ＮＡＴＯの正体と目的
投稿者： desert_leomontree 投稿日時： 2012/05/21 23:43 投稿番号： [5330 / 5582]
日本はアメリカの軍事同盟国ですから
ＮＡＴＯとも全く関係ないわけはないですね。
イラクにも自衛隊を派遣し、アフガニスタンでも軍事支援をしているのですが、Ｋａｒｚａｉは明らかにアメリカの傀儡政権であり、
アメリカイギリスフランスなどと一緒に戦争処理で経済的に
潤ってきた日本は否定できないですね。
日本は沖縄に在日米軍基地を置いていますが
ベトナム戦争も朝鮮戦争も、沖縄と日本の協力なしでは
ありえなかったでしょう。
ユーロ通貨危機で、ヨーロッパも分裂しそうですが、
ＮＷＯの不気味な組織が東アジアに寄生し
崩壊しそうな経済を立て直そうと考えるのは
むしろ自然な流れですね。
歴史は繰り返すが、日本は戦争の悲惨さを忘れ
今一番好戦的な戦争願望の国だと思える。
＞＞NATO has little to do with the 'defense of values, democracy, human rights, freedom and a law based state' as then NATO secretary general Javier Solana claimed on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of NATO. NATO is about defense of economic and geostrategic interests, as its history shows abundantly. A number of memberstates were all but examples of good practice. Just to mention in this field Portugal under Salazar, the military regime of the colonels in Greece, the serial military coups in Turkey and the atrocities committed by the colonial NATO members. After the Cold war NATO continued to manifest itself as the military shield for the economic interests of its member states. Every now and then this is overtly admitted bu the NATO protagonists themselves as in the following quote of the former secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in his Brussels New Year's speech of January 8, 2008. "This century will be, to a large extent, about energy. Energy security is a theme where NATO is in the process of defining its added value. Protection of critical energy infrastructure. You've heard me before. It has been discussed already previously. NATO certainly doesn‟t carry the primary responsibility in the framework of energy security. NATO's not an economic organization. But there is certainly added value to be defined and you can be sure and certain that energy security will also figure on the agenda of the Bucharest Summit"
The Libya operation seems now to show something like the beginning of a new strategy. This is how president Barack Obama expressed it in his speech on defence January 5, 2012. "As a global force, our military will never be doing only one thing. It will be responsible for a range of missions and activities across the globe of varying scope, duration, and strategic priority. This will place a premium on flexible and adaptable forces that can respond quickly and effectively to a variety of contingencies and potential adversaries.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30899
ＮＡＴＯとも全く関係ないわけはないですね。
イラクにも自衛隊を派遣し、アフガニスタンでも軍事支援をしているのですが、Ｋａｒｚａｉは明らかにアメリカの傀儡政権であり、
アメリカイギリスフランスなどと一緒に戦争処理で経済的に
潤ってきた日本は否定できないですね。
日本は沖縄に在日米軍基地を置いていますが
ベトナム戦争も朝鮮戦争も、沖縄と日本の協力なしでは
ありえなかったでしょう。
ユーロ通貨危機で、ヨーロッパも分裂しそうですが、
ＮＷＯの不気味な組織が東アジアに寄生し
崩壊しそうな経済を立て直そうと考えるのは
むしろ自然な流れですね。
歴史は繰り返すが、日本は戦争の悲惨さを忘れ
今一番好戦的な戦争願望の国だと思える。
＞＞NATO has little to do with the 'defense of values, democracy, human rights, freedom and a law based state' as then NATO secretary general Javier Solana claimed on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of NATO. NATO is about defense of economic and geostrategic interests, as its history shows abundantly. A number of memberstates were all but examples of good practice. Just to mention in this field Portugal under Salazar, the military regime of the colonels in Greece, the serial military coups in Turkey and the atrocities committed by the colonial NATO members. After the Cold war NATO continued to manifest itself as the military shield for the economic interests of its member states. Every now and then this is overtly admitted bu the NATO protagonists themselves as in the following quote of the former secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in his Brussels New Year's speech of January 8, 2008. "This century will be, to a large extent, about energy. Energy security is a theme where NATO is in the process of defining its added value. Protection of critical energy infrastructure. You've heard me before. It has been discussed already previously. NATO certainly doesn‟t carry the primary responsibility in the framework of energy security. NATO's not an economic organization. But there is certainly added value to be defined and you can be sure and certain that energy security will also figure on the agenda of the Bucharest Summit"
The Libya operation seems now to show something like the beginning of a new strategy. This is how president Barack Obama expressed it in his speech on defence January 5, 2012. "As a global force, our military will never be doing only one thing. It will be responsible for a range of missions and activities across the globe of varying scope, duration, and strategic priority. This will place a premium on flexible and adaptable forces that can respond quickly and effectively to a variety of contingencies and potential adversaries.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30899