60 Years Of NATO In Eight Minutes

[Melehete]

I am very happy to see the vidoe after you give this After World War II, fears of a Soviet attack in Europe convinced Western leaders of the pressing need for a defensive military alliance

[anakmudajaman]

I Love The Video It Can Increase My Knowledge After World War II, fears of a Soviet attack in Europe convinced Western leaders of the pressing need for a defensive military allianc

[bebeheuy]

Steady I Really Like This Video After World War II, fears of a Soviet attack in Europe convinced Western leaders of the pressing need for a defensive military alliance

[Mjhond]

Good, I like that you share this video After World War II, fears of a Soviet attack in Europe convinced Western leaders of the pressing need for a defensive military alliance, I wish success always

[AntoMelta]

Nice Video That You Share , So Very Nice Thanks You the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was born. After World War II, fears of a Soviet attack in Europe convinced Western leaders of the pressing need for a defensive military alliance

[willamricard]

I Really Like The Video From Your Sixty years ago in Washington, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was born.

[imegatrone]

Your Video Is Very Useful Sharing Sixty years ago in Washington, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was born

[LillyofParis]

NATO=== ANOTHER STOOGE PUPPETT OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER.. THE PENTAGONS EU ARM OF ENFORCEMMENT .......AND FASCISM¬¬!!

TO HELL WITH NATO!!..MURDERS OF MILLIONS!!

FUCK NATO>>!! ROTTON!!

[Souria2011archives]

Long Live NATO !! Defender of Democracy and Freedom around the Globe.!! The people who hate NATO are scummy little rats who are either fascists or communist scum who loathe freedom and democracy and hate human rights and individual freedom. People who hate NATO are Satanic devils who want to destroy values of free will, individual liberty and individual responsibility. People who hate NATO are Evil Scumbags who love Joe Stalin, Mao, Bashar Assad, Gadaffi, Saddam, Iranian Mullahs and Taliban.

[MrStoneGhost]

@Souria2011archives

youz trollin

[karatekla]

This is the NATO nowadays: "Breaking News: PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE: NATO Bombed Libya's Nasser University" you'll find the page searching on internet.

[karatekla]

Albright... The NATO started the war in the exJugoslavia! That war was illegal; against the constitution of the NATO.

[dave19941000]

@karatekla How is war even legal? At least it ended the wars sooner, and saved thousands if not more lives.

[karatekla]

@dave19941000 I think the NATO just start wars in collaboration with the weapon sellers and the worldbankers that always have big gain on any war. The manipulated media give us false informations about situations to find a 'reason' to invade an bombard other countries. The NATO was 'born' for defence, not for attacking and distructing countries. Jugoslavia was attacked for strategic reasons between others. Like now in Lybia it has never anything to do with bringing democracy.

[dave19941000]

@karatekla Well excuse me if I like the fact my aunt and cousins may have died if the Serbs where not bombed, but it was a war long before NATO intervened and if they hadn't we would look back on it like we do Rwanda, a place we should have intervened in to stop the genocide, which we in in Yugoslavia. And in Libya the rebels asked for our help, so where giving it.

[karatekla]

@dave19941000 I'm happy to hear your aunt and cousins did survive. If there's nothing interesting, like petroil or strategic reasons to start an intervention for, they don't care about the population. Rwanda had nothing to offer so they let the genocide happen. The 'rebels' in Lybia are trained by the CIA and the weapons given by the same CIA. The invation in Lybia is a pure question of interests. The NATO itself is bombing also the population by israelian-made drones.

[karatekla]

They are trying to kill a man, Gaddafi, they gave freemason handshake 'yesterday'. Who killed more people, the USA or Gaddafi? Iraq was attacked for interests, Afghanistan idem. Iran will be the next, but they are still thinking what excuse to invent. Confront the egyptian struggle for democracy with the lybian struggle. The egyptian population didn't have all those weapons. It were people ion the streets. Lybia was on the Agenda and this was the right moment!

[adrastea99]

Fucking Madeline, I hope she burns in hell for her actions

[101andrewj]

nato needs to kick out the united states, then declare war against them

[Trolleymctrolltrolls]

@101andrewj I dont think the world united would be able to defeat the US they have 13k nuclear warheads more then all nations combined and times by 2

[101andrewj]

@Trolleymctrolltrolls russia had more warheads then the US... about 15000.. but after the soviet union failed, they started to disarm...

