35 Comments

Had NATO disbanded when the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact disappeared, there would have been no market for all the US weapons manufacturers (aka merchants of death). Bye-bye military-industrial complex. Thus, there was only one option. Keep NATO going. But, due to their voracious greed and megalomania, they decided to double down. So, NATO expanded into all the former Warsaw Pact countries and decided in 2008 to invite some former members of the Soviet Union (Ukraine and Georgia). A sure-fire bonanza, since all the former Warsaw pact countries were forced to upgrade their militaries with US made weapons. And, what the hell---let's expand NATO's mandate beyond Europe, turning NATO into a US-led military alliance to dominate the entire globe. What a perfect recipe to make sure the mega profits never stop flowing!! Who cares if it increases the risk of a nuclear conflagration? The main goal is to ensure corporate profits keep growing at Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Northrup Grumman, etc. and the boys at the Pentagon, CIA, NSA, etc. keep their secure, lucrative jobs and fat pensions.

Expand full comment

Whenever I say this, Charlie, the response I get is: But Putin! You want Putin to win!

That's all they've got. Fear of Putin.

Expand full comment

Fear mongering is the foundational propaganda tool of the National Security State. It has always been this way. The "new Hitler" may change over time (Milosevic, Assad, ISIS, Taliban, Hussein, Putin), but the basic playbook remains the same.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jul 9
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Dennis, Trump supports genocide in Gaza. Do you support Trump on this?

Also, as George Carlin noted, politicians like Trump and Biden don't care about you at all. AT ALL. So why should I care about them? Why should I place any faith in them?

Expand full comment

That's the THIRD time You've asked our esteemed Kiwi that question, Bill.

And i'm sure that there will be several more occasions to ask it; all of which will be similarly ignored.

Expand full comment

So the third time's not a charm?

Expand full comment

Well said, Charlie.

Expand full comment

Yea, NATO is 75 and I was a boy of six when it came into existence in the same year when an independent BRD (Federal Republic) was created by the western allies and its government was filled with former Nazi officials. I do remember very well my parents outrage when they observed the rehabilitation of the those Nazis. I vividly remember the disgust of my father who had been a veteran of WW I and II. when the German military was resurrected by the west allies by 1955. The old trope of German “militarism” is nothing more than anti German propaganda. Anyone who really knows anything about German military history should know that by WW I and later WW II the military of Britain, France and Russia were numerically far superior. The Germans had superior leadership and that was the only difference.

The real reason for NATO can be ascertained from George Kennan’s 1948 long telegram from Moscow in which he stated among other things that the U.S. needs to make sure that its control of the world’s wealth and having only a fraction of the world’s population will be maintained into the future. Another reason was to prevent Western Europeans from voting for left parties; Greece became a real nasty example of English and U.S. interference in the domestic affairs of another country where left resistance to Nazi occupation had been very popular. Russia remaining a threat and the “specter” of communism being real issues is again nothing more than propaganda to support U.S. control in Europe and expand it. Russia was not expansionist towards Europe. The fact is that the West has been trying to expand into Russia (1918) and Senator Truman’s statement in the summer of 1941 makes it clear what U.S. objectives were. “If we see Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.”

Germany was defeated by the Red Army. NATO was created “To keep America in, Russia out, and Germany down” to quote the Secretary General of NATO Lord Hastings (Izmir) in 1949.

The post war world that I have lived through would have been very different if the U.S. had pursuit a more cooperative policy towards the Soviet Union (Russia). Unfortunately, for the world the post World War to mindset of the U.S. was continued in a more aggressive mode by the Wolfowitz and Brzezinski (and others) doctrines of the 1990s to the present day. Gorbachev’s offer of a cooperative world order and a Social Democratic economic system in the USSR had to be destroyed. That was accomplished most successfully when Yeltsin was actively supported from the WEST - Clinton spent hundreds of millions to guarantee his re-election in 1996. The rest is the story that will be forever a stain on the western image. This is the perception of an European historian and a German who grew up just a few hours from the Iron Curtain.

Expand full comment

You can't have a huge "national security state," i.e. the MICIMATT, without enemies. Russia is always a good one, but maybe not fearsome enough, hence China. And there's always "terror" looming in the background.

Expand full comment

And the innocent of the world are paying the price. I haven’t forgotten the fourteen million Germans who were expelled with Churchill’s and Truman’s approval from their homes. We had some of them as “forced” houseguests, neighbors and classmates. This happened in many other countries. What you refer to as the MICIMATT has been the main cause of the 20th century catastrophe. British historian Niall Ferguson (not my favorite) was right when he stated in THE PITY OF WAR that Britain (and through it the U.S.) bear the main responsibility for a European conflict to turn into a world war. The rest of the story we know all too well.

Expand full comment

Again, the question is not "Will the United States survive to celebrate its 250th Birthday on July 4, 2026, 726 days from today?"

It is "SHOULD the United States survive to celebrate that Birthday? And if it does, will the American Peoples be in any condition or mood to celebrate anything?"

Expand full comment

Indeed. They tried "terrorism" all by itself and that didn't work. So back to the old enemies. And just for good measure, throw in a bunch of small ones (e.g., Venezuela) when they need to demonstrate "the finest fighting force in history" to justify even more spending.

