America Should Exit From NATO & The National Security State

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Jacob Hornberger via The Future of Freedom Foundation,

In its reporting on Brexit, the New York Times asks an interesting question: “Is the post-1945 order imposed on the world by the United States and its allies unraveling, too?”

Hopefully, it will mean the unraveling of two of the most powerful and destructive governmental apparatuses that came out of the postwar era: NATO and the U.S. national-security state. In fact, although the mainstream media and the political establishment elites will never acknowledge it, the irony is that it is these two apparatuses that ultimately led to the Brexit vote:

The Times points out:

Refugees have poured out of Syria and Iraq. Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon have absorbed several million refugees. But it is the flow of people into the European Union that has had the greatest geopolitical impact, and helped to precipitate the British vote.

But what was it that gave rise to that massive refugee crisis?

The answer: It was the U.S. national-security state’s regime change operations in the Middle East, including NATO’s bombing campaign as part of its regime-change operation in Syria.

What did U.S. and NATO officials think — that people would simply remain where they were so that they could get blown to bits with the bombs that were being dropped on them, by the U.S. assassination program, or by the massive civil-war violence that came as a result of the U.S. and NATO regime-change operations?

People don’t ordinarily behave in that fashion. Most people prefer to live rather than die and will do anything they can to survive. That’s why those refugees fled to Europe—  to escape the horrific consequences of interventionism by NATO and the U.S. national security state in the Middle East.

I wonder if deep down, those who are lamenting and groaning about the Brexit vote realize that: If there had been no U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, no regime change in Libya, no U.S. and NATO bombing and interventionism in Syria, there wouldn’t have been a massive refugee crisis in Europe and, almost certainly, a rejection of Brexit by a majority of British voters.

How’s that for dark irony?

Like the U.S. national-security state, NATO is a Cold-War era governmental apparatus, one whose mission was ostensibly to protect western Europe from an attack by the Soviet Union, which was America’s and Britain’s World War II partner and ally.

But as everyone knows, the Cold War ended more than 25 years ago. A question naturally arises: Why then didn’t NATO go out of existence once the Cold War was over?

The following statement by the Times perfectly reflects how the mainstream media and the political establishment elites just don’t get it:

NATO has rediscovered its purpose in the aftermath of Russia’s intervention in Ukraine. Yet the Baltic countries still worry whether the military alliance would truly defend them against Russian aggression, and the alliance has had trouble defining its role in fighting terrorism or dealing with the migrant flow.

What the Times is insinuating is that NATO is just as necessary today to protect western Europe (and now eastern Europe) from Russian aggressiveness as it was during the Cold War era.

But there is something wrong with that picture, something that the Times and the political establishment elites don’t want to focus on — that it was NATO and the U.S. national-security establishment that precipitated the crisis with Russia over Ukraine.

After the Cold War ended, not only did NATO decide to remain in existence, it began absorbing Eastern European countries that had formerly been in the Warsaw Pact. When the expansionary efforts finally reached Ukraine, NATO strived to absorb that country as well, which it came very close to doing thanks to a pro-U.S. coup that had all the earmarks of a successful CIA regime-change operation. Absorbing Ukraine into NATO would have meant U.S. bases, troops, tanks, and missiles on Russia’s border and the U.S. takeover of Russia’s longtime military base in the Crimean port of Sevastopol.

There was never any chance that Russia was going to permit that to happen, which led to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the onset of the Ukraine crisis.

After all, imagine that the Warsaw Pact had remained in existence and had begun absorbing Cuba, Venezuela, Chile, Nicarargua, Guatemala, and Mexico, with aims of installing Russian military bases on Mexico’s border with the United States. What do you think the reaction among U.S. officials would have been to those provocative acts?

But what do we get from the mainstream media and the political establishment elites? That NATO is just an innocent party, one that is a force for good in the world, rather than a corrupt Cold War dinosaur-like apparatus whose mission is to provoke crises in order to justify its continued existence.

