Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, I do believe that NATO is a war-crime committing, human-rights abusing entity that is bringing much death and destruction and turmoil to the world for the sake of special interests - political and commercial - who stand to gain billions in profit from every single NATO base built.

But, I've been paying attention to NATO's war crimes over the last two decades, as well as the immensely evil crimes against humanity committed by the Wests' 5-eyes nations in their disgusting wars. Why haven't you?



You didn't answer the previous posters question.

I actually am well aware of the crimes committed by NATO members (I would argue that they were not under NATO mandate though, except maybe Serbia, but that's a different argument). BTW the most atrocious crimes go back way more than 20 years. I also know that many western nations have been very nonchalant about violations of international law by their own allies, and I seriously hope that one of the outcomes of this crisis is that the Europeans in particular realize that to be believable you can't close your eyes just because it's your "friends".

All the above is true, but that doesn't change the fact that the motivation of the former eastern block countries is driven by a deep skepticism/fear of Russia and their politics of invading and repressing their neighbors. There is a reason why the Baltic states and Poland are the largest supporters of Ukraine, there is very strong opposition towards the Russian state, despite all countries having large Russian minorities.

Also with the (certainly justified) complaints about the "aggressive west", lets not act like Russia is some sort of innocent victim instead of being wannabe imperialists that are worse by pretty much any standard (and China is a completely different discussion).


The NATO actions happened after a huge number of crimes against humanity committed in former Yugoslavia.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_indicted_in_the... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia

It is not as if NATO randomly invaded Serbia.


Yes I am aware, and I didn't meant to equate the bombing of Serbia with Russia's invasion of Ukraine if you understood it this way.

I simply meant it as an example were NATO as an "entity" arguably broke international law. I say "arguably" because there is some debate about this.


I think this is a clear case where war is just very messy. It is easy to come up will all kinds of legal frameworks during peace time. And then a war situation will not be what you expect.


> You didn't answer the previous posters question.

That's how you troll. You reply to everything by pointing out something bad about NATO/USA/The West without answering anything.

Serious people assume good intentions on your part and waste their time with thoughtful replies only creating more opportunities for your drive-by replies.


>You didn't answer the previous posters question.

I, in fact, answered it.

YES, I believe NATO will commit further war crimes and continued crimes against humanity in its lust to demolish Russia. It has a long history of doing so already and shows no signs that it will stop its criminal behaviours in the near future.


You said:

>Yes, I do believe that NATO is a war-crime committing, human-rights abusing entity that is bringing much death and destruction and turmoil to the world for the sake of special interests - political and commercial - who stand to gain billions in profit from every single NATO base built.

>But, I've been paying attention to NATO's war crimes over the last two decades, as well as the immensely evil crimes against humanity committed by the Wests' 5-eyes nations in their disgusting wars. Why haven't you?

So no you did not answer the question.

Now I have a question for you, how did NATO force Russia to invade Ukraine, considering it is somehow part of their plan of "continued crimes against humanity in its lust to demolish Russia".

Second question, do you think what Russia is doing in Ukraine are crimes against humanity? If not why?


The question was:

"do you think any of said war crimes would actually be committed against Russia directly?"

And the answer is YES, because NATO has already set a heinous precedent for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, with seeming impunity, for decades and shows no signs of stopping its criminal war regime.

So yes, I did answer the question. You maybe don't like the answer, though.

>NATO force Russia

NATO brought weapons of mass destruction to Russias borders. Unfortunately, this has now escalated into a war where, indeed, crimes against humanity are being committed. This is not unexpected, given the nature of war as a whole. It is inexcusable whether Russians or Americans are doing it, and that is entirely the point: the worlds' powers have already set a precedent, which Russia is clearly following.

Now here is a question for you: Why is it okay for Americans to support genocide in Yemen yet call for the end of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine?


> "do you think any of said war crimes would actually be committed against Russia directly?"

> And the answer is YES, because NATO has already set a heinous precedent for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, with seeming impunity, for decades and shows no signs of stopping its criminal war regime.

> So yes, I did answer the question. You maybe don't like the answer, though.

You seriously need to work on how you argue, because in every discussion I see here you answer in generalities, instead of specific answers. Yes now you have answered the question, but you definitely did not before.

Regarding your argument, by the same argument I could say that Russia will commit war crimes against NATO, because Russia has already set a heinous precedent for committing ware crimes for decades with no signs of stopping. That's not how this works.

> NATO brought weapons of mass destruction to Russias borders.

Which weapons of mass destruction?

Also you are saying NATO brought weapons of mass destruction to Russias borders. Let's not forget that Russia invaded and annexed Ukrainian territories in direct violation of the Budapest agreement, and that was all done for oil and gas nothing else. That triggered a massive change of public opinion about joining NATO in Ukraine, before there was only 20% support after it was well over 50%.

Also Russia already has weapons of mass destruction on NATO borders, there are already nuclear weapons in Kalingrad.


> Now here is a question for you: Why is it okay for Americans to support genocide in Yemen yet call for the end of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine?

I am neither American nor do I support the war in Yemen. I actually believe the propping up of the regime in Saudi Arabia by western governments is outrageous and one of the primary reasons for instability in the region. That does not mean I defend Russia's invasion in Ukraine, nor their behavior in e.g. Syria.


> yet call for the end of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine

Um, who called for "the end of Russia"?


You know what would be really helpful here? Links to sources to know what the heck you're talking about. Preferably Wikipedia pages or something like that.

And no, "do your own research" is not a valid answer.


[flagged]


Providing evidence and arguments to support your claims is not "spoonfed bootlicking".

Your claim was: "NATO is a war-crime committing, human-rights abusing entity."

The first seems to be a link collecting data points for civilian casualties. I don't see any NATO actions on there; and in any case it's missing the further evidence that war crimes and human rights abuse occurred.

The second page, on the front page anyway, has nothing about NATO whatsoever as far as I could tell.


Airwars tracks civilian casualties of war. These casualties - war crimes and crimes against humanity - are committed by NATO members and aligned states almost every single day. NATO bases are used to launch the attacks. NATO resources are used to cover up the crimes.

Clearly, you're not asking for this information in good faith, or else you'd have discerned this already, even with a casual look at the Airwars reports, which details quite descriptively the nature of NATO involvement in war crimes and crimes against humanity.

As far as your glib understanding of Wikileaks, I suggest you really, really study the material.


> are committed by NATO members and aligned states

That's not the same as committed by NATO.


> who stand to gain billions in profit from every single NATO base built

Broken window fallacy [0]. That money spent on bases is a cost we'd rather not spend because it could be spent on other things or just saved with reduced taxes giving us citizens more of our money back.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window


The fact is, billions and billions in profits have been made by every single NATO base built, and it has not stopped a single damn war. In fact, NATO bases have been used to commit one heinous atrocity after the other for the last 30 years.


I don't think you understand what profit means.


I sure know what it means to Lockheed Martin (LMT), Northrop Grumman (NOG) and Raytheon (RTN).

So do many, many others - thankfully:

https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/the-soaring-prof...


All paid for by taxpayers so overall a net cost which is what matters to the average citizen.


Nobody asked about your opinion of NATO, answer the question.


Yes, NATO-aligned states do currently commit war crimes and crimes against humanity at heinous scale - with seeming impunity - and there is nothing to indicate this would change in their battle against Russia. Sanctions - factually, crimes against humanity since they collectively punish an entire nation - are already evidence of the intentions of the West in dealing with Russia: to see its destruction.


> NATO-aligned states

Notice the constant careful weasel-wording.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: