@QMS

They always try to disguise it as something it isn't. A fight against despots, terrorism, etc. Before the unipolar moment, it was the fight against communism, blah, blah, blah.

Why is NATO in Iraq? What does that
have to do with protecting Europe? Is
Iraq threatening the EU? Don't think so.
Quite a stretch at the very least IMO.
And what does Iraq have to do with Iran?
Crazy logic. Forcing Iraq closer to Iran will
be the outcome of US bombing Iraq. Nuts.

@QMS

The Early 20th Century Fascists. The Cold War Mongers. The Latter-Day NAZIS.

It's a fairly well-established fact that NATO was designed under NAZI influence — and and led by a procession of off-the-shelf psychopaths. (See, Neocons, Zionists). Their vision... the goal that drives them, is to suppress communism and promote capitalism; achieve massive wealth with low taxes for the Few; and establish a Cash-and-Carry' democracy to to introduce legislation (like the draft) that the People must accept and obey. Their corrupt goals have had moderate success for the Elite. But when they run out of money and missiles, they will be finished. However, I personally believe it will take the final passing of the Boomer generation, and most of GenX, before Western culture can rid itself of the horrendous Neocon insanity. It is not at all necessary that the economies of the West be degraded and broken — by the psychopaths bad decisions on their way to oblivion — but I fear the hot polloi may passively allow that to happen happen. All they have ever known is bait and switch democracy. Not Citizen Authority striving for consensus and win-win solutions.

NATO's Formation and Controversial Ties to Nazis
NATO, established in 1949, was formed primarily as a military alliance to counter Soviet expansion in Europe after World War II. However, its creation is intertwined with controversial decisions regarding former Nazis.
Historical Context
Following World War II, the West faced the threat of Soviet influence. The United States and its allies sought to strengthen their military capabilities, leading to the establishment of NATO
During the Cold War, both Western and Eastern blocs recruited former Nazis for intelligence and military roles, often prioritizing strategic advantages over moral considerations
Integration of Former Nazis
Some former Nazi officials were integrated into NATO structures, raising ethical questions about justice for war crimes. This was seen as a pragmatic move to bolster defenses against the Soviet Union
.
Critics argue that this integration reflects a troubling aspect of NATO's history, where geopolitical interests overshadowed accountability
.
Legacy and Controversy
The narrative of NATO as a "Nazi Atlantic Terrorist Organization" has emerged in some critiques, emphasizing the moral compromises made during its formation
.
This complex history continues to influence discussions about NATO's role and legacy in global politics today.

.

Why is NATO in Iraq? What does that
have to do with protecting Europe? Is
Iraq threatening the EU? Don't think so.
Quite a stretch at the very least IMO.
And what does Iraq have to do with Iran?
Crazy logic. Forcing Iraq closer to Iran will
be the outcome of US bombing Iraq. Nuts.

@soryang
Not only trumpet, but the zionists have painted
themselves into a corner from which only failure
will be the outcome, one way or another. They are
unable to bomb their way out of this bind. The present
attempts to 'negotiate' an off-ramp may be fruitful if only
the zionists cease their peculiar mission of control. Doubt
that is in the cards, as Iran obviously understands. So, what
is left? Talks go nowhere and the media will try to spin it as
a success. This whole process is getting mighty old.

Put this off due to other distractions for some time, but I'd been meaning to find an appropriate passage documenting the insight of Hannah Arendt who wrote the Origins of Totalitarianism. It didn't take much searching -

Hannah Arendt (1944)

Nationalism is bad enough when it trusts nothing but the rude force of the nation. A nationalism that necessarily and admittedly depends upon the force of a foreign nation is certainly worse. This is the threatened fate of Jewish nationalism and of the proposed Jewish State, surrounded inevitably by Arab states and Arab peoples. Even a Jewish majority in Palestine-nay, even a transfer of all Palestine Arabs, which is openly demanded by Revisionists-would not substantially change a situation in which Jews must either ask protection from an outside power against their neighbors or effect a working agreement with their neighbors.