Expand full comment

Au contraire, Tom R: “Terrorism” and the so-called “Global” so-called “War On” so-called “Terrorism” it spawned worked GREAT; exactly as it was planned, programmed, and prepared to do. Perfectly, in fact.

As i noted in a piece i wrote and Bill published here on BV back on March 5, 2022 [nine days after the start of Putin’s SMO]:

“America's twenty year ‘Forever War’ after 9/11 was, is, and ever will be a halftime show designed to keep the troops occupied, THE DEFENSE CONTRACTORS PROFITABLE, and the American people comfortably numb to protracted conflicts in places many if not most of them cannot find on a map of the world.

“For now, Russia has recovered from the disintegration of the USSR and European Communism ~ and China has recovered from the madness of Mao ~ sufficiently for either [or especially both] to present viable, credible "threats" to America's 30-year reign of global, unipolar hegemony since the end of Cold War I in December, 1991.

“For now looms Cold War II, with Ukraine, the South China Sea, and/or Taiwan set to kick it off in fine fashion.”

[ https://bracingviews.substack.com/p/orwells-1984-holds-many-lessons-for-the-new-cold-war ; EMPHASIS added.]

The best measure of how well “terrorism” has in fact worked is the fact that the US spent $6 [SIX] TRILLION on its “Forever War”; virtually every dime of which went into the pocket of a worker, supervisor, manager, executive, or shareholder in America’s MICIMATT.

For details, see: https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/BudgetaryCosts .

Expand full comment

In addition to the $6 TRILLION spent on waging that GWOT, the US faces $2.2 TRILLION costs in providing Veterans' care over the next 30 years.

See the above link for details.

Expand full comment

I've seen that Brown University study - even went through the download where they break out the costs by year. Would like to see the costs for Afghanistan too.

I would agree that for 2001 - 2012, growth in spending related to DOD operations in the GWOT were increasing, with contractors getting a major cash infusion for their various "services". Beyond that, things moved into sustainment and drawdown, and the veterans benefits that will need to grow over the next 20 years to take care of the men and women who were deployed and injured (a euphemism if there ever was one).

My original point is that none of the above really translated into the multi-generational weapons systems programs that go on and on and on - that's where the big money is for companies like the Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon; and where the huge campaign contributions come from. Those programs require near-peer or peer adversaries.

Expand full comment

And that was also my point, TomR.

After the demise of the Soviet Empire, there was no marketable and saleable “threat” from hi-tech, mass death, multi-generational weapons systems from anybody anywhere. And thus no need for them. They were ~ and still are ~ totally useless against Ragheads living in caves in Afghanistan, or on the desert sands of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc. Plus, the MICIMATT was making plenty of money and getting a more-than-suitable return on its investment.

Just as the MICCIMATT had hired Osama bin Laden to give the USSR “its very own Vietnam,” the MICIMATT hired OBL to give America its “very own Reichstag Fire.” Which he did quite spectacularly and successfully. And thus began “The Forever War,” intended to keep the Money flowing to all the right people after the end of Cold War I.

And in the meantime, Russia was recovering from the death of the USSR and European Communism, and China was recovering from the Madness of Mao and Deng. And now they are recovered, the GWOT and Forever War are long-forgotten ancient history [except for those Veterans], and Cold War II is upon us. In spades.

And the MICCMATT has never been doing better, in terms of either Power or Cash Flow.

Expand full comment

Very well said, Karl. Thank You for sharing that perspective.

Expand full comment

I love this country and its people, but I saw the devastation and experienced hardship and my family were victimized by the Nazis - suicide, euthanasia, incarceration. Then occupation which hasn’t ended. And the American people have been and are still lied to about the real villains.

Expand full comment

i'm curious, Karl. Are You referring to the lies about the "real villains" back then, the Nazis? Or about the lies about the Real Villains today, in this country that You love?

Expand full comment

Those who caused the human catastrophes of the nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

Expand full comment

i like WORLD BEYOND WAR's interpretation of the NATO acronym: "Nuclear Armed Terrorist Organization.."

https://worldbeyondwar.org/wbw-news-action-nuclear-armed-terrorist-organization-at-75/

Expand full comment
Jul 8Edited

There's a real parallel between Biden and NATO. Both are clearly past their prime although both cling to power with all their might. Biden would destroy the country rather than give up his power. NATO would destroy the world. And of course both consider Trump as the hated enemy.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jul 8
Comment removed
Expand full comment

That's a good bet, Ray.

It, of course, assumes that there will actually BE an election. Which i don't think anybody can guarantee at this stage of The Game.

Expand full comment

NATO--Neoliberal Alliance of Totalitarian Oligarchs

Expand full comment

NAFO, Noodle Around and Find Out.

Imagine if Biden achieved what the neoconlibs want the expired term dictator in Kiev to do!

Expand full comment

That's a good one--and sadly, exactly what they are dangerously doing!

Expand full comment

Never should have past 50.

Expand full comment

Perhaps their fears are groundless, but people in a number of European nations adjacent to Russia have been afraid of a Soviet/Russian takeover for generations. I have friends with families in Poland, Lithuania, and Slovakia who've felt the shadow of a possible invasion all their lives. Maybe they're simply the targets of fear mongering tactics by [fill in the blank], but their and their ancestors' apprehension is genuine. FWIW.

Expand full comment