No to Nato - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talking about and organise marches, demonstrations, writing to your local Member of Parliament etc.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

User avatar
By anarchist23
#14443961
I didn't realize there was a NATO summit in Wales next month. I will see you there. Hope the weather is good.

NO TO NATO
As Nato member countries, including the UK, prepare for military exercises in the Ukraine next month as part of NATO’s Rapid Trident manoeuvres, the momentum for organised resistance to this year's Nato summit in Newport has grown. All the leaders of the key Western powers will be in Wales for the Nato summit and we need the biggest possible protests to force them to break from their aggressive foreign policy.

A whole week of protest is planned during the week of the summit. Here is an outline of the events called by CND,
Stop the War, No to War: No to Nato and No to Nato Newport.

PROTEST 30 August to 5 September

Saturday 30 August, Mass demonstration through central Newport.
Assembles 1pm at the Civic Centre Car Park and marches around the town Centre ending at Westgate Square for a rally.
COUNTER-SUMMIT Sunday 31 August to Monday 1 September, Cardiff and Newport
Sunday 31 August
Counter Summit in Cardiff, County Hall, CF10 4UW View on map
10am – 5.30pm speakers include Boris Kagarlitsky, Joseph Gerson, Medea Benjamin, Margaretta D'Arcy, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Kate Hudson.
Monday 1st September
Newport Alternative Summit
Pill Mill , 10.00 – 5pm. Subjects include: Drones, Women and War, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Non Proliferation Treaty.
Tuesday 2nd and Wednesday 3rd September
Local events
More details soon.
Thursday 4th September
First day of NATO Summit
Mass action and march on the Celtic Manor. Gather at 12.00, Cenotaph, Clarence Place, Newport NP11 6DG.
Friday 5th September
Final day of Summit
Direct Actions. Street Theatre.
The Long March on Newport
A month long march through Wales with plenty of time for actions, leafleting, street theatre, banner drops and much more has been arranged from August 8th onwards, email longmarch@riseup.net or call 01495 220400 for more information.

Help us build the No to Nato protest
Share the No New Wars No to Nato Facebook event with your contacts
Sign and share the petition to stop Nato's Rapid Trident manoeuvres in July
Order the No to Nato protest postcards, which contain details of the week of action, to build the event in your area. Call Stop the War at 020 7561 4830
For more information email: information@cnduk.org
User avatar
By Goldberk
#14444025
I think it's punishment enough for Nato that they have to to Newport (maybe they are trying to see what East Ukraine feels like?)

How close do you plan to get to Celtic Manor?
User avatar
By Drlee
#14444035
I agree with Anarchist23. It is time the EU did away with Nato. It would work really well for them. They could use the structure already in place for a good EU united defense force. All they need to do is tax their citizens to provide the 23% of the budget that the US is paying, build a world class Navy for a few trillion dollars and Bobs your uncle.

Meanwhile the US could save a hundred billion and perhaps way more by not maintaining the two-front military it needs to defend Europe. I am all for it. You might want to get the UK and France to build a dozen or so Missile Subs each before you actually pull the plug. It might get a bit dicey otherwise.
User avatar
By Rei Murasame
#14444038
And if they don't intend to support the kind of suggestions that have been wisely put forward by Dr Lee, then they might as well come out for this protest carrying Russian flags, because that's what they'd essentially be supporting as the logical extension of their protest.

Sometimes I wonder if these peace demonstrators think their ideas through before committing them to paper.
User avatar
By anarchist23
#14444054
Goldberk wrote:I think it's punishment enough for Nato that they have to to Newport (maybe they are trying to see what East Ukraine feels like?)

How close do you plan to get to Celtic Manor?

^
Have got an offer of a lift for Saturday, this Article 5 that NATO has used is dangerous. Why? This is an interesting read..


Friday 11 May 2012 00.05 BST
Richard Norton-Tayler:

"Nato's plans to upgrade the US's estimated 180 tactical nuclear weapons in western Europe are unnecessary, expensive and likely to exacerbate already difficult relations with Russia, according to a report.

The alliance is preparing to replace "dumb" free-fall nuclear bombs and ageing delivery aircraft with precision-guided weapons that would be carried by US F35 strike aircraft, according to a report from the European Leadership Network (ELN), a thinktank supported by former UK defence ministers including Lord Des Browne and Sir Malcolm Rifkind.

The report, Escalation by Default?: the Future of Nato Nuclear Weapons In Europe, is by Ted Seay, who until last year was arms control adviser to the US mission at Nato headquarters in Brussels.