As I detail in my new ebook The CIA, Terrorism, and the Cold War: The Evil of the National Security State, it’s no different with the U.S. national-security apparatus that was also brought into existence to wage the Cold War against the Soviet Union and which fundamentally changed America’s government structure for the worse. After all, don’t forget: China and North Korea are national-security states as well. Totalitarian regimes are almost always national security states.

So, why did U.S. officials graft a totalitarian apparatus to America’s federal governmental structure, without even the semblance of a constitutional amendment? They said that a temporary totalitarian apparatus was necessary to wage a cold war against the Soviet Union’s and China’s totalitarian communist regimes.

In itself, that’s problematic, but one thing is certain: The Cold War is over. It ended more than a quarter-century ago. Rather than be dismantled, which is what should have happened back in 1989, the national-security state, having lost its official enemy with the end of the Cold War, decided to go into the Middle East and provoke trouble with invasions, occupations, sanctions, interventions, and regime-change operations. All that brought us anti-American terrorist attacks, the war on terrorism, a formal assassination program, a massive secret surveillance program, indefinite detention, torture, secret prison camps, and other dark things that characterize totalitarian and communist regimes.

And yet the mainstream media and the political establishment elite just don’t get it: They see the national-security state as a protector and as a force for good in the world, rather than as a major purveyor of death, destruction, crises, chaos, and loss of liberty, peace, and prosperity.

It’s time for Americans to do some real soul-searching. It’s time to do some fundamental post-World War II alterations here at home. A great place to begin would be a dismantling of both NATO and the national-security state. An American exit from these corrupt and expensive Cold War-era apparatuses would lead the way to freedom, peace, prosperity, and harmony with the world.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
navy62802's picture

Dumping NATO would be a good first step.

Friedrich not Salma's picture

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't NATO America's bitch. The USA says "jump" and NATO says "How high."

Vatican_cameo's picture

As long as we're cleaning house, could we dump the CIA too?  That would spare the entire world a lot of trouble.

kliguy38's picture

Yeah and I shoulda banged Jane George in High School when she won Homecoming Queen.......

bamawatson's picture

..... instead of boy george

Escrava Isaura's picture

Article:

America Should Exit From NATO…… It’s time for Americans to do some real soul-searching. 

 

I love the REAL SOUL-SEARCHING part. That will really help.

 

Anyway, I wonder if you can find one in one hundred thousand Americans that have that have the slightest clue about NATO.

 

NATO is there so no European nation get some crazy idea of independency.  

 

JamesBond's picture

I thought you were going to say the UN and the FED...

 

jb

santafe's picture
santafe (not verified) JamesBond Jul 2, 2016 9:10 PM

NATO is just an extension of US Army to wage WAR EVERYWHERE without the US label.
https://goo.gl/15VRor

Déjà view's picture

NATO... Key Stone Cops in Yugoslavia...culminating with bombing of Chinese Embassy in Belgrade.

If U.S. did not pay largest portion of NATO budget...we would not be having this conversation.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

The Chinese embassy in Belgrade was bombed "accidentally", because they got the fuselage of the Stealth Bomber that was shot down by the Serbs -- the only one ever shot down, with Serbian ingenuity and Russian SAMs.

Russia got the cockpit portion of the plane. It's safe to assume that both Russia and China now have some level of their own stealth tech, leveraging the Reverse Engineering done on the American bomber.

A mockup of said stealth bomber was recently spotted in a walled yard of a Chinese industrial complex, using human analysis of satellite images: it was not detected from satellite radar imagery, but was detected by a specialist who reviewed photo imagery and spotted a faint (well camouflaged) image of a mockup/prototype of an identical model.

Interestingly enough, stealth fighters were first developed using the theoretical groundwork of Russian scientists, who lacked the technology to actually developed their concepts into real planes.

oncemore's picture

Stealtf airplane is stealth max. against your means, my means and the civil aircraft radars, as per ICAO.

