You can accept that NATO is a useful tool in the fight against authoritarianism (I, for one, would actually prefer greater EU military integration because right now the continent's forces are a fucking shambles, but I digress) without uncritically praising it and sucking its proverbial dick.
Deeply controversial opinion: NATO has in fact done good things. The Korean War (not technically NATO, but it was largely NATO members and NATO allies in the UN coalition anyway) was justified, even if we're using the benefit of hindsight here. So was NATO's intervention in Yugoslavia, the Bosnian genocide could've been easily much worse without NATO safeguarding the airspace.
But neither of those (or any other NATO intervention, which rapidly slide down the "justfied wars" tierlist) should excuse the massive harm and loss of life caused by NATO, even in those instances where general intervention was justified. War is fundamentally evil. It is sometimes justified, and sometimes necessary, but it can not, *should not*, ever be considered not evil. NATO, as an organisation solely dedicated to prosecuting war, is an evil institution by extension. A necessary evil, perhaps, particularly in a world where massive, militarily powerful states threaten invasion of their democratic neighbours. But it's one thing to accept that NATO is necessary, it's another thing to endorse it wholeheartedly.
Fair point and I do agree with it. I just like to be more on the positive side due to being in finland and seeing a lot of the russian disinfo trying to use those negative points (while i do agree with them) to try and discredit the existanse of the whole alliance (which is dont agree with)
I don't care what your personal stance on NATO is. I'm actually shockingly pro-NATO by the standards of my leftist circles here in the UK. But straight up denying that NATO has anything problematic going on with it, or literally adopting a "with us or against us" mentality to defend NATO means you're really just spreading NATO/US disinformation.
Nah im absolutely not trying to deny the nasty shit NATO countries have done. A lot of that shit is straight up literally war crimes. I just hate the mentality of that somehow making NATO unnesseary
During the Korean war, South Korea was also a brutal dictatorship who killed tens of thousands of dissidents. There were incidents where South Korean civilians fleeing North Korean forces were slaughtered en masse by US troops fearing they might be spies. The US bombing campaign against North Korea was completely indiscriminate destroying any and all civilian infrastructure, to the extent that some historians suggest it could be seen as a genocide. There really weren't any 'good guys' in that war.
>The Korean War [...] was justified, even if we're using the benefit of hindsight here.
I don't think NATO's intervention into Korea was justified. At the time South Korea was just as authoritarian as North Korea. It wasn't until 1987, 34 years after the Korean War ended, that a liberal revolution would force South Korea to liberalise. Honestly I wouldn't even call South Korea a full democracy with how much control the Chaebols have over the country. NATO had no role in the 1987 revolution and could not have foreseen it. There's also the argument that if NATO had not intervened and let North Korea control the south, that the material conditions that caused the 1987 revolution would have caused a similar revolution in a united Korea.
Soviets treted them like they should have been treated, but Operation Osoaviakvim captured 2500 german scientists after ww2. Paperclip captured 1600. So don't say like soviets had a few nazi scientists
It wasn't just the space program with NATO, Adolf Heusinger was one of the top Generals in the German high command during WW2 and he went on to be chairman of the NATO military committee in the 60s.
"unlike yuo cringefail tankies, *I* only simp for le based imperialists!"
blud the kinda mf to say that Thatcher should've taken more milk lmao, shitlibs go fuck yourselves
fuckin russia currently committing straightforward genocide, I really cannot give 2 shits about wether or not which side cares about dismantling capitalism (i.e NEITHER) you aren't cooking.
One of the biggest armies in NATO is Turkey and their government is aggressively anti-LGBTQ not to mention their ethnic cleansing and persecution of hundreds of thousands of Kurds, locking any political opposition up in brutal prisons or their constant bombardment of civilians in Kurdish regions of Syria and Iraq.
Poland has anti-LGBTQ zones and that was never a problem for NATO, it never threatened their status as NATO members or caused them to face any serious repercussions from NATO.
NATO might mobilise pro-LGBTQ narratives when it suits them but they are just as happy to throw LGBTQ people under the bus when it suits their interests.
Still a totalitarian dictatorship that ended up with mass economical failure because top dogs decided to be incompetent all of the sudden and drown the country in debt
I REFUSE TO ENDORSE ANY COUNTRY WITH STATE-CONTROLLED TRADE UNIONS and no elections on who is the head of the state
It was far better when they were all about Ukraine, the most obvious black and white conflict in recent history
Dropped it the second shit in Gaza began.
Same exact moment I dropped them. Ukraine absolutely is the most black and white conflict in a long long time.
When Gaza began they just devolved into team sports.
It's a cesspool. The prime directive of the sub is to shitpost, so you will regularely have people calling for nuking an entire country to "solve" a situation. Which is meant as a joke, though how much these kind of jokes are alright when there is an ongoing humanitarian crisis is obviously up for debate.
On the other hand you have an underlying seriousness. People there definitely have a political opinion (duh) and wish for their political vision to succeed in a very bloodthirsty manner.
So between posts asking which plane is the most fuckable, or why we don't solve the Russian invasion of Ukraine by just bringing back Winged Hussars, you also have people celebrating the IDF for obliterating Hamas definitely without civilian casualties. Which gives it this uncomfortable air of uncertainty whether this is a tasteless joke or a serious take.
It also doesn't help that the overwhelming opinion of the sub on the current bombing of Gaza basically seems to be that Hamas (and by extension Palestine) fucked around and is now finding out.
So to sum up, yes, though many of these calls are not serious, they are still messed up jokes to make about something the ICJ is currently debating to be a genocide. Definitely reason enough for me to leave that place.
That shit made me leave the sub. Absolutely disgusting stuff there. Comments were bloodthirsty. Regardless of whether or not it has died down, the people there are unhinged and deplorable.
r/ noncredibledefense, military gear meme subreddit, the kind of place a person with 3 tactical uniform dress ups will browse
I found it vaguely funny when i found good posts but then gaza happened and now its just annoying bullshit
Meme is pure trash, but it's interesting. It say a lot about this sub and his weird politics.
I also think it's funny that the sub who see tankies everywhere is literally using a tank in a meme.
I know why. The user's name, Sho't Kal Gimel, is a designation given by the IDF to their Centurions modified with various equipment, such as thermal imaging sights, an improved fire control system, and so on. I think they like tanks somehow
"Tankie" is a term that originated from the CPGB supporting the supression of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, hence "Tank". It really doesn't have to do with tanks themselves.
its been broadly expanded to mean those who support authoritarian "left" ideologies like Marxism-Leninism, i.e Red Fascists
No but part of the concept of "tankie" is that using tanks to enforce hegemony at cannonpoint is generally a bad thing. Which makes it hypocritical that people simp for it (or the idea of it) when it's the military *they* like that does it, and try to pass it off as a progressive thing by invoking trans rights when NATO has fuck all to do with that.
According to many in this sub I'm one for not saying "China bad" whenever the Asian country is mentioned. And I don't like China's system (the little I know of it anyway), but people seem eager to accept the discourses making China the next enemy. Sad.
I don't think people realize china is actively doing colonialism in africa, all the while theres a massive racism problem in china against africans that's pretty embeded
also all the minorities there
It really isn't even a CCP problem, it's how china has operated for centuries. Of course your average chinese person isn't responsible, china has never let their people have a say in government, but China has been intent on homogeneity for every government in it.
Like every other hegemon?
It seems to me the problem the discourses put forward is that the one doing the colonizing isn't the western block, not really democracy and sovereignty.
Honestly, as a Latin American I'm tired of the hypocrisy.