The plans to upgrade significantly the US's stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons would increase its ability to reach targets in Russia at a time when Nato and Russia are already locked in a tense standoff over missile defence, warns the report.

Nato possesses 180 B61 free-fall tactical nuclear bombs in Europe stored at bases in Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany and Turkey. The bombs, relics of the cold war, have no guidance systems and are regarded as having no real military purpose or value, says the report. The aircraft tasked with delivering them are also in need of replacement.

Despite defence spending cuts, the US is planning to upgrade the bombs with precision-guided B61-12 nuclear gravity bombs at a cost of $4bn (£2.5bn), according to the report. European countries, whose pilots are trained to deliver the B-61s to their targets, are also facing expensive decisions to replace their existing aircraft with the US F35 Joint Strike Fighter, whose cost has risen to more than $100m (£62m) each.

Nato's plans would produce a "formidable increase in nuclear capabilities for Nato in Europe", according to Seay, who adds that modernisation would be a form of expensive nuclear escalation by default that could be expected to draw a hostile reaction from Moscow.

Ian Kearns, the ELN chief executive, said: "The planned upgrade of Nato's tactical nuclear forces in Europe will be expensive and is unnecessary. Nato states are fully secure without this additional capability and should be focused on removing all tactical nuclear weapons from Europe, not on modernising them"..."
User avatar
By Goldberk
#14444071
I think Rei overestimates Russia's power, sure it has some military supremacy, but it's not that, that would allow it to dominate a Europe free from US protection, but political decision making would, if European nations decided not to kow tow to Russia, there would be little it could do but commit nuclear suicide.
By layman
#14444085
I disagree with this protest but support the phasing out of NATO.

I dont agree with the suggestion we need a large navy though. What we need is a lot more nukes, missle defense, planes etc. Fortress Europe style. The navy we have is actually pretty good already compared to any non-US actor. The russian navy is shit. France could probably defeat it alone.
By Atlantis
#14444102
Nato should have been replaced following the collapse of the Soviet Union more than 20 years ago by a European peace architecture comprising Russia and all parts of the former SU. Now its too late. Getting rid of Nato is not a feasible aim at present. Activists should therefore concentrate their efforts on lobbying member governments to use their veto against an aggressive expansion of the military alliance. The immediate aim should be to make it quite clear the Ukraine membership of Nato will be vetoed.
User avatar
By Rei Murasame
#14444251
Goldberk wrote:I think Rei overestimates Russia's power, sure it has some military supremacy, but it's not that, that would allow it to dominate a Europe free from US protection, but political decision making would, if European nations decided not to kow tow to Russia, there would be little it could do but commit nuclear suicide.

How am I overestimating their power? If you give Russia control of the trade routes between East and West and remain reliant on them for natural gas supplies, then they don't need to use a nuclear weapon to place you into check.

NATO is useful for making sure that you can take these routes away from Russia and put them into European or Asian hands, thus removing the Russian-middleman option, the Russian-middleman option that Russia has wanted. This is the Great Game II, not a second Cold War. NATO's reason for existence has simply transitioned from one thing to the other.

Also, another comment I'd make is on how this free society thing is acting as a vector for self-punishing behaviour. The Russians aren't going to go to Moscow and protest against Russia's geopolitical ambitions, but British people have no problem going to Wales to protest against NATO, as though NATO is somehow the problem here.
By OllytheBrit
#14444256
anarchist23 wrote:I didn't realize there was a NATO summit in Wales next month. I will see you there. Hope the weather is good.

NO TO NATO
As Nato member countries, including the UK, prepare for military exercises in the Ukraine next month as part of NATO’s Rapid Trident manoeuvres, the momentum for organised resistance to this year's Nato summit in Newport has grown. All the leaders of the key Western powers will be in Wales for the Nato summit and we need the biggest possible protests to force them to break from their aggressive foreign policy.


For some reason which I don't understand, NATO with the US in the van and the poodle UK trotting along behind as usual, seems hell-bent on provoking Russia. Why have they got it in for Putin? I reckon we owe him - need I mention 'Syria' again? Indeed, there's a strong correlation in the two scenarios.
User avatar
By Rei Murasame
#14444263
What exactly do you think that you owe to Vladimir Putin? Also, if the US is in the van driving, and the UK is trotting behind like a poodle, that is what the British people deserve for not asserting themselves within the alliance. Britain can get into the van at any time that it wants.