Since there are some spy satellites, which can recognize the burning coal in your garden during BBC party, there is no stealth plane. Longrange russsian/american solid state phased radars will recognize 10 cm at a distance of 6000 km.

A 1m^2 cross section of a "stealth" aircraft is for them visible,  like a concrete obstacle 1mx1m for you or me.

Those satellites see, when the "stealth" planes take of, where are they whlying to, what they do.

The ground based equipment will take care of them.

Both sides Russia and USA, do know, that it is just a joke to channel some budgets arround.

Killdo's picture

Belgrade is so small - there is no way their spies on the ground did not know where the Chinese Embassy was. It was done on purpose 

MalteseFalcon's picture

But what was it that gave rise to that massive refugee crisis?

The answer: It was the U.S. national-security state’s regime change operations in the Middle East, including NATO’s bombing campaign as part of its regime-change operation in Syria.

That is only a small part of the answer. 

The US fought two wars against Iraq, sanctioned them and  bombed the crap out of them.

There was zero "refugee" flow from Iraq.

Many of the current invaders are NOT from conflict areas.

They are from simple 3rd world shitholes.

The US and the EU in concert with NGOs run by Soros have planned, funded and implemented the invasion.

EOS.


not dead yet's picture

Wrong. Thanks to the US over one million Iraqi's, mostly Sunni, fled to Syria. Many tried to go home after things wound down but found their homes occupied by Shia thanks to the Shia who assumed power after the defeat of Saddam. These people were screwed again when the US and it's pals Qatar and Saudi Arabia fomented and supported the jihadists to overthrow Assad.

 

Libya was very prosperous, the best economy in Africa, and many of the would be boat people to Europe got jobs there as most Libyans, oil checks in hand, wouldn't do the grunt jobs. Those people sent money home keeping their familes there and their spending that money creating local jobs which kept even more people from becoming refugees to Europe. Libya also spent money on development across Africa which created more jobs. Thanks to the DC bomber in chief Libya is a failed state and those jobs and prosperity are now gone and the refugee flow into Europe is a flood. The real reason Qaddafi had to go was he was promoting Africa for Africans, and spending plenty of his money on African development, and the gold dinar as the currency for all of Africa with 3 central banks to manage African affairs. It would take away the power of the dollar and emasculate the power of the US controlled IMF and World Bank in Africa allowing them to grow without economy killing loan terms that allowed the big world corporations to enslave the continent and buy assets and commodities on the cheap. Also as long as Qaddafi was in the drivers seat the US African Command, AFRICOM, couldn't set foot in Africa. Qaddafi was barely dead when AFRICOM set up on the continent and commenced operations.

MalteseFalcon's picture

Wrong. Thanks to the US over one million Iraqi's, mostly Sunni, fled to Syria.

Oh, my mistake. Is Syria tucked in between Slovenia and Slovakia?

 

11b40's picture

Need to work on critical reading skills.

Killdo's picture

when I lived in London I met many refugees from former Yugoslavia - a few of them became friends (I used to study with ) - I also met 4 or so Albanian refugees. Out of maybe 15 they were all fake refuges (according to their stories) - none has ever seen any bullets or war - it was just an opportunity to leave the country and to get benefits , free Unversity education (plus grants sponsored by SOROS)etc.

The 4 Albanian refugees told me they went to Dover and made up a story they that were actually not fromAlbania but from Serbia (where they said they were treated very badly etc...). In reality they had never even been to Yugoslavia and they got fake Yugosalvian passports from Albania.

I had another Serbian friend who pretended he was also a refugee (with his wife and a kid)  - and there was no war in Serbia at all at that time. Moral of the story - most refugees (100% in this case) are fake - they never were involved in any kind of war-realted danger. 