[Trolleymctrolltrolls]

@101andrewj The US has the largest stockpile of nuclear warheads at the present moment the soviet union only caught up in the mid 80s but those facts are null and void because atm the us is the only superpower

[101andrewj]

@Trolleymctrolltrolls US only has the most because they have only been taking apart 1 of their nukes for every 10 russian ones... russia, china, britian, and france all have the nuclear firepower to completly destroy america should they want to... the US is the biggest superpower, not the only 1... and as soon as chinese and indian industry catches up, americans will be just a thing of the past

[Trolleymctrolltrolls]

@101andrewj Sounds like a bunch of babble to me china and the us rely too much on each other and all of india is a cesspit the only reason their gdp is high is because of their population, the us is also one of the only countries with a functional missile defense system most nuclear weapons wouldnt even get through

[101andrewj]

@Trolleymctrolltrolls a nuke could still be detonated in the US, it just cant fly in like a ICBM and then once a couple smuggled nukes go off in the US, the massive amounts of EMP would disable large amounts of american defences, making it possible for a ICBM strike... america wouldnt be able to save itself, all it would be able to do is get some nukes in the air before it dies, and hurt china and russia too

[Trolleymctrolltrolls]

@101andrewj A nuke would have to go off for it to disable defense systems the systems them selves would destroy said nuke before what you said could even happen, the only way a country could even dream of destroying america is throwing their entire nuclear arsenal at america at once which is not only illogical but bound to invoke stronger retaliation when noticed, Sadly all of these scenarios are null because nukes are a deterrent mind wise for warmongers and not a viable weapon in reality

[101andrewj]

didnt u listen to what i just sayd... the first strike nukes would have to be smuggled in, then once they detonate and disable american defences the ICBMS can launch and hit american targets.... the only problem is the american nuclear submarines that could survive a first strike and launch a nuclear counter attack on the attacking nation.. so whomever attacks america gots to make sure they arnt part of a nation

[Trolleymctrolltrolls]

@101andrewj Smuggling a nuke in the Us is impossible at the current moment due to increased fear of terrorism the idea is void you could however make a dirty bomb on US soil but thats next to impossible as well.

[101andrewj]

@Trolleymctrolltrolls over 100 000 shipping containers enter the USA everyday... no matter how many radiation devices they have set up, they can never scan them all, also, its only likly they could pick up a dirty radioactive bomb, not just enriched nuclear material... watch the documentary film, countdown to zero

[Trolleymctrolltrolls]

@101andrewj Count down to zero was more of a what if then a what will, Youd need ALOT of knowledge and a very good delivery system to even get a dirty bomb to work in the US, Planting a dirty bomb in a city and having it explode would do little damage, getting one to blow up in the atmosphere over a city is another thing and knowing how heavy a dirty bomb would have to be to do that kind of damage you'd need a military or industrial sized aircraft to drop one. Not gonna happen

[101andrewj]

@Trolleymctrolltrolls i know... but a homemade nuke detonated at ground level could still do massive amounts of damage, and the US governement did tests, wer they took graduate students and tested them, and several times, these untrained students wer able to build complete working nuclear bombs with all homemade and store bought parts accept for the enriched nuclear fuel, which has also been proven to be really insecure and completly possible to steal or buy illegally,

[nthbeach]

What a point piece of propaganda!

NATO/US is nothing more than a bully! It is an imperialist and criminal organization imposing its will on the weak and defenseless.

They are responsible for some of the worst crimes in the 20th Century. Yet, at the same time they are immune from any kind of prosecution.

Madeleine Albright' is an evil and wrenched piece of filth!

She is nothing more than a walking pro-abortion ad.

[zedsdeadz]

@nthbeach while your comments may be true, the author of the vid pointed out the events as they occurred AND albrights comments SEEN IN THAT LIGHT. This is called objectivity, not propaganda, even if your comments are still true. 

[nthbeach]

@zedsdeadz I call this propaganda because it is clearly one sided and implies that NATO is a force for peace and goodness throughout the world.

Therefore it has zero objectivity as this is clearly NOT the case!

Nowhere does it mention civilian casualties it inflicts or the political pressures/threats that NATO exerts upon other nations.

And using sinister creatures like Madeleine Albright to promote a cause kills any credibility and objectivity this video potentially might have had.

[5678lob]

this is an amazing video! I'm doing a project on NATO, and I can't believe how helpful this is. :)

[BitnikGr]

/watch?v=mTK4US7tmrI - Russian documentary about NATO with subs.