Logged
Temporarily Embarrassed Scholar-Statesman
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,405
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: May 14, 2022, 07:28:46 AM »

Fake word.
Logged
Alben Barkley
KYWildman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,134
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.97, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: May 14, 2022, 09:26:04 AM »


Logged
👁️👁️
The Impartial Spectator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,612


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: May 15, 2022, 10:58:24 AM »

This reasoning doesn't make any sense. The Warsaw Pact was also avowedly defensive in nature, and of course the only countries it ever invaded were its own members. It would be absurd to allege that the Warsaw Pact was not imperialist because its charter made it clear that it was a defensive military alliance.

I know Wikipedia is not necessarily the ideal source, but it is a convenient one for a starting point:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact

Quote
Although an apparently similar collective security alliance, the Warsaw Pact differed substantially from NATO. De jure, the eight-member countries of the Warsaw Pact pledged the mutual defense of any member who would be attacked; relations among the treaty signatories were based upon mutual non-intervention in the internal affairs of the member countries, respect for national sovereignty, and political independence.[78]

However, de facto, the Pact was a direct reflection of the USSR's authoritarianism and undisputed domination over the Eastern Bloc, in the context of the so called Soviet Empire, which was not comparable to that of the United States over the Western Bloc.[79] All Warsaw Pact commanders had to be, and have been, senior officers of the Soviet Union at the same time and appointed for an unspecified term length: the Supreme Commander of the Unified Armed Forces of the Warsaw Treaty Organization, which commanded and controlled all the military forces of the member countries, was also a First Deputy Minister of Defence of the USSR, and the Chief of Combined Staff of the Unified Armed Forces of the Warsaw Treaty Organization was also a First Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Soviet Armed Forces.[80] On the contrary, the Secretary General of NATO and Chair of the NATO Military Committee are positions with fixed term of office held on a random rotating basis by officials from all member countries through consensus.

Despite the American hegemony (mainly military and economic) over NATO, all decisions of the North Atlantic Alliance required unanimous consensus in the North Atlantic Council and the entry of countries into the alliance was not subject to domination but rather a natural democratic process.[79] In the Warsaw Pact, decisions were ultimately taken by the Soviet Union alone; the countries of the Warsaw Pact were not equally able to negotiate their entry in the Pact nor the decisions taken.[79]

So at least according to that, although maybe formally the Warsaw Pact was supposed to be a defensive alliance, it de facto differed from NATO in this respect. The Soviet Union could simply tell the Warsaw Pact what to do in a way that the USA could not simply tell NATO what to do.

There are some people (Russians especially) who like to say that European countries are US puppet states. However, this is a mischaracterization. To see that, you have only to consider that the USA never had any need to, and never did, anything similar to the Soviet invasion of Czeschoslovakia in 1968. So Czechoslovakia was de facto a Soviet puppet state in a way that Western European NATO countries were never puppet states of the USA, and European NATO countries currently also are not.

And really, he Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia is a good example of the essence of Imperialism - one country going into another country and forcibly controlling/changing its government. Unless NATO ever does something like that, you can't reasonably call it imperialist in the same way.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.048 seconds with 14 queries.