PS they all managed to stay in London where they live and work happily ever after (I met them in early 90s)

Meanwhile the EU charges a country 260k Euros if they refuse to accept a refugee

jeff montanye's picture

although he was quite cute, particularly as a teenager.

the u.s. may get nato to say how high but israel gets the same question from the u.s.

that they could do 9-11 to the u.s. pretty much tells you all you need to know on this subject.

navy62802's picture

NATO was an outgrowth of the dying Nazi state. NATO's secret arm of influence consisted largely of former Nazi's outfitted with weapons caches by the OSS/CIA in an ostensible effort to combat a hypothetical Soviet advance into Europe. The secret arm of NATO carried out various terror campaigns throughout Europe in the 50s, 60s and 70s. That is what NATO is ... a fascist control infrastructure influencing Europe through a violent campaign of fear, a strategy of tension. It has been this way from the very founding of NATO. It will continue until NATO is disbanded.

Rubicon727's picture

YES uncovered revelations prove the CIA and other US operatives initiated this with the Germans after WWII. Google the info. It's out there.

NATO exists at the express purpose of America's financial/military hegemony. Uniting all European nations under one umbrella, called the EU, is a far easier method for the US govt. to keep NATO under its wraps. 

So when you think "NATO" ALWAYS make that synonymous with THE US FINANCIAL/MILITARY COMPLEX and its legions of neo-cons in D.C.

It's a central reason why Hillary Clinton should NEVER be elected as prez. She's the epitome of being a "neo-con."

Katos's picture

As Americans,  we're paying about 75% OF NATO costs. Even Europe doesn't want to have to pay for its own defense.  Mostly because they all know they're not in any danger. It's just the megalomaniac in the US who have a lust to kill. They love killing people,  and they look for any excuse to slaughter as many people as possible with the slightest provocation. Killing people is fun, chopping people's heads off and dropping smart bombs from drones is just a kick in the ass for these psychopaths who sit with their lists and terror cards deciding who gets bombed into the storage today? These monsters love mercenaries who can be paid small amounts of money to perpetrate atrocities, while our leaders sit back and watch it all while smoking cigars and drinking Jack daniels. 

11b40's picture

Made possible when the MIC realized that a citizens army could not be depended on to blindly follow orders for very long after all the anti- war protest over Vietnam, and had the draft eliminated.

wildbad's picture

the idea of america is just a phantom set of rules to let people believe they belong and have something nice to base their empty lives upon.

NATO, the deep state, the EU and all of the upper crust and overlords of banking are the real state and real seat of power.

 

we are just the fools who need to be pandered too every few years to legitimize their megalomanic crimes and demonic plans.

Killdo's picture

i met an American guy with a degree here recently working for Dropbox who thought 4th of July commemorates US's victory in last 2 world wars. 

Friedrich not Salma's picture

Check out Mark Dice on YouTube for a plethora of idiot Americans and their ignorance regarding Independence Day.

We're so screwed.

nibiru's picture

It would but the core problem is still military industrial complex - it's not like getting rid of NATO suddenly will change the fact that US have some few hundred bases around the globe.

 

Still, it would be interesting to see the reaction of China and Russia because if US steps down too quickly you already know who is going to replace the hegemony!

http://independenttrader.org/the-power-of-the-sino-russian-alliance-part-ii.html

beijing expat's picture

Well, I think that based on past behaviour we can predict future behaviour. 

 

China has been around for 5000 years.  For most of that time it has been the most powerful, most prosperous country on earth.  It has never made a bid for global power.

 

Russia has been around for 1000 years.  It has never launched a bid to conquor Europe.  Though, as a result of being attacked, it has conquored Europe twice, in 1813, and in 1945.

Both times it packed up and went home because at the end of the day, they are not interested in Empire.

It is a common mistake when trying to determine the motives of another, to ascribe your own motives to them.  We (anglozionists) seek empire.  It does not mean they seek empire, though it could be argued they seek a world without empire.

If America goes home, peace will break out though there might me a few regional squabbles at first. 

BigJim's picture

Invasion of Tibet? Invasion of Poland?

roddy6667's picture

You should study the history of Tibet before making remarks about China "invading".

Atomizer's picture

Don't forget the United Nations wanker's. 

