Talk:North Atlantic Treaty Organization

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Should we make mention that France withdrew from NATO's military sctructure while remaining a part of the political arm? Jros83 16:06, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

It's part of the history, so yes. Karajou 16:07, 27 June 2007 (EDT)

Conservapedia?

This article is not written from a conservative view. It would be better to put it in Liberalpedia.--Alex00 09:07, 25 April 2013 (EDT)

I agreee Libelpedia is a joke worse than wilipedia Dvergne 09:14, 25 April 2013 (EDT)

NATO is now as bad as the Warsaw Pact. Time to withdraw.

We need to withdraw from NATO, now. Not because of the lack of military spending by our fellow members, but because the alliance has completely lost its moral compass. We have tolerated Erdogan as he slowly transformed Turkey into an Islamist caliphate; a neo-Ottoman Empire. It has reached the point where Turkey isn't even trying anymore to deny that its attacks on Syria and Iraq are motivated by a desire to commit jihad, and that international observers[1] are now warning that Turkey is on the edge of committing ethnic cleansing against Kurdish, Yazidi, and Christian minorities in Syria and Iraq. Both Syria and Iraq border Turkey. Turkey has been invoking self-defense as its justification for jihad. If this war ends up spreading onto Turkish soil, Erdogan will invoke Article V. We would then be obligated to militarily intervene in this war... on the side of the jihadists. That's what will happen if we stay in NATO, unless we somehow manage to push Erdogan out. I don't think trying to push Erdogan out will work because any attempt to do so will result in fierce resistance from our allies that are puppets of the EU bureaucracy, which has been supporting Erdogan. So I can safely say that if we expect to not engage in a foreign policy that would make us look obscenely bad on our part, we need to get out of NATO. No ifs, ands, or buts. If NATO is going to be a vehicle for jihad, then it is no longer a force for good. It is now a force for evil, just as bad as the Warsaw Pact.

I would also recommend that this article be substantially edited to reflect these recent developments. Time to call NATO what it is. A globalist organization, and possibly even a terrorist organization.

-Geopolitician 13:37, 23 March 2018 (EDT)

Turkey's anti-Iranian stance is the only thing holding the alliance together. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:01, 23 March 2018 (EDT)
I'm OK calling NATO a globalist organization -- it has definitely outlived its purpose, especially with the EU now about the create a common military force. However, calling it a terrorist organization seems ridiculous. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:22, 23 March 2018 (EDT)
@1990'sguy, I have two things to say about your reply.
First, while it may seem ridiculous to call NATO a terrorist organization today, it will be far from ridiculous to call NATO a terrorist organization in the near future. One of its most powerful members has gone completely rogue. It has been hijacked by radical Islamists who answer to the Muslim Brotherhood and openly sponsor Sunni jihadists. An just over the past three months, they have also openly declared a jihad against innocent civilians in Syria and Iraq; threatened to invade Greece; and threatened to attack American, Italian, and Cypriot troops and/or ships. And yet NATO continues to enable this regime. Why? Are NATO countries willing to protect this regime and even help it commit jihad by abusing Article V -- which Turkey will inevitably invoke? If so, then NATO should be called a terrorist organization, for being pro-jihad.
Second, the EU defense force is one of the main reasons why I oppose the EU. This is a blatant attempt by Germany to challenge American power in Europe and restore its WWII-era domination of the continent. This is a serious national security threat to the US regardless of who's in power in Germany. And if Germany goes through with this, then the German-American alliance is dead. We would have another reason to withdraw from NATO, because we would have no reason to treat Germany as anything other than a major geopolitical adversary on par with China and Russia. Geopolitician 9:52, 24 March 2018 (EDT)
@RobSmith, Turkey is not anti-Iran anymore. It switched sides in the Saudi-Iranian cold war back in June of last year after the crisis in Qatar broke out. Since then, relations between Saudi Arabia and Turkey have deteriorated the point that within the next few years, Turkey likely will replace Iran as Saudi Arabia's main enemy, and assume the senior partner position in the anti-Saudi bloc in the Middle East. Geopolitician 9:38, 24 March 2018 (EDT)
I'd have to examine that closer to respond. All NATO has done in recent years is prove how naive and stupid Democrat voters are. Obama & Hillary sought cover for their war of aggression against Libya by getting the UN to "authorize" NATO for an aggressive act; imagine hearing a news item that said, "The UN Security Council authorized the Chinese military to use force." You would poop your draws. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:16, 24 March 2018 (EDT)