Do We Still Need NATO?

Macron said the alliance is brain dead, and Trump tweeted about Europe not paying its fair share. Bureaucratic inertia and vested interests are keeping NATO alive.

Director: Bababtunde Ogunfolaju
Audio Engineer: Adam Coley
Video Editor: Bababtunde Ogunfolaju
Visual Producer: Andrew Corkery
Chase Producer: Genevieve Montinar
Research: Marc Steiner
Andrew Corkery

[crosstraffic]

Nato defence spending in 2019 is 1036 Billion $ per year. And it's still not enough. These politicians are all crazy!

[flowerpower]

... Like a chocolate fire guard 🙄

The PLANET wants PEACE ☮️ & LOVE ♥️♥️♥️

[tEx]

We never needed it.
It never served the interests of ordinary people.

[TBONESIDEOFLIFE]

Nato is obsolete, the thinkers and planners of this are dated to 20th-century thoughts. Life is already a thing of terror, but in America, (example) it’s a thing where economic and social terror is added to the existential terror. Anger becomes a rage. Rage becomes violence. American life has become a kind of combative life, yet it’s inherently a thing of mortality, helplessness, and solitude. So anger, resentment, bitterness, guilt, shame, along with "self-hate" all become second nature. It’s kill or be killed. Nobody offers us any kind of support or succor or consolation or True meaning. There is no meaning to life in this capitalist society except money and violence and even those fail to really provide meaning, in the end. We Americans are left enraged. What’s the point of it all? What does anything really matter? About as much as NATO does. Everyone should have public goods, like education, healthcare, retirement, income, safety nets, and so on and further, that they should be basic human rights. Think about that in light of the human condition. Here we are, estranged things, trying to deal with the terror of just living, angry at the universe for making us exist at all. Now at least our society is supporting us. Maybe now we are not so angry, wounded, hurt, enraged. We are freer to discover and create what meaning we can give our lives that which matters. Whether it’s art or literature or medicine or science or woodwork, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that we’re free of our primal rage, to not be imprisoned by the terror of just existing so much anymore. When we are supported, we can be angry at the universe, still, and not have to be angry at each other. We can pour all that heartache and sorrow and grief out into art and words and along with thoughts. We don't need a NATO or anything equivalent to one...Just my view of this matter. ~PEACE!~ 𝓣.𝓑𝓞𝓝𝓔

[deancooper]

One could make an argument that NATO was never really needed, let alone necessary.

[DD-zufy]

"do we STILL need nato?" the title itself is ridiculous. From it's beginning NATO has always been not only unnecessary but destructive.

[Vierotchka]

NATO should have been disbanded when the Soviet Union dissolved on December 26, 1991. Its only real purpose today is to make vast amounts of money for the US' military/industrial complex.

[blackbird]

Ask yourself why Trump is trying so hard to dismantle NATO and then you'll know whether or not it's of any value to the US. Of course it's still a viable alliance.

[totonow]

I wish we could all developed the outward expressive nature if David Gibbs. He knows the subject absolutely and can then provide perspective that reveals Trump and others as politicians just creating a scene not deserving of true attention and at the same time provide informative, educational facts about the actual outcomes of NATO ( Milton Freidman's goons playground? ) interventions.

[Bjorn]

Sad to hear an historian not realizing the true value of Nato to peace in both Europe and America!

As long as Russia is no true democracy, small neighbors like Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia live in uncertain times.

Besides, Nato helped apease conflicts in Greece/Turkey, the Balcans etc.

Do not confuse external hotspots like Syria, Libya or WoT with the intrinsic security only an alliance can guarantee.

Nato is a defence force, yet all members are still sovereign countries. So what Turkey, France or the US may mingle in external conflicts is their deal. Don't blame Nato.

[CautionCU]

The risk of NATO breaking up is a new arms race. Currently the US has a military hegemony which cannot be contested (from a game theory perspective) by their rivals. While not all of the consequences of hegemony have been good, this has led to peace between the major powers. If NATO breaks up, we will see a breakup of the major arms manufacturers which will lead to a new arms race into space. This would be a pretty bad outcome. Certainly this is no more than educated speculation, but that's my take.

[peacedove]

For the sake of HUMANITY
PLEASE!! VOLUNTEER &SUPPORT BERNIE SANDERS for PRESIDENT
2🔥2🔥MEDICARE for ALL now!!
Don't let the insurance companies medically Bankrupt you and your families home

[unlikelysource]

Killer Clown's bloviating are more "tale[s] told by an idiot" ... you know the rest.

But my question is when did NATO ever serve "any legitimate function", USSR or no? Wasn't it predicated on defending Europe from a Soviet invasion, which was never contemplated in the Kremlin?

Hasn't it always been an instrument of empire under the pretense of an "alliance"?

[Bjorn]

Nato is like Medicare 4 All.
Did that answer your question?😝

[EbonCollins]

What’s NATO? I’m glad I believe in God and his only begotten Son Jesus

[haleybrown]

As horrific the atomic bomb is it nevertheless acted as a deterrent to another world war. NATO too served and continues to serve its purpose. It too helped to preserve peace in Europe and it halted Russia's expansionism after WWII. I suggest reading Europe's post WWII history.