HRH of Aquitaine's picture
HRH of Aquitaine (not verified) navy62802 Jul 2, 2016 8:39 PM

I have been saying this for several years. Start with fucking Turkey and the wanna-be-Caliph-in-Chief Erdogan. That asshole should have been kicked to the curb a few years ago. And where did that fuckwad go this week? To apologize to Putin. He knows Putin is a real leader. Unlike the pussies in Europe and the USSA.

jeff montanye's picture

sure would.

something missing from the analysis above, useful as far as it goes, is why the u.s. is willing to have such disastrous results and keep on with the same course.

the answer is that the end goal is failed states throughout the maghreb and the greater levant.  the u.s. doesn't benefit from this turn of events nor does europe, indeed those controlling both are possibly going to be unseated by these wildly impractical and inhumane policies.  but that's ok with the ones really making policy; what happens to the u.s. is not of ultimate concern to them.

so who does benefit from all these failed states?  for instance a hated country in their midst who wants no functioning state that could become a significant military opponent.

any ideas, new york times?  vicky nuland?

LetThemEatRand's picture

I have to agree with the premise of this article, though it is the ultimate Machiavellian thing to create a world-wide shit storm just in time to pull out and say to other NATO members, "good luck, we're all counting on you."   That's probably why the Donald got it right on this topic.

erkme73's picture

Queue santafe and his obscured link in 3, 2, 1... 

haruspicio's picture

Excellent ideas for a more peaceful world.

Last of the Middle Class's picture

NATO is the left's police force in waiting when the local forces finally realize they have to make a choice and back a little thing called the voters.

beijing expat's picture

Actually, what Brexit showed us was that the left (cultural Marxists) will call on the right (neo conservatives and oligarchs) to crack down on democracy.   The voters control nothing (for now).  So the thing that has changed is that the left has abandoned the working class and  joined the right in the attack on the workers.  Quite incredible really.

The people know they have been abandoned  and are beginning to revolt.  Will there be a crackdown, or will the people reclaim their democracies? 

This is the Wests 1989 moment.

MASTER OF UNIVERSE's picture

Cororatism is industrial fascism that needs enforcement capability to grow. Corporatism needs to be wiped off the face of the planet so that thr rights paradigm governs individual rights above that of corporate structures which are presently placed above individuals. Corporate fascism promulgates industrial takeover through their corporately controlled Military Industrial Complex. Who profited from the Iraq War? The Carlyle Group and Dickhead Cheney.

jomama's picture

Then who will be their cover for all these illegal occupations?

Ms No's picture

They are hoping operation ISIS will suffice. 

swmnguy's picture

Almost all our political vocabulary has been drained of meaning, words used to mean so many things they mean nothing. What differences there were between Democratic and Republican are gone now.  "Left" and "Right" mean nearly nothing, as Nazism is described as "Leftist" and allowing corporations to use the public purse as a line of credit is called "Socialism."

Best to drop those words and simply judge in terms of Pro or Anti Authoritarianism.  That's where the actual rubber hits the road.

Killdo's picture

the Western 'democracy' has become a beauty contest for psychopaths. Religion primes bovine masses to bend over and to love submission. Psychopaths thrieve in that kind of environment. 

They love it when you turn the other cheek and bend over

yovatti's picture
yovatti (not verified) Jul 2, 2016 8:41 PM

Zerohedge toes the Russian propaganda line..... for the millionth time.

 

maxwellsdemon's picture

well Yovatti toes the ZioNaz  line for the gazillionth time!

skepsis101's picture

Wow, you've counted it up, and all in only 29 weeks.  Extrodinaire, you.  Stick around for a few years, maybe you'll actually learn a thing or too.  Unless, of course, you know everything you need to know already.  Sheesh, how much are actually paid for churlishness?

Thoreau's picture

Most of "America" is out of Nato because they never joined! Mexico, central america, south america... NADA!

Kaeako's picture

Too bad rightful criticism of NATO is often used in such an unfactual manner. Gives the text the feel of a sloppy propaganda effort more than anything.