What do you think about NATO?

Sportello

Well-Known Member
@FrigidFTSup: right on Bosnia, wrong on science
You're talking about radioactive half life. I'm talking about biological. Biological is what matters when discussing half life in humans. If you believe science.

Look at the links on that google search. You show me one site that is reputable.
Take out the first three and you have a decent source. I didn't look at Rense or TruthOut or MintPress. I just used your words as search terms, which may be telling. A refined search has different results. I just searched your exact words.

I have no clue what biological half life of a radioactive mineral even means. Can you define that for me?
 

rickyb

Well-Known Member
"3. The third task of the report is to justify the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization beyond Germany, a violation of the promise Ronald Reagan made to the Soviet Union’s Mikhail Gorbachev after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Expanding NATO in Eastern Europe opened up an arms market for the war industry. It made those businesses billions of dollars. New NATO members must buy Western arms that can be integrated into the NATO arsenal. These sales, which are bleeding the strained budgets of countries such as Poland, are predicated on potential hostilities with Russia. If Russia is not a threat, the arms sales plummet. War is a racket." - chris hedges

could go in a war thread too.
 

Nike

Well-Known Member
NATO started as a good idea but it really is to bloated and ultimately to US focused. I say we should dump it and stick with just the English speakers. Great Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand.
 
Top