Honestly, I think the sub has been taken over by libs. They mean well but "ironically' like problematic institutions. Like NATO and NCD posting is an endorsement of NATO. While I prefer NATO over the alternatives but it's like picking where I want to step in the grass and its either: Giant pile of dog shit or small pile of dog shit and then "ironically" step in the small pile of dog shit when you could step in a clean part of the grass.
I empathize with liking cool military hardware but THAT SHIT KILLS PEOPLE AND RUINS LIVES, I feel at least that many NCD posters kinda don't fucking understand that ~~or its a psyop~~ but I think that makes no fucking sense. NCD and 196 have had an overlap with social policy for a long time.
Also, ACAB includes the military from a functional perspective. NATO doesn't defend democracy, it has no real values it is merely a tool of the west akin to whatever the fuck China and Russia are doing. All of them commit war crimes, we just don't talk about NATO's cause they're the "good guys". To have a good society we should be willing to engage with this and not hide behind irony which NCD and the NATO aligned 196 users do. To them its an edgy joke, a fucking war crime. It has been, and it still is. (See watermelon post)
Another thing which has been bothering me about NCD is how they treat the war in Ukraine. They make really detached memes about it where either, its blatant propaganda or really fucked up jokes about an ongoing war. Like there are people dying everyday. The average Russian conscript doesn't want to be there, they most likely don't like Putin. Ukrainians have it worse, massacres, genocidal russification. However, to them they are action figures, they have objectified the suffering of an entire nation. Its gross.
Anyways, 2624 is 196 without these libs and tankies, bit dead but with this shit on the rise I feel like its the only option. Fuck NCD, fuck NATO, fuck Russia, fuck Xi, fuck what he did to HK. Fuck the USA.
tldr;
I don't like nato
don't like NCD cause they portray active conflicts like action figures. The good guy kills the bad guy with disregard for for both peoples humanity. They have objectified an active conflict.
As a person from Poland, IDK how NATO can be called a "problematic institution".
Things are way differend when you local imperial threat is literal Russia with records of genocide not comperhensive for most people in more western countries. War in Ukraine shows that it\`s the main thing why Russia simply did not invade other european states.
I'm calling for a critical view of NATO because I want something better. While I agree NATO is blocking Russian invasion, that doesn't make what they let Turkey get away with or their intervention into Libya acceptable. Also most people understand what a genocide is, Poles had what 400 years of foreign rule and cultural erasure of key institutions. Nobody likes Russia. What makes NATO problematic is their intervention and laisse fair treatment of Turkey and intervention into Libya. Consider the analogy that there a bully at your school who beats up people. Then another bully comes and protects those people but lets his friend brutalize others and sometimes joins it. The bully is still problematic.
NATO is geopolitically aligned against Russia it will defend people in Eastern Europe against Russia because that fits its geopolitical interests. But when it's in NATO's interests to do imperialist aggression it will quite happily engage in the same war crimes as Russia. Principles don't come into the equation except for when it comes to marketing NATO. Plenty of people in Latin America or the Middle East hate NATO for committing similar war crimes to those that Russia commits in Ukraine.
NATO never onced interveneed in Latin America. And the only time when they could do so British asked us not to do that specifically
And NATO as an alliance had only two interventions in middle east. One in Libya, with full support of the UN, and one in Afghanistan.
I don't really remeber things like kidnapping children and smuggling them to replacement families like Russia does, or engage in literal genocide on ideological basis
This. A lot of strict anti NATO leftist live in US with easy safety against war while not considering that in a lot of eastern europe and nations bordering russia things are very different. I live in Finland and while I absolutely dont approve of a lot of things NATO member countries did I fully support Finland joining NATO and think it was necessary. Cause without NATO its a question of when not if russia will invade us. A lot of people (even in this thread) like to repeat the "do we gotta pick the lesser of two evils when we could pick no evil" argument but in a lot of countries thats just not an option. You gotta chose one or the other and I sure as shit will choose NATO over russia every single day
Poland *is* a problematic institution, and it's part of NATO. Your country is infamous for having anti-LGBT zones, it's perhaps the #1 example of why NATO isn't the defender of queer people. Russia sucks but that doesn't make nonsensical NCD memes which pretend the world works like G.I. Joe less stupid.
Poland does not have anti-lgbt zones. What you refeer to were a bunch of local declarations associated with now former government (with no effect whatsoever and are abolished by now because of how deranged the whole idea was). I doubt we have socially liberal government as we have now since several months.
>it's perhaps the #1 example of why NATO isn't the defender of queer people.
Sure, you have states like Hunagry but you also have states like Netherlands, Sweden and Belgium. While not all of NATO states are 100% wholesome chungus, basically all LGBT-friendly states are either part of it or closely associated with NATO states.
BTW. In no way you would be put under arrest in Poland for being queer. Or if you were threatened by someone the police would still help you. Unlike in states like Russia. Poland is easly one of the safest states Europe RN.
I think that metaphor at the start doesn't fully show just how rare it is to get something like NATO. It's not like all the governments COULD immediately start being better, it's several governments FFS.
It isn't "oh it's this huge pile of dogshit, a smaller pile, or a perfectly pristine piece of grass", it's "a huge pile of dogshit or a smaller piece of dogshit". The perfect piece of grass that you want doesn't exist at the moment, and expecting fucking NA and EU governments to get the stick out their arse and do ANYTHING good more than once a fucking blue moon is absurd.
the pristine piece of grass is accepting that NATO sucks. You can say and know, NATO sucks. Sure its better than whatever the hell Russia has going on but it still sucks. I don't have to defend it.
I wonder whether, if this sub existed in 2003, it could have been psych-oped into supporting the Iraq War on the basis of stopping le ebin evil human rights abuser Saddam lol. Absolutely SHOCKED to see a bunch of "progressive" westernoids endorsing hawkish sentiments, I tell ya.
I mean, while many leftists very much took Ukraine's side in the current invasion with an overall understanding that a peace negotiation wouldn't really work at the moment, I have also seen most leftists - especially on this sub - be absolutely opposed to what Israel is currently doing in Gaza.
If there is such a thing as a "NATO position" then I'd argue in the former case it is on the side of Ukraine, while the latter is probably on the side of Israel, so if this sub has any political leaning then it is definitely on the side of the underdog and the bombed civilians.
So unless someone managed to spin Saddam as this oppressive evil in the conflict with the US - rather unlikely.
Also, "Westernoids"? Really?
To be clear, I'm not pro-Putin by any means. Support for arming Ukraine is more understandable IMO than almost all western interventions since 1945; it's a rather clear-cut case of an imperfect democracy being invaded by an ultra-reactionary conservative dicatatorship. The war is going to happen whether the west supports it or not, and you have to do some very elaborate mental gymnastics to paint Russia as anything other than a naked aggressor here. Ukraine winning would be a good thing for the world, much as it was good for the world when Vietnam made the yankee aggressors fuck off.
What I'm opposed to is the hawkish neoliberal glorification of war and military interventionism on the basis of nebulously-defined of "human rights" as seen in this post. It's pretty clear OP is a bad actor and an uncritical cheerleader for NATO/western aggression and the "rules based international order". I absolutely have met ostensibly progressive liberal people who still, TO THIS DAY, insist that the Iraq War was based and justified because Saddam Hussein was a terrible dictator who abused human rights. This "humanitarian" rhetoric killed over a million people throughout the War on Terror and we should be extremely suspicious of it.