If such an agreement is not brought about, there is the imminent danger that, through their need and willingness to accept any power in the Mediterranean basin which might assure their existence, Jewish interests will clash with those of all other Mediterranean peoples; so that, instead of one “tragic conflict,1” we shall face tomorrow as many insoluble conflicts as there are Mediterranean nations. For these nations, bound to demand a mare nostrum shared only by those who have settled territories along its shores, must in the long run oppose any outside interfering power creating or holding a sphere of interest. These outside powers, however powerful at the moment, certainly cannot afford |4 to antagonize the Arabs, the most numerous people5 of the Mediterranean basin. If, in the present situation, the powers are6 willing to help the establishment of a Jewish homestead, they may7 do so only on the basis of a broad understanding that takes into account the whole region and the needs of all its peoples. On the other hand, the Zionists, continuing8 to ignore the Mediterranean peoples and watching9 out only for the big far-away powers, will appear only as their tools, the agents of foreign and hostile interests. Jews who know their own history should be aware that such a state of affairs will inevitably lead to a new wave of .....hatred; the ....... of tomorrow will assert that Jews not only profiteered from the presence of the foreign big powers in that region but had actually plotted it and hence are guilty of the consequences.

@soryang
Thank you for posting this. And in other words, it seems to me, the whole establishment of Israel was an injustice, and therefore the outside power enforcing it (the U.S.) would eventually have to fight to cover for it over and over, expanding and deepening the injustice.

Put this off due to other distractions for some time, but I'd been meaning to find an appropriate passage documenting the insight of Hannah Arendt who wrote the Origins of Totalitarianism. It didn't take much searching -

Hannah Arendt (1944)

Nationalism is bad enough when it trusts nothing but the rude force of the nation. A nationalism that necessarily and admittedly depends upon the force of a foreign nation is certainly worse. This is the threatened fate of Jewish nationalism and of the proposed Jewish State, surrounded inevitably by Arab states and Arab peoples. Even a Jewish majority in Palestine-nay, even a transfer of all Palestine Arabs, which is openly demanded by Revisionists-would not substantially change a situation in which Jews must either ask protection from an outside power against their neighbors or effect a working agreement with their neighbors.

If such an agreement is not brought about, there is the imminent danger that, through their need and willingness to accept any power in the Mediterranean basin which might assure their existence, Jewish interests will clash with those of all other Mediterranean peoples; so that, instead of one “tragic conflict,1” we shall face tomorrow as many insoluble conflicts as there are Mediterranean nations. For these nations, bound to demand a mare nostrum shared only by those who have settled territories along its shores, must in the long run oppose any outside interfering power creating or holding a sphere of interest. These outside powers, however powerful at the moment, certainly cannot afford |4 to antagonize the Arabs, the most numerous people5 of the Mediterranean basin. If, in the present situation, the powers are6 willing to help the establishment of a Jewish homestead, they may7 do so only on the basis of a broad understanding that takes into account the whole region and the needs of all its peoples. On the other hand, the Zionists, continuing8 to ignore the Mediterranean peoples and watching9 out only for the big far-away powers, will appear only as their tools, the agents of foreign and hostile interests. Jews who know their own history should be aware that such a state of affairs will inevitably lead to a new wave of .....hatred; the ....... of tomorrow will assert that Jews not only profiteered from the presence of the foreign big powers in that region but had actually plotted it and hence are guilty of the consequences.

@on the cusp

...to the structure of these AI presentations. It's almost as if the same person is doing all of them. Not with respect to point of view, but the way the presentation is organized.

* This is good, worth consideration, but some suggest it is AI.

@on the cusp I’ve seen AI videos where buildings are supposedly being bombed. So if this is AI, Marandi has not said these things?

* This is good, worth consideration, but some suggest it is AI.