Also, provoking Russia to do what? And why should Russia not be 'provoked'? Your post contains so many assumptions that it leads to more questions than answers.
By OllytheBrit
#14444267
Rei Murasame wrote:What exactly do you think that you owe to Vladimir Putin? Also, if the US is in the van driving, and the UK is trotting behind like a poodle, that is what the British people deserve for not asserting themselves within the alliance. Britain can get into the van at any time that it wants.


Well the massive demo to stop the war in Iraq didn't get very far did it!! Anyway, Putin stopped Cameron and probably Obama sending in troops to Syria; had it not been for him they'd be there now.

Also, provoking Russia to do what? And why should Russia not be 'provoked'? Your post contains so many assumptions that it leads to more questions than answers.


You want to provoke Russia into something that might get out of control for no other reason than everyone presumes that MH17 was brought down by them, but with no incontrovertible evidence whatsoever that it actually was? Lots of speculation but no evidence?? Now that leads to some questions!
User avatar
By Far-Right Sage
#14444268
I never in my days thought I would find myself saying this, but this protest enjoys my full and emphatic support.

The best possible outcome is that hopefully the kids and some of the younger types coming manage to cause a bit of chaos a la the anti-globalist protest in Seattle a few years back and thus make a few international headlines which itself, even if it raises an awareness level to the nefarious activities of those ensnared within the NATO alliance by 1%, is a worthwhile exercise.

Giving NATO officials as many cumulative PR cluster headaches as possible for the genuine interests of the European world and those parts of the global-south threatened by its position as the fixed bayonet of international finance is the ultimate good.
User avatar
By Goldberk
#14444274
I am in agreement with frs above, but am puzzled by rei's position, my assumption was that you were still opposed to international liberalism but your position regarding NATO disputes that, let's not forget that nato's other primary aim was to prevent local European people's rising up against liberalism (Italy a case in point)

As to Russia and energy supplies, this is a conflict between aristocrats of the liberal system, whoever supplies the energy, international capital wins
User avatar
By Rei Murasame
#14444318
OllytheBrit wrote:Anyway, Putin stopped Cameron and probably Obama sending in troops to Syria; had it not been for him they'd be there now.

Doubtful.

OllytheBrit wrote:You want to provoke Russia into something that might get out of control for no other reason than everyone presumes that MH17 was brought down by them, but with no incontrovertible evidence whatsoever that it actually was?

Nope, my reasons are for resources and for securing trade routes. I actually don't care about MH-17. I care about containing Russia, and if NATO is the thing which will contain Russia, then it means that I support NATO insofar as it keeps doing that.

Goldberk wrote:I am in agreement with frs above, but am puzzled by rei's position, my assumption was that you were still opposed to international liberalism but your position regarding NATO disputes that, let's not forget that nato's other primary aim was to prevent local European people's rising up against liberalism (Italy a case in point)

As to Russia and energy supplies, this is a conflict between aristocrats of the liberal system, whoever supplies the energy, international capital wins

If I have to choose between two groups of liberals, I'll always choose the one that benefits me. Why would that be surprising? In various circumstances, standing with liberal-capitalist Britain in NATO is the best option. This is one such instance. People need to stop just childishly opposing NATO on every single thing all the time.

I'm happy to be on the side that benefits me. NATO is good for me.

Russians don't like NATO. This is because NATO is annoying Russia.
User avatar
By Solastalgia
#14444359
Goodluck A23. Hopefully they don't beat you down with wood batons or trample you with horses, like they did to us in Chicago a couple years ago.
User avatar
By anarchist23
#14444369
^
Most England/Scotland/Wales demos are civilized affairs, no tear gas, water cannons, guns. Northern Ireland is completely different.
Last edited by anarchist23 on 28 Jul 2014 18:07, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Solastalgia
#14444382
anarchist23 wrote:^
Most English demos are civilized affairs, no tear gas, water cannons, guns. Northern Ireland is completely different.


Yeah, you should be fine. They may bring out the tear gas if it's possible. The only reason they didn't in Chicago 2012, was because it was so densely packed in, and maybe because they wanted to relive the "glory days" of '68, with the old wooden batons. There actually were some anarchists pulled over a week before the protests, and were threatened of '68 repeat.

Image

Image
User avatar
By Goldberk
#14444412
If I have to choose between two groups of liberals, I'll always choose the one that benefits me. Why would that be surprising?


You choose the material benefits that disguise the cultural/intellectual wasteland they bring, a place where belonging and identity are concepts subordinated to consumption and spectacle.

Any liberal choice is not good for you.

It has already been explained that this type of c[…]

For me Republicanism is masculine and monarchism i[…]

Please provide it again. You have no problem aski[…]

Sure, keep thinking that. Election year is caus[…]