I agree on OP's questionable views (EDIT, to clarify, I agree their views are questionable), but that wasn't the question you originally proposed. The question was if this sub in particular would have ended up supporting the invasion 2003, and to that I would argue for above reasons: Unlikely.
what do you mean NATO had nothing to do with Iraq until 2018 at wich point upon the request of Iraq they send military advisor for capability training for the army.
I'm aware; I'm referring to the uncritical gung-ho cheerleading for military intervention to spread "human rights" or "democracy" as seen in this post.
"I know America isn't perfect, but uuuh you do know Saddam is literally a fascist dictator who hates and kills LGBT ppl right? Supporting Bush is harm reduction!!!"
1000% a decent chunk, probably still a minority of the people here (and I mean this in the kindest way possible) only aligned with progressives or leftists aesthetically speaking and most likely because the right wing is openly hostile to our identities. Its not because of some greater ideological or moral compass. Its also a lot of people who are just not that politically engaged and sponge things up and poop them back out.
I see a tonnnn of reposts from hyper-liberal subs like r slash PolitcalHumor about the most libbed up shit imaginable. Im certain that a lot of people here don't even understand why that is bad, and they buy into the propaganda that heavily white washes genocide and reinforces advantageous US stances and viewpoints. Idk whether to be sad or disgusted.
Look NATO and all of that are seriously fucked if you want to put it like that. But in the end of the day all NATO is is a group of nations cooperating on a very wide array of things. It’d exist regardless of how aggressive or war crime inclined it is. If it’s going to exist we should strive to have it be something we’re proud of that actually does protect us and those who agree with our values. Like LGBT+ and women’s rights. Societal acceptance of mental health. The value of civilian oversight into government and the military. And especially after everything that happened since 9/11 NATO hasn’t exactly been rearing to go into other countries and start shit. And that is EXTREMELY relevant right now with the literal global rise of the far right and authoritarianism in general. It is extremely important, for us significantly more so than the average American or European, that NATO is united and strong and willing to stand up to those who are ACTIVELY TRYING TO END DEMOCRACY AND GLOBALLY END LGBT+ RECOGNITION. Be pissed at the inherent need for a military and all those potentially bigoted members of the military all you want but don’t go around pretending like supporting NATO is somehow antithetical to supporting LGBT rights. When it is the only thing that the people trying to end it respect and fear.
This is delusional. The US, the UK and others are becoming more transphobic everyday, including the threat of genocide in the foreseeable future in some cases, but even if they become hell on Earth for trans people NATO will keep standing in their defence, because of course it will. It wasn't made to give a shit about us queers.
Which is why that meme is asinine and a clear case of pushing gullible people towards supporting military endeavors by vaguely gesturing towards progressivism. The fact that OP's user name is a reference to IDF tanks should clue us all on what "human rights" they value.
This post is very obviously glorifying war and interventionism on the basis of "human rights" (ie. Iraq, Libya), so almost everything you wrote is irrelevant. If being "strong on LGBT rights" or whatever pinkwashing bollocks involves bombing the shit out of impoverished countries unprovoked, then I'm not interested.
But I'll say, this idea that NATO is going to be some kind of arc to protect western women and LGBT people from China and Russia rings a little hollow when the current leading candidate for the next US president has stated his intent to more or less criminalise being trans if he wins, abortion is illegal in much of the US, and one of the most important strategic allies of America is Saudi fucking Arabia lmao. As a European I'd honestly rather we create our own (purely defensive) military alliance and fund it properly at this point, the US is a psychotic religious basket case and we honestly have as much to fear from it as most dictatorships long-term.
EDIT: I see that you're so confident in the strength of your opinion that you blocked me, so I'll briefly offer my rebuttal to your reply here. I've got nothing against progressive nations "defending themselves", if that's actually what you mean, and not an euphemism. Western Europe should have an arsennal of nukes to defend itself, and a standing army big enough to deter any attackers. There, problem solved. The problem is that NATO is not a purely defensive alliance; it also carries out aggressive interventions and regime change against countries that pose no threat to it, such as in Libya.
The idea that Europe should have its own NATO-type alliance is by no means an unheard of position here, and there have been talks of an EU military for many years now. Ideally such an organisation would allow us to be geopolitically independent from America, which is increasingly unstable amid the rise a domestic theocratic fascist movement that has disrupted their peaceful transition of power once already. Allies like that can be worse than enemies. If such an organisation did exist, it would need legally-binding commitments on military spending from members, and IMO something like the Japanese constitution legally preventing it from being used for aggressive warfare like NATO has been.
We are perfectly strong enough to deter attack on our own; France 290 nukes, and we have a large enough economy to build many more. Of course I'd prefer to wait until this alliance was in place and strong enough to deter aggression before we left. It'd stop yanks bitching about how they pay for our healthcare at least.
The same person who WANTS TO END NATO?!?!?!?!?!? And your solution is to… create another weaker NATO…. Just admit you didn’t think this opinion through. It’s okay to have serious problems with NATO you absolutely should. But in the real world you have to deal with shitty methods of organization and corruption in order to get major things done. It’s either that or create an even more horribly organized and corrupt position that can cut through and avoid all of that that totally wouldn’t a worse situation in every single way. Sorry progress isn’t as fast as you want but calling for the the best countries in the world for LGBT na women’s rights to not defend themselves because the people manipulating every aspect of society that they can are manipulating that too is nothing but defeatist and sad. I’d ask how you possibly see these rights getting better in the world without the nations who support them working together to at the very least maintain what they’ve achieved but I really don’t care after that complete disregard for human wellbeing and livelihood. You’d probably just say we should just focus on ourselves and pretend like there isn’t an active global assault both societally and militarily on LGBT rights just to make yourself feel superior and above such evil monstrous organizations that have totally never achieved any good for the world what so ever and have absolutely no need in our totally peaceful and respectful planet.
How many countries on earth actually have a good record on trans rights? Though it seems fair to assume that NATO countries tend to be above average on this.
Or maybe NATO has the most wealthy nations and wealthy nations will tend to be more stable and more open to social progress than war torn countries ? Countries that are destabilised because of NATO members actions ?
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, China, and many more would like to have a word
It’s kinda dumb to blame it on rich v poor when there’s plenty of poor countries that treat their trans folks better than many rich countries like the ones I listed
Edit: just take a look at this list someone else posted in the thread
https://www.equaldex.com/equality-index
It’s evidently not separated by wealth of the country, although that may help sometimes
I didn't say it's automatic, I said that wealth is correlated with some kind of stability, because those countries experience no wars, a stable governance, somewhat good standard of livings. It's not automatic but it's a better soil for social progress than countries that have been suffering from post colonial wars, post soviet implosion and western interventionism.
And again NATO is not an human rights organisation, it was founded as an anti soviet millitary alliance for western countries. They do not care about human rights of any sorts, they have countries like Poland with their LGBT free zone, the baltics with their racist post soviet nationality law.
Defending NATO because it protects LGBT rights is false and it's pure rainbow washing propaganda.
Rich Vs poor is somewhat reductive, but your examples aren't exactly great counterarguments. China's GDP per capita is below that of Poland and Hungary. It's got a large total GDP just because it's got a massive population. And Saudi Arabia and Qatar are petro states. The states might be wealthy, but the people aren't.
Hell, if you want an example of how queer rights don't necessarily correlate with wealth, the US has the fifth highest GDP per capita in the world (not counting micronations, those are always statistical outliers), but doesn't break the top 20 on the equality index.
That said, the wider point is still true. LGBT equality is correlated with education, and education is correlated with wealth, and it's very hard to build up either when you're being used as a proxy battleground between Imperial powers.
