• 0 Posts
  • 246 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle




  • Okay, so who are the people responsible? A handful of leaders? Most of the original Zionists have been dead for a long time. Is it literally every single Israeli? What exactly does this freedom and justice look like? I don’t think locking up Netanyahu and Ben Gvir would exactly satisfy the Palestinian cause, so ultimately, you have the situation of millions of Israelis, most of which were born there, who do not want to leave and will only do so by force.

    So, what do you want? The forced removal of all Israelis? That’s not an inconsistent position given your general perspective, but if that’s the case, come out and actually say it.

    You’ve said a lot of nice abstract things about wanting freedom and justice, and very little actual concrete info about the situation on the ground.


  • Jews conquered large parts of Palestine (not all of it AFAIK)

    This isn’t really true to the historical record, not that it’s significantly relevant to the modern conflict. Contrary to the Biblical Exodus account, from what the archeological and linguistic record seems to show, a unique Jewish culture seems to organically emerge from a particular group of Canaanites who were not otherwise previously distinct from any of their neighbors. There certainly was no mass migration and conquest from Egypt. Over time, the Jews/Israelites developed a distinct cultural identity, possibly with some amount of external influence, and later developed individual minor kingdoms before being subjugated by the Egyptian New Kingdom, the Assyrians (thus the Lost Tribes of Israel), the Babylonians (thus the first Exile and the destruction of the first Temple), the Persians (who returned the previously exiled Jews), Alexander the Great, and lastly the Romans, who destroyed the Second Temple and began the Diaspora.

    Again though, none of this should really be seen as being particularly relevant to the modern issue any more than Roman territorial claims are to the modern borders of Italy.







  • No, it is not, and I’m not going to allow you to just walk back your claims after some inconvenience. To quote you yourself:

    This just means that Sweden will have [to] send their troops to fight wars in middle east for oil companies.

    No, it doesn’t. NATO membership does not mean that anyone is forced to fight wars in the Middle East. If that were the case, all of NATO would have been roped into the Iraq invasion, but they weren’t. The vast majority told America to fuck off during the invasion, and only lightly participated in some minor training operations with the Iraqi military afterwards.

    And again, Sweden not being in NATO did not prevent it from participating in other NATO campaigns in a voluntary capacity. Your claim that Sweden joining NATO means that it’s going to be forced to participate in all these Middle Eastern wars against its will simply does not stand up to even a cursory look at actual reality. You can believe whatever you like since it appears that you’re immune to facts, but anyone else reading this should know that you’re not saying anything based in actual evidence.

    Also, if you really think that ten Norwegians trying to teach Iraqi soldiers how to resist the groups that later became ISIS is an example of the “horrible things” that NATO does, that says much more about you than it does about NATO. The world is actually more complicated than “US brainwashes the world into killing the third world because oil”.

    Cheers.


  • And again, the only mandatory after Article V have been monitoring and patrolling US airspace for a few months after 9/11 and some maritime operations in the Mediterranean to protect shipping and prevent terrorism and smuggling. All those other NATO operations were voluntary, and other NATO countries have happily told the US to fuck off when they don’t want to be involved.

    Also, Sweden, despite not being in NATO, also participated in operations in Afghanistan. Your premise that being in NATO necessarily causes you to be involuntarily dragged into gallivanting around the Middle East is simply false. Other nations have autonomy and agency, actually. Not everything is about America.






  • It absolutely is; this guy is either an idiot or deliberately misleading.

    Article V has been invoked exactly one time, by the United States after the September 11 attacks. The direct outcomes of this were two operations: Operation Eagle Assist, where NATO forces helped patrol and monitor US airspace in the immediate months after 9/11, and Operation Active Endeavour, a maritime operation where NATO ships patrolled and secured shipping lines in the Mediterranean. NATO itself was not directly involved under Article V in the Iraq invasion, though some members did voluntarily participate (hence Bush’s “coalition of the willing”).

    There have been NATO operations in the Middle East under Article IV invoked by Turkey, which mandates only military consultation from members, not direct intervention, though they may voluntarily participate if they want. Likewise, NATO was involved in Afghanistan (which, it should be noted, is not in the Middle East) and Libya in a similar voluntary capacity. It should be noted that, despite not being a member, Sweden did participate in NATO operations in Afghanistan, voluntarily.

    Sweden is only obligated to participate in military action if a member state is actively attacked. Otherwise, it’s able to voluntarily participate in other NATO operations, as it has already done in the past. That NATO is a tightly organized and coordinated international military organization makes it really useful for large international operations - generally directed by the UN - but outside of defensive invocations of Article V, these are strictly optional, and members very much have refused to participate in American-led operations that they don’t agree with (see Iraq).