CRINK: It’s the new ‘Axis of Evil’
CRINK: It’s the new ‘Axis of Evil’
PATO: The Pacific and Atlantic Treaty Organization
Their cooperation is forcing NATO to build closer ties with like-minded countries in the Indo-Pacific. For the first time, senior officials from Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan took part in a meeting with NATO defense ministers in Brussels on Thursday.
They baddies are “forcing” NATO into this. The poor imperial core, being dragged around again. #AlwaysTheSameMap
Citations Needed podcast: The Always Stumbling US Empire: "Stumbling", "sliding", "drawn into" war––the media frequently assumes the US is bumbling its way around the world. The idea that the United States operates in “good faith” is taken for granted for most of the American press while war is always portrayed as something that happens to the US, not something it seeks out.
Also, doesn’t “CRINK” already have a name, the Axis of Resistance?
Anyway, death to POTATO.
- The Intercept, 2021: Meet NATO, the Dangerous “Defensive” Alliance Trying to Run the World
- CounterPunch, 2022: NATO is Not a Defensive Alliance
- Noam Chomsky, 2023: NATO “most violent, aggressive alliance in the world”
- Thomas Fazi, 2024: NATO: 75 years of war, unprovoked aggressions and state-sponsored terrorism
It's interesting how NATO is "forced" to take action by Chinese military build-up, doesn't leave any room for China being forced to take action by NATO's military build-up. Reminds me of that recent video of previous NATO's head complaining about China placing bases close to NATO, when any NATO country is thousands of km away and China is deploying near its own coast.
Those dastardly axis of evil, how dare they place their countries so close to US military bases
As if the US military build-up to encircle and “contain” China has nothing to do with it. This new cold war began in earnest with Obama’s pivot to East Asia. The US has over 750 overseas military bases, while China has one anti-piracy base in Djibouti. The rhetoric is Orwelian.
When the Russian invasion started, the US government and media stressed that it was “unprovoked” at every opportunity. The empire doth protest too much.
- NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.
- The War in Ukraine Was Provoked—and Why That Matters to Achieve Peace
- The Ukraine Mess That Nuland Made Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland engineered Ukraine’s regime change without weighing the likely consequences.
- Leaked audio reveals embarrassing U.S. exchange on Ukraine, EU
- US Imperialism and the Ukraine Coup
- Former German Chancellor Merkel Admits that Minsk Peace Agreements Were Part of Scheme for Ukraine to Buy Time to Prepare for War With Russia
- Zelensky admits he never intended to implement Minsk agreements
- The West’s Sabotage of Peace in Ukraine In May of [2022] Ukrainian media reported that then-British prime minister Boris Johnson had flown to Kiev the previous month to pass on the message on behalf of the western empire that “Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with,” and that “even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they are not.”
I like how Pakistan is striped as if they didn't just throw away billions of dollars of chinese investments for some IMF loans because the US told them to lol.
Also Afghanistan being green which actually happened right before Pakistan's thing
EDIT: Also India which always gets refused US arm tech sales because they exclusively buy from Russia lol. It's like enemy of my enemy but also friend of my other enemy.
My tired brain looked at the thumbnail and thought that CRINK was some new onomatopoeia for wine glasses being tapped together
Ah yes, gotta lick those authoritarian dictator boots. So cool, so cool.
It's criticizing NATO. The biggest boot. Your masters have you so turned around you think it's anti-authoritarian to defend NATO.
This cold war joke is just as applicable today.
A KGB spy and a CIA agent meet up in a bar for a friendly drink.
“I have to admit, I’m always so impressed by Soviet propaganda. You really know how to get people worked up,” the CIA agent says.
“Thank you,” the KGB says. “We do our best but truly, it’s nothing compared to American propaganda. Your people believe everything your state media tells them.”
The CIA agent drops his drink in shock and disgust. “Thank you friend, but you must be confused… There’s no propaganda in America.”
Ah yes, gotta lick those Global North neocolonial imperialist boots. So cool, so cool.
"US bad, mmm'kay"
See the funny thing is, I can point out that you're kissing autocrat ass without having to lick any imperial Western boots or whatever.
All I have go do is recognize that you're kissing autocrat ass. I don't have to take any position beyond pointing out that you're kissing autocrat ass.
You should do less kissing autocrat ass.
Just as a heads up, we don't like horseshoe theory here, which "authoritarian" falls under. Please refrain from horseshoe theory posting.
Also, factually, China isn't a dictatorship. They follow a proletarian democratic model that is significantly distinct from bourgeois democratic models.
Hold up - the terms “authoritarian” and “totalitarian” are banned in this community? I have to admit, I think that is an absolutely absurd rule that can only stand to benefit the far-right. Are there alternative terms which are preferred without the ideological baggage outlined below, or are we just meant to not criticise far-right regimes which exert extreme control over their citizens by use of the “””rule of law”””?
Oh please, you can't just decide that a term falls under a theory you disagree with and then disregard it out of hand.
The term "authoritarian" might be used in horseshoe theory but it is not defined by horseshoe theory. The term has its own meaning independent of horseshoe theory.
You're just playing Calvinball to redefine and then exclude words you don't like.