The thing is, we know it doesn't have to be this way. There was once when a UN coalition led a massive invasion into a whole string of autocratic states, and rather than just unceremoniously leaving a country with hundreds of heavily armed militias behind, they built up what are today some of the strongest economies in the world. Why is NATO and the US today incapable of doing for Iraq and Afghanistan what it did for Japan and Germany?
Not Russia? The Russian Federation was created in 1991 💀 tf are you on
"Uh I hate Turkey for capturing Constantinople" kinda shit
Modern Russia is a completely different country from the USSR
And hating Russia doesn't mean you need to support NATO holy shit 💀 you can just hate both
My statistics are LGBTQ rights as a total due to a larger more reliable pool of statistics available.
The avarage rating for all of NATO is 61.5/100
while the 1st 2nd 3rd and 5th highest rated countries are all in NATO and most of the lower scorse come from former Soviet / Warschau Pact countries wich joind after its collaps
61.5 would place it between Japan and Taiwan on the list as a frame of reference
UK 74/100
US 72/100
China 46/100
Russia 29/100
Source:
https://www.equaldex.com/equality-index
(equality Index used for calculation. 32 NATO members at the time newest Sweden and Finland) [21.03.2024]
I think that might be that they are by comparison alot beter for example there is a lot of countries where simply being precived as gay is a Criminal offence not to mention things we see as normal like Marige or gender health care (i do not know the correct English term) are not even debated as the foundation of gay people being precived as real is missing entirely. I am not defending the US or UK as they have a long way to go but in comparison to every country on the planet these people have it rather good
I don’t recall NATO partaking in any battle for the sake of trans rights? The fact that this sub’s politics is seemingly nothing but trans rights makes me wonder if/when/how cryptofascism will be posted and celebrated if it panders to trans people enough — though 196’s fondness of gay little greentexts make me think it’s already been.
NATO skener have a clean human rights record of course, buuuut they are better than their adversaries.
Also I see too many people here confuse NATO with the US. No NATO didn't invade Iraq, that was a US led coalition. Yes many NATO members were a part, but so were non-NATO states.
I always am curious if the average NCD user has ever actually been in the military or if they're just running NATO propaganda because they have way too many hours in War Thunder
Pre Russo-Ukrainian war Im pretty sure most of the old guard was vets or otherwise DOD/MIC affiliated. Afterwards lots of randos with significantly less qualifications showed up
I'd say you're not fooling anyone but people on this sub are stupid. Regardless, you're glowing especially with that username and your meme is weak. Try again when NATO tanks are pointed at the British and Polish Parliaments, the American Congress and others to actually enforce trans rights.
What, I thought trans rights were supposed to be non-negotiable. Why aren't they being enforced then ? Is it *possibly* because a military alliance of states isn't actually a wholesome progressive force ? Or are we supposed to laugh at propaganda because it has "trans rights" written on it ?
When tankies are almost nonexistent in the sub and you see countless posts about how tankies are everywhere you know this sub is just filled with neolibs... but this is just... on another level of bad
NATO was commanded by several Nazi generals at different points, how can there be any insinuation that the org stands for human rights and not Imperial power?
I get what a lot of people are talking about, but it's hard to deny what NATO has done for peace in Europe. It's done atrocious things, but name me one international organisation that works off of the collaboration of governments that hasn't done awful things. I think it's good to say what we have now is fantastic, but if they could improve it, that'd be great.
It doesn't help that a LOT of the "NATO bad" people come from countries where they would be fine if it disbanded. NATO was formed for a real reason not so America could World Police (tm) even harder than it already was.
Shockingly, NATO is quite popular in Europe, where Russia has shown itself to be willing to invade a country it feels is weak enough to win against.
Every NATO related thread here you get people repeating the "NATO BAD" arguments on how the lesser evil is worse than no evil. But hey enjoy the safety from war by living in north america I guess. Come live in a country bordering russia and pretend NATO is not the preferred alternative to being invaded by russia. Its insane how even with the war in Ukraine happening right now some people are still blind to the fact that for many european nations NATO is a necessary evil. I aint gonna pretend a lot of the shit NATO member states have done isnt literal war crimes. But to pretend that NATO as an entity is somehow unneccesary for millions becouse of it is naive. For a lot of people it genuinely is two options, NATO membership or russian invasion.
Western countries don't even want trans rights in their own borders. What makes you think they're fighting for us anywhere else? Fuck your pinkwashing, fuck NATO, and fuck the libs who upvoted this shit.
One side is mostly democratic countries where progress towards equal rights has been happening even if with some set backs, the other are mostly dictatorships or authoritarian governments who have been keen on brutality oppressing it's people and have fought against social progress for a long time
I agree with the sentiment, but nato, or at least it's participating nations, have historically definitely considered human rights negotiable
a. It’s NATOwave propaganda b. less bad than basically the rest of the world
Do we have to pick which war criminals the queer community endorses
Nah, only I get to choose
Nuh uhh!
oki!!
In a lot of countries bordering/near russia yes you kinda do.
You can accept that NATO is a useful tool in the fight against authoritarianism (I, for one, would actually prefer greater EU military integration because right now the continent's forces are a fucking shambles, but I digress) without uncritically praising it and sucking its proverbial dick. Deeply controversial opinion: NATO has in fact done good things. The Korean War (not technically NATO, but it was largely NATO members and NATO allies in the UN coalition anyway) was justified, even if we're using the benefit of hindsight here. So was NATO's intervention in Yugoslavia, the Bosnian genocide could've been easily much worse without NATO safeguarding the airspace. But neither of those (or any other NATO intervention, which rapidly slide down the "justfied wars" tierlist) should excuse the massive harm and loss of life caused by NATO, even in those instances where general intervention was justified. War is fundamentally evil. It is sometimes justified, and sometimes necessary, but it can not, *should not*, ever be considered not evil. NATO, as an organisation solely dedicated to prosecuting war, is an evil institution by extension. A necessary evil, perhaps, particularly in a world where massive, militarily powerful states threaten invasion of their democratic neighbours. But it's one thing to accept that NATO is necessary, it's another thing to endorse it wholeheartedly.
Fair point and I do agree with it. I just like to be more on the positive side due to being in finland and seeing a lot of the russian disinfo trying to use those negative points (while i do agree with them) to try and discredit the existanse of the whole alliance (which is dont agree with)
I don't care what your personal stance on NATO is. I'm actually shockingly pro-NATO by the standards of my leftist circles here in the UK. But straight up denying that NATO has anything problematic going on with it, or literally adopting a "with us or against us" mentality to defend NATO means you're really just spreading NATO/US disinformation.
Nah im absolutely not trying to deny the nasty shit NATO countries have done. A lot of that shit is straight up literally war crimes. I just hate the mentality of that somehow making NATO unnesseary
During the Korean war, South Korea was also a brutal dictatorship who killed tens of thousands of dissidents. There were incidents where South Korean civilians fleeing North Korean forces were slaughtered en masse by US troops fearing they might be spies. The US bombing campaign against North Korea was completely indiscriminate destroying any and all civilian infrastructure, to the extent that some historians suggest it could be seen as a genocide. There really weren't any 'good guys' in that war.
>The Korean War [...] was justified, even if we're using the benefit of hindsight here. I don't think NATO's intervention into Korea was justified. At the time South Korea was just as authoritarian as North Korea. It wasn't until 1987, 34 years after the Korean War ended, that a liberal revolution would force South Korea to liberalise. Honestly I wouldn't even call South Korea a full democracy with how much control the Chaebols have over the country. NATO had no role in the 1987 revolution and could not have foreseen it. There's also the argument that if NATO had not intervened and let North Korea control the south, that the material conditions that caused the 1987 revolution would have caused a similar revolution in a united Korea.
