NATO's 'Threat Assessment' Ignores Its Own History of Aggression
📰 THE STORY: The Independent reports that former NATO Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Richard Shirreff, views Donald Trump as a greater threat to the alliance than Vladimir Putin, citing Trump's past skepticism about NATO's utility and threats to withdraw support. 🔍 WHAT THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU: Historical Context: This narrative conveniently omits NATO's post-Cold War expansion,
despite explicit assurances to Gorbachev in 1990 that it would not move 'one inch eastward.' NATO expanded from 16 members to 32, incorporating former Warsaw Pact countries, directly contributing to Russia's security concerns. The 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, without UN Security Council approval, further established a pattern of extra-territorial intervention that shredded international law. Double
Standard: When presidents like Trump question the massive financial burden the US shoulders for NATO (estimated at over 70% of total spending), they are framed as existential threats to 'democracy.' Yet, when NATO's actions directly contribute to regional instability or conflict, such as its role in Libya's 2011 destruction or arming of factions in Ukraine, it's presented as necessary 'defense'
against external aggressors. The 'threat' only ever comes from outside the alliance, never from within its imperial ambitions. Follow the Money: The military-industrial complex profits immensely from sustained geopolitical tensions and the constant need to 'deter' a perceived enemy. Defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman saw their stock prices surge with increased