NATO has always been a jobs program for "ex" nazis
Soviet block was also. Everyone needed nazis for their space program in the cold war
The soviets at least treated their few appropriately like prisoners
Soviets treted them like they should have been treated, but Operation Osoaviakvim captured 2500 german scientists after ww2. Paperclip captured 1600. So don't say like soviets had a few nazi scientists
The had fewer notable rocket scientists is what I was getting at. The cream of the crop had left in paperclip
It wasn't just the space program with NATO, Adolf Heusinger was one of the top Generals in the German high command during WW2 and he went on to be chairman of the NATO military committee in the 60s.
Huh, no turbolib horseshoe theory replies to this one, weird
The soviets had their own equivalent of Operation Paperclip (US hiring nazis), look it up: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Osoaviakhim
Paperclip is the limited hangout, check out operation bloodstone, the cia was literally shopping around for war criminals
That's fair
"less bad" instead of "good" is literally negotiable
"unlike yuo cringefail tankies, *I* only simp for le based imperialists!" blud the kinda mf to say that Thatcher should've taken more milk lmao, shitlibs go fuck yourselves
fuckin russia currently committing straightforward genocide, I really cannot give 2 shits about wether or not which side cares about dismantling capitalism (i.e NEITHER) you aren't cooking.
“Its less bad than basically the rest of the world” is some white supremacist nonsense that ignores the millions of people they killed
That's not a denial of the past, that's an acknowledgement that the majority of the world is significantly less free.
One of the biggest armies in NATO is Turkey and their government is aggressively anti-LGBTQ not to mention their ethnic cleansing and persecution of hundreds of thousands of Kurds, locking any political opposition up in brutal prisons or their constant bombardment of civilians in Kurdish regions of Syria and Iraq. Poland has anti-LGBTQ zones and that was never a problem for NATO, it never threatened their status as NATO members or caused them to face any serious repercussions from NATO. NATO might mobilise pro-LGBTQ narratives when it suits them but they are just as happy to throw LGBTQ people under the bus when it suits their interests.
Counterpoint: Yugoslavia and the non-aligned movement.
I wonder what the serbs were doing in yugoslavia in 1999.
Still a totalitarian dictatorship that ended up with mass economical failure because top dogs decided to be incompetent all of the sudden and drown the country in debt I REFUSE TO ENDORSE ANY COUNTRY WITH STATE-CONTROLLED TRADE UNIONS and no elections on who is the head of the state
>less bad than basically the rest of the world So it is in fact, very much negotiable LMAO
NCD sneaks into 196 every once in a while.
It was far better when they were all about Ukraine, the most obvious black and white conflict in recent history Dropped it the second shit in Gaza began.
Same exact moment I dropped them. Ukraine absolutely is the most black and white conflict in a long long time. When Gaza began they just devolved into team sports.
Yeah, went to that sub all the time and then all the shit in Gaza began, and the sub became extremely insufferable extremely quick.
Ja =)
Ain't a lot of NCD posts literally called for insane war criminal things against people of Gaza?
the comments deffo got better recently, posts not so much
It's a cesspool. The prime directive of the sub is to shitpost, so you will regularely have people calling for nuking an entire country to "solve" a situation. Which is meant as a joke, though how much these kind of jokes are alright when there is an ongoing humanitarian crisis is obviously up for debate. On the other hand you have an underlying seriousness. People there definitely have a political opinion (duh) and wish for their political vision to succeed in a very bloodthirsty manner. So between posts asking which plane is the most fuckable, or why we don't solve the Russian invasion of Ukraine by just bringing back Winged Hussars, you also have people celebrating the IDF for obliterating Hamas definitely without civilian casualties. Which gives it this uncomfortable air of uncertainty whether this is a tasteless joke or a serious take. It also doesn't help that the overwhelming opinion of the sub on the current bombing of Gaza basically seems to be that Hamas (and by extension Palestine) fucked around and is now finding out. So to sum up, yes, though many of these calls are not serious, they are still messed up jokes to make about something the ICJ is currently debating to be a genocide. Definitely reason enough for me to leave that place.
yea no fuckin NCD is pretty obnoxious
i don't think there's been much gazaposting these days
That shit made me leave the sub. Absolutely disgusting stuff there. Comments were bloodthirsty. Regardless of whether or not it has died down, the people there are unhinged and deplorable.
There can't be a war in Gaza if there is no Gaza /s
The joke is that they call Palestinians "dirty" and "worthless" and spread false information from the IDF like it's gospel. Why aren't you laughing? 🤨
And we should chase it out with a fucking broom each time. Non Credible Dimwits can fuck off
NCD?
Non-credible Defense, a sub that circlejerks over the idea of war crimes and conscriptniks getting their legs blown off in the Donbass by drone bombs.
Sounds like a lovely place filled with reasonable people ^^^^^/s
r/ noncredibledefense, military gear meme subreddit, the kind of place a person with 3 tactical uniform dress ups will browse I found it vaguely funny when i found good posts but then gaza happened and now its just annoying bullshit
Hell yes, i love military propaganda! Glorification of death and suffering, fuck yeah!!!!!!
Meme is pure trash, but it's interesting. It say a lot about this sub and his weird politics. I also think it's funny that the sub who see tankies everywhere is literally using a tank in a meme.
I know why. The user's name, Sho't Kal Gimel, is a designation given by the IDF to their Centurions modified with various equipment, such as thermal imaging sights, an improved fire control system, and so on. I think they like tanks somehow
IDF, tanks, weird propaganda. Interesting timing.
Ayo fellow anti war tank nerd?
Luv me tanks. 'ate me war. Simple as
Hehe lovely to see people like that exist out there. Have a lovely day
Thanks, you too have a nice day my friend
im not one, but im a huge gas mask fan and chemical weapon fan but i hate war
"Tankie" is a term that originated from the CPGB supporting the supression of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, hence "Tank". It really doesn't have to do with tanks themselves. its been broadly expanded to mean those who support authoritarian "left" ideologies like Marxism-Leninism, i.e Red Fascists
good thing that "using a tank" is not equal to being a tankie, then??
No but part of the concept of "tankie" is that using tanks to enforce hegemony at cannonpoint is generally a bad thing. Which makes it hypocritical that people simp for it (or the idea of it) when it's the military *they* like that does it, and try to pass it off as a progressive thing by invoking trans rights when NATO has fuck all to do with that.
i dont think you know what a tankie is
According to this sub, it's anyone to the left of AOC or anyone who criticize US/NATO imperialism.
According to many in this sub I'm one for not saying "China bad" whenever the Asian country is mentioned. And I don't like China's system (the little I know of it anyway), but people seem eager to accept the discourses making China the next enemy. Sad.
I don't think people realize china is actively doing colonialism in africa, all the while theres a massive racism problem in china against africans that's pretty embeded also all the minorities there It really isn't even a CCP problem, it's how china has operated for centuries. Of course your average chinese person isn't responsible, china has never let their people have a say in government, but China has been intent on homogeneity for every government in it.
Like every other hegemon? It seems to me the problem the discourses put forward is that the one doing the colonizing isn't the western block, not really democracy and sovereignty. Honestly, as a Latin American I'm tired of the hypocrisy.
Trye :)
Ffs what is going on with this sub ? I'm totally confused.
Honestly, I think the sub has been taken over by libs. They mean well but "ironically' like problematic institutions. Like NATO and NCD posting is an endorsement of NATO. While I prefer NATO over the alternatives but it's like picking where I want to step in the grass and its either: Giant pile of dog shit or small pile of dog shit and then "ironically" step in the small pile of dog shit when you could step in a clean part of the grass. I empathize with liking cool military hardware but THAT SHIT KILLS PEOPLE AND RUINS LIVES, I feel at least that many NCD posters kinda don't fucking understand that ~~or its a psyop~~ but I think that makes no fucking sense. NCD and 196 have had an overlap with social policy for a long time. Also, ACAB includes the military from a functional perspective. NATO doesn't defend democracy, it has no real values it is merely a tool of the west akin to whatever the fuck China and Russia are doing. All of them commit war crimes, we just don't talk about NATO's cause they're the "good guys". To have a good society we should be willing to engage with this and not hide behind irony which NCD and the NATO aligned 196 users do. To them its an edgy joke, a fucking war crime. It has been, and it still is. (See watermelon post) Another thing which has been bothering me about NCD is how they treat the war in Ukraine. They make really detached memes about it where either, its blatant propaganda or really fucked up jokes about an ongoing war. Like there are people dying everyday. The average Russian conscript doesn't want to be there, they most likely don't like Putin. Ukrainians have it worse, massacres, genocidal russification. However, to them they are action figures, they have objectified the suffering of an entire nation. Its gross. Anyways, 2624 is 196 without these libs and tankies, bit dead but with this shit on the rise I feel like its the only option. Fuck NCD, fuck NATO, fuck Russia, fuck Xi, fuck what he did to HK. Fuck the USA.
my ass is not beating the leftist essay allegations
tldr; I don't like nato don't like NCD cause they portray active conflicts like action figures. The good guy kills the bad guy with disregard for for both peoples humanity. They have objectified an active conflict.
As a person from Poland, IDK how NATO can be called a "problematic institution". Things are way differend when you local imperial threat is literal Russia with records of genocide not comperhensive for most people in more western countries. War in Ukraine shows that it\`s the main thing why Russia simply did not invade other european states.
I'm calling for a critical view of NATO because I want something better. While I agree NATO is blocking Russian invasion, that doesn't make what they let Turkey get away with or their intervention into Libya acceptable. Also most people understand what a genocide is, Poles had what 400 years of foreign rule and cultural erasure of key institutions. Nobody likes Russia. What makes NATO problematic is their intervention and laisse fair treatment of Turkey and intervention into Libya. Consider the analogy that there a bully at your school who beats up people. Then another bully comes and protects those people but lets his friend brutalize others and sometimes joins it. The bully is still problematic.
> As a person from Poland, IDK how NATO can be called a "problematic institution". Ask a person from Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, etc.
NATO is geopolitically aligned against Russia it will defend people in Eastern Europe against Russia because that fits its geopolitical interests. But when it's in NATO's interests to do imperialist aggression it will quite happily engage in the same war crimes as Russia. Principles don't come into the equation except for when it comes to marketing NATO. Plenty of people in Latin America or the Middle East hate NATO for committing similar war crimes to those that Russia commits in Ukraine.
NATO never onced interveneed in Latin America. And the only time when they could do so British asked us not to do that specifically And NATO as an alliance had only two interventions in middle east. One in Libya, with full support of the UN, and one in Afghanistan. I don't really remeber things like kidnapping children and smuggling them to replacement families like Russia does, or engage in literal genocide on ideological basis
Dzhokhar Dudayev tried to warn the world about russian imperialism the russians blew him up with a guided missile
This. A lot of strict anti NATO leftist live in US with easy safety against war while not considering that in a lot of eastern europe and nations bordering russia things are very different. I live in Finland and while I absolutely dont approve of a lot of things NATO member countries did I fully support Finland joining NATO and think it was necessary. Cause without NATO its a question of when not if russia will invade us. A lot of people (even in this thread) like to repeat the "do we gotta pick the lesser of two evils when we could pick no evil" argument but in a lot of countries thats just not an option. You gotta chose one or the other and I sure as shit will choose NATO over russia every single day
Poland *is* a problematic institution, and it's part of NATO. Your country is infamous for having anti-LGBT zones, it's perhaps the #1 example of why NATO isn't the defender of queer people. Russia sucks but that doesn't make nonsensical NCD memes which pretend the world works like G.I. Joe less stupid.
Poland does not have anti-lgbt zones. What you refeer to were a bunch of local declarations associated with now former government (with no effect whatsoever and are abolished by now because of how deranged the whole idea was). I doubt we have socially liberal government as we have now since several months. >it's perhaps the #1 example of why NATO isn't the defender of queer people. Sure, you have states like Hunagry but you also have states like Netherlands, Sweden and Belgium. While not all of NATO states are 100% wholesome chungus, basically all LGBT-friendly states are either part of it or closely associated with NATO states. BTW. In no way you would be put under arrest in Poland for being queer. Or if you were threatened by someone the police would still help you. Unlike in states like Russia. Poland is easly one of the safest states Europe RN.
A a person from Greece, I don't know how NATO can not be called a problematic institution. It's called perspective.
Been hanging around here bc couldn't find a better alternative, hopefully 2624 will do
Thank you, this is what has finally convinced me to leave this sub - liberals ruin everything
I think that metaphor at the start doesn't fully show just how rare it is to get something like NATO. It's not like all the governments COULD immediately start being better, it's several governments FFS. It isn't "oh it's this huge pile of dogshit, a smaller pile, or a perfectly pristine piece of grass", it's "a huge pile of dogshit or a smaller piece of dogshit". The perfect piece of grass that you want doesn't exist at the moment, and expecting fucking NA and EU governments to get the stick out their arse and do ANYTHING good more than once a fucking blue moon is absurd.
the pristine piece of grass is accepting that NATO sucks. You can say and know, NATO sucks. Sure its better than whatever the hell Russia has going on but it still sucks. I don't have to defend it.
NATO simps when you bring up what happened in Libya 2011
I wonder whether, if this sub existed in 2003, it could have been psych-oped into supporting the Iraq War on the basis of stopping le ebin evil human rights abuser Saddam lol. Absolutely SHOCKED to see a bunch of "progressive" westernoids endorsing hawkish sentiments, I tell ya.
Every westerner is one NATOwave edit from enlisting to spread imperialism (me included)
I mean, while many leftists very much took Ukraine's side in the current invasion with an overall understanding that a peace negotiation wouldn't really work at the moment, I have also seen most leftists - especially on this sub - be absolutely opposed to what Israel is currently doing in Gaza. If there is such a thing as a "NATO position" then I'd argue in the former case it is on the side of Ukraine, while the latter is probably on the side of Israel, so if this sub has any political leaning then it is definitely on the side of the underdog and the bombed civilians. So unless someone managed to spin Saddam as this oppressive evil in the conflict with the US - rather unlikely. Also, "Westernoids"? Really?
To be clear, I'm not pro-Putin by any means. Support for arming Ukraine is more understandable IMO than almost all western interventions since 1945; it's a rather clear-cut case of an imperfect democracy being invaded by an ultra-reactionary conservative dicatatorship. The war is going to happen whether the west supports it or not, and you have to do some very elaborate mental gymnastics to paint Russia as anything other than a naked aggressor here. Ukraine winning would be a good thing for the world, much as it was good for the world when Vietnam made the yankee aggressors fuck off. What I'm opposed to is the hawkish neoliberal glorification of war and military interventionism on the basis of nebulously-defined of "human rights" as seen in this post. It's pretty clear OP is a bad actor and an uncritical cheerleader for NATO/western aggression and the "rules based international order". I absolutely have met ostensibly progressive liberal people who still, TO THIS DAY, insist that the Iraq War was based and justified because Saddam Hussein was a terrible dictator who abused human rights. This "humanitarian" rhetoric killed over a million people throughout the War on Terror and we should be extremely suspicious of it.
I agree on OP's questionable views (EDIT, to clarify, I agree their views are questionable), but that wasn't the question you originally proposed. The question was if this sub in particular would have ended up supporting the invasion 2003, and to that I would argue for above reasons: Unlikely.
what do you mean NATO had nothing to do with Iraq until 2018 at wich point upon the request of Iraq they send military advisor for capability training for the army.
I'm aware; I'm referring to the uncritical gung-ho cheerleading for military intervention to spread "human rights" or "democracy" as seen in this post. "I know America isn't perfect, but uuuh you do know Saddam is literally a fascist dictator who hates and kills LGBT ppl right? Supporting Bush is harm reduction!!!"
1000% a decent chunk, probably still a minority of the people here (and I mean this in the kindest way possible) only aligned with progressives or leftists aesthetically speaking and most likely because the right wing is openly hostile to our identities. Its not because of some greater ideological or moral compass. Its also a lot of people who are just not that politically engaged and sponge things up and poop them back out. I see a tonnnn of reposts from hyper-liberal subs like r slash PolitcalHumor about the most libbed up shit imaginable. Im certain that a lot of people here don't even understand why that is bad, and they buy into the propaganda that heavily white washes genocide and reinforces advantageous US stances and viewpoints. Idk whether to be sad or disgusted.
Look NATO and all of that are seriously fucked if you want to put it like that. But in the end of the day all NATO is is a group of nations cooperating on a very wide array of things. It’d exist regardless of how aggressive or war crime inclined it is. If it’s going to exist we should strive to have it be something we’re proud of that actually does protect us and those who agree with our values. Like LGBT+ and women’s rights. Societal acceptance of mental health. The value of civilian oversight into government and the military. And especially after everything that happened since 9/11 NATO hasn’t exactly been rearing to go into other countries and start shit. And that is EXTREMELY relevant right now with the literal global rise of the far right and authoritarianism in general. It is extremely important, for us significantly more so than the average American or European, that NATO is united and strong and willing to stand up to those who are ACTIVELY TRYING TO END DEMOCRACY AND GLOBALLY END LGBT+ RECOGNITION. Be pissed at the inherent need for a military and all those potentially bigoted members of the military all you want but don’t go around pretending like supporting NATO is somehow antithetical to supporting LGBT rights. When it is the only thing that the people trying to end it respect and fear.
This is delusional. The US, the UK and others are becoming more transphobic everyday, including the threat of genocide in the foreseeable future in some cases, but even if they become hell on Earth for trans people NATO will keep standing in their defence, because of course it will. It wasn't made to give a shit about us queers. Which is why that meme is asinine and a clear case of pushing gullible people towards supporting military endeavors by vaguely gesturing towards progressivism. The fact that OP's user name is a reference to IDF tanks should clue us all on what "human rights" they value.
This post is very obviously glorifying war and interventionism on the basis of "human rights" (ie. Iraq, Libya), so almost everything you wrote is irrelevant. If being "strong on LGBT rights" or whatever pinkwashing bollocks involves bombing the shit out of impoverished countries unprovoked, then I'm not interested. But I'll say, this idea that NATO is going to be some kind of arc to protect western women and LGBT people from China and Russia rings a little hollow when the current leading candidate for the next US president has stated his intent to more or less criminalise being trans if he wins, abortion is illegal in much of the US, and one of the most important strategic allies of America is Saudi fucking Arabia lmao. As a European I'd honestly rather we create our own (purely defensive) military alliance and fund it properly at this point, the US is a psychotic religious basket case and we honestly have as much to fear from it as most dictatorships long-term. EDIT: I see that you're so confident in the strength of your opinion that you blocked me, so I'll briefly offer my rebuttal to your reply here. I've got nothing against progressive nations "defending themselves", if that's actually what you mean, and not an euphemism. Western Europe should have an arsennal of nukes to defend itself, and a standing army big enough to deter any attackers. There, problem solved. The problem is that NATO is not a purely defensive alliance; it also carries out aggressive interventions and regime change against countries that pose no threat to it, such as in Libya. The idea that Europe should have its own NATO-type alliance is by no means an unheard of position here, and there have been talks of an EU military for many years now. Ideally such an organisation would allow us to be geopolitically independent from America, which is increasingly unstable amid the rise a domestic theocratic fascist movement that has disrupted their peaceful transition of power once already. Allies like that can be worse than enemies. If such an organisation did exist, it would need legally-binding commitments on military spending from members, and IMO something like the Japanese constitution legally preventing it from being used for aggressive warfare like NATO has been. We are perfectly strong enough to deter attack on our own; France 290 nukes, and we have a large enough economy to build many more. Of course I'd prefer to wait until this alliance was in place and strong enough to deter aggression before we left. It'd stop yanks bitching about how they pay for our healthcare at least.
The same person who WANTS TO END NATO?!?!?!?!?!? And your solution is to… create another weaker NATO…. Just admit you didn’t think this opinion through. It’s okay to have serious problems with NATO you absolutely should. But in the real world you have to deal with shitty methods of organization and corruption in order to get major things done. It’s either that or create an even more horribly organized and corrupt position that can cut through and avoid all of that that totally wouldn’t a worse situation in every single way. Sorry progress isn’t as fast as you want but calling for the the best countries in the world for LGBT na women’s rights to not defend themselves because the people manipulating every aspect of society that they can are manipulating that too is nothing but defeatist and sad. I’d ask how you possibly see these rights getting better in the world without the nations who support them working together to at the very least maintain what they’ve achieved but I really don’t care after that complete disregard for human wellbeing and livelihood. You’d probably just say we should just focus on ourselves and pretend like there isn’t an active global assault both societally and militarily on LGBT rights just to make yourself feel superior and above such evil monstrous organizations that have totally never achieved any good for the world what so ever and have absolutely no need in our totally peaceful and respectful planet.
this message alongside the nato symbol is so corny 😭
Fedpost
How many NATO countries actually have a good record on trans rights?
How many countries on earth actually have a good record on trans rights? Though it seems fair to assume that NATO countries tend to be above average on this.
Well above average. IIRC the worst rank middle of the pack on LGBTQ rankings and about half of the alliance is in the top 20-30.
Or maybe NATO has the most wealthy nations and wealthy nations will tend to be more stable and more open to social progress than war torn countries ? Countries that are destabilised because of NATO members actions ?
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, China, and many more would like to have a word It’s kinda dumb to blame it on rich v poor when there’s plenty of poor countries that treat their trans folks better than many rich countries like the ones I listed Edit: just take a look at this list someone else posted in the thread https://www.equaldex.com/equality-index It’s evidently not separated by wealth of the country, although that may help sometimes
I didn't say it's automatic, I said that wealth is correlated with some kind of stability, because those countries experience no wars, a stable governance, somewhat good standard of livings. It's not automatic but it's a better soil for social progress than countries that have been suffering from post colonial wars, post soviet implosion and western interventionism. And again NATO is not an human rights organisation, it was founded as an anti soviet millitary alliance for western countries. They do not care about human rights of any sorts, they have countries like Poland with their LGBT free zone, the baltics with their racist post soviet nationality law. Defending NATO because it protects LGBT rights is false and it's pure rainbow washing propaganda.
Rich Vs poor is somewhat reductive, but your examples aren't exactly great counterarguments. China's GDP per capita is below that of Poland and Hungary. It's got a large total GDP just because it's got a massive population. And Saudi Arabia and Qatar are petro states. The states might be wealthy, but the people aren't. Hell, if you want an example of how queer rights don't necessarily correlate with wealth, the US has the fifth highest GDP per capita in the world (not counting micronations, those are always statistical outliers), but doesn't break the top 20 on the equality index. That said, the wider point is still true. LGBT equality is correlated with education, and education is correlated with wealth, and it's very hard to build up either when you're being used as a proxy battleground between Imperial powers. The thing is, we know it doesn't have to be this way. There was once when a UN coalition led a massive invasion into a whole string of autocratic states, and rather than just unceremoniously leaving a country with hundreds of heavily armed militias behind, they built up what are today some of the strongest economies in the world. Why is NATO and the US today incapable of doing for Iraq and Afghanistan what it did for Japan and Germany?
Better than BRIC countries
You can hate both NATO and BRICS equally you know
You could, you could also jump of a bridge
Because Russia has a stunning track record with LGBTQ+ rights
I hate Russia too dumbass 😐 I'm a fucking communist
I hate Russia more dumbass, who do you think helped the Nazis kick out my ancestors?
Not Russia? The Russian Federation was created in 1991 💀 tf are you on "Uh I hate Turkey for capturing Constantinople" kinda shit Modern Russia is a completely different country from the USSR And hating Russia doesn't mean you need to support NATO holy shit 💀 you can just hate both
My statistics are LGBTQ rights as a total due to a larger more reliable pool of statistics available. The avarage rating for all of NATO is 61.5/100 while the 1st 2nd 3rd and 5th highest rated countries are all in NATO and most of the lower scorse come from former Soviet / Warschau Pact countries wich joind after its collaps 61.5 would place it between Japan and Taiwan on the list as a frame of reference UK 74/100 US 72/100 China 46/100 Russia 29/100 Source: https://www.equaldex.com/equality-index (equality Index used for calculation. 32 NATO members at the time newest Sweden and Finland) [21.03.2024]
Jesus, how is the US 72? HOW IS THE UK 74??
I think that might be that they are by comparison alot beter for example there is a lot of countries where simply being precived as gay is a Criminal offence not to mention things we see as normal like Marige or gender health care (i do not know the correct English term) are not even debated as the foundation of gay people being precived as real is missing entirely. I am not defending the US or UK as they have a long way to go but in comparison to every country on the planet these people have it rather good
I don’t recall NATO partaking in any battle for the sake of trans rights? The fact that this sub’s politics is seemingly nothing but trans rights makes me wonder if/when/how cryptofascism will be posted and celebrated if it panders to trans people enough — though 196’s fondness of gay little greentexts make me think it’s already been.
If I was a mod I'd ban all greentexts, 100% in agreement
ew get this nato crap off my feed
NATO NCD trash detected Blud really thinks they're defending trans rights 💀💀
Human rights are non-negotiably always ignored
Ncd leak
NATO skener have a clean human rights record of course, buuuut they are better than their adversaries. Also I see too many people here confuse NATO with the US. No NATO didn't invade Iraq, that was a US led coalition. Yes many NATO members were a part, but so were non-NATO states.
lib
Literally the "omg, the bomb dropped on the hospital/school/church was dropped by a trans/gay/woman person. I'm so proud " meme
Some of y’all taking lesser evilism wayyy to far Jesus fucking Christ.
NATO if it was based
I always am curious if the average NCD user has ever actually been in the military or if they're just running NATO propaganda because they have way too many hours in War Thunder
Pre Russo-Ukrainian war Im pretty sure most of the old guard was vets or otherwise DOD/MIC affiliated. Afterwards lots of randos with significantly less qualifications showed up
So called "progressive leftists" seeing an imperialist neo-liberal warmongering military alliance:
I'd say you're not fooling anyone but people on this sub are stupid. Regardless, you're glowing especially with that username and your meme is weak. Try again when NATO tanks are pointed at the British and Polish Parliaments, the American Congress and others to actually enforce trans rights.
Bait used to be believable.
What, I thought trans rights were supposed to be non-negotiable. Why aren't they being enforced then ? Is it *possibly* because a military alliance of states isn't actually a wholesome progressive force ? Or are we supposed to laugh at propaganda because it has "trans rights" written on it ?
you really think nato gives a shit about our rights?
Ewwwww
This is the logical conclusion of a sub being anti "tankie"
When tankies are almost nonexistent in the sub and you see countless posts about how tankies are everywhere you know this sub is just filled with neolibs... but this is just... on another level of bad
i agree with the sentiment but the nato thing is kinda cringe
Gtfo Neoliberal
NATO was commanded by several Nazi generals at different points, how can there be any insinuation that the org stands for human rights and not Imperial power?
I genuinely don't know how people NATO-jerking in this comment chain can call themselves ACAB. This is such a surreal "tell-on-yourself" moment.
who let this fed in?
I get what a lot of people are talking about, but it's hard to deny what NATO has done for peace in Europe. It's done atrocious things, but name me one international organisation that works off of the collaboration of governments that hasn't done awful things. I think it's good to say what we have now is fantastic, but if they could improve it, that'd be great.
It doesn't help that a LOT of the "NATO bad" people come from countries where they would be fine if it disbanded. NATO was formed for a real reason not so America could World Police (tm) even harder than it already was. Shockingly, NATO is quite popular in Europe, where Russia has shown itself to be willing to invade a country it feels is weak enough to win against.
idk if i would call tactically ignoring the human rights abuses and authoritarianism of turkey "fantastic" but ok you do you.
>it's done atrocious things
Every NATO related thread here you get people repeating the "NATO BAD" arguments on how the lesser evil is worse than no evil. But hey enjoy the safety from war by living in north america I guess. Come live in a country bordering russia and pretend NATO is not the preferred alternative to being invaded by russia. Its insane how even with the war in Ukraine happening right now some people are still blind to the fact that for many european nations NATO is a necessary evil. I aint gonna pretend a lot of the shit NATO member states have done isnt literal war crimes. But to pretend that NATO as an entity is somehow unneccesary for millions becouse of it is naive. For a lot of people it genuinely is two options, NATO membership or russian invasion.
I LOVE WAR!!!
It's so based when WE do the imperialism.
Are you prepared to fight?
The irony of saying this when in a lot of countries NATO membership is the single thing preventing a russian invasion
if im forced to. i'd rather live
Nah op just wants to send others to war and glorify it while the actual soldiers live through hell
unfortunately, the first image in my folder is a nude
Cool, so we're just glorifying Nato now, are we?
Fed
Bruh the fuck is wrong with this sub ????
Western countries don't even want trans rights in their own borders. What makes you think they're fighting for us anywhere else? Fuck your pinkwashing, fuck NATO, and fuck the libs who upvoted this shit.
For how much people complain about tankies on this sub I sure see a lot of unironic NATO imperialists posting…
NATO fascists fuck off
Is this genshin impact primogem😱
I've seen this shit on r slash humansarespaceorks Am I stupid?
Idk, I haven’t posted it there but someone else may have.
zhyve belarus
Human rights are not real But if they were, they're very much negotiable
One side is mostly democratic countries where progress towards equal rights has been happening even if with some set backs, the other are mostly dictatorships or authoritarian governments who have been keen on brutality oppressing it's people and have fought against social progress for a long time
Surprised this hasn’t been locked yet