STOP NATO: ¡NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK --------------------------- ListBot Sponsor -------------------------- Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/links/joinlb ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hey all, just wanted to let you know that the no_to_nato people are looking for help in drafting reasons why NATO should be opposed. I would like to ask everyone on this list to dig up a top ten or top twenty list (of there own making) stating why it is necessary to oppose NATO and send it to Richard Sanders at [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the guy organizing the campaign in Ottawa at city hall to have NATO booted out of that city and prevent the Alliance from meeting there in the fall. Cover as many topics as you like here's my sample list: 1 NATO continues to employ depleted uranium in its armaments in contravention of the Geneva conventions which explicitly prohibit weapons that primarily affect civilian populations 2 NATO continues to employ cluster bombs in its armaments in contravention of the Ottawa Process on Landmines 3 According to the UN Environmental Program, NATO triggered an environmental catastrophe in Yugoslavia 4 NATO member-state Turkey: a) continues to wage an aggressive campaign of ethnic cleansing against its Turkish population in which 3,500 villages have been destroyed, 35,000 people killed, and millions have been displaced, b) continues to sporadically invade Iraq to carry out mop-ups of ethnic Kurds in foreign territory, c) continues its occupation of half of Cyprus 5 NATO has been a prime source of destabilization in Macedonia 6 NATO controlled Kosovo has been ethnically cleansed of 250,000 non-Albanian citizens, while the remaining minorities in this Yugoslav province have no freedom of movement, live in ghettoes and face daily terrorist attacks, destruction of their property, etc. So far 1,300 citizens of Kosovo have been killed during NATO's occupation and another 1,300 are reported missing or disappeared 7 NATO troops are heavily involved in fuelling the demand for prostitution in both Bosnia and Kosovo, making sexual slavery one of the most lucrative businesses in the region 8 The women that service NATO troops live in deplorable conditions and are frequently held against their will by local captors. Whenever evidence of UN or NATO involvement in this trade has surfaced, the officers were discharged and sent home without any criminal proceedings being initiated against them. 9 NATO forces have been involved in enforcing the cancellation of election results in Bosnia, the shutting down of media stations and transmitter towers of media critical to the NATO presence in the country, and have seized banks and other assets of political parties refusing to cooperate with these forces 10 NATO fomented ethnic war in the Balkans and prolonged the bloodshed in the region to discredit its competing rivals and to cement its hegemony in the European theatre etc., etc., etc., In a message dated 18/07/01 16:46:22 Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Subj: Kole: Can you help COAT with antiNATO petiton/statement? Date: 18/07/01 16:46:22 Eastern Daylight Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Sanders) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dear Kole, Thanks for you comments. I have forwarded them to two people -- Dick and Jordan (their emails are in the CC line of this email) -- who have worked on a list of reasons for Canada to get out of NATO. We need to add your points too. I hope you can help us with this effort. We want to create a web petition for Cda out of NATO for the COAT web site. We also need a strong statement to summarize why. Do you know of the existance of any other petitons against NATO, or statements which briefly summarize the reasons to be against NATO? Our next magazine issue will be on this topic. Cheers Richard 1. NATO was promoted by its founders, among them several Canadians, only for defence against the Soviet Union, which no longer exists. 2. History shows that military alliances like street gangs provoke counter alliances and eventually war 3. NATO's military capabilities are overwhelmingly those of the US. NATO is the USA with its European allies. 4. NATO constantly offers military solutions to diplomatic problems. 5.NATO's war against Yugoslavia broke numerous international laws, Geneva conventions, as well as contravening the NATO charter. 6. NATO members are less than 10% of the members of the UN. General Assembly which was intended to be the major body to deal with world problems. 7. NATO provokes China/Japan/ Korea/India to increase military spending diverting resources from essential needs. 8 NATO will eventually provoke an anti-NATO alliance of China/Japan/Korea(unified) and India. 9 Canada's NAFTA partner Mexico is not a member of NATO or any other military alliance. 10. Canada, out of NATO, could join the Middle Powers Initiative with Mexico and New Zealand to oppose nuclear weapons. 11. NATO has a "first use" nuclear weapons policy, i.e., it will use nuclear weapons in war evne before such eapons have been launched at them. In NATO, Canada is complicit in NATO's support for the possible use of nuclear arms. 12. Canada's role in UN peacekeeping, a Canadian tradition founded by our own Prime Minister Pearson, is compromised by our membership in war-fighting military alliance. 13. European countries, 56 years after the end of Word War II, need to take responsibility for their own security. Even without Canada and the USA total European defence capabilities are vastly superior to any potential enemies. 14. NATO presence in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia should be taken over by the European Union and the UN 15. NATO's powerful core members are all former masters of vast empires, the British, the French, the Germans, the Dutch, the Belgians and the Spanish. Former colonies, today's Third World, still suffer from tragic distortions and inequalities from over 200 years of political and economic imperialism. 16. Canada, as a member of the Commonwealth, could follow the examples of neutral New Zealand and Australia. 17. Canada and the U.S. are NATO's only non-European members. Canada'a presence justifies that of the U.S. Without Canada Europeans would replace NATO with their own regional security arrangement. ---- At 11:21 AM 18/07/01 -0400, you wrote: >Richard, to the notes below I would add that I don't think that Nato has >ever really been about defence against the Soviets. It is about establishing >AMerican imperialism. > >To: Richard >from: Jordan Bishop >re: Nato/otan: Some remarks > >1. I cannot believe that any sane person ever thought that Nato was >necessary to defend the West against a Soviet invasion. Unless US >intelligence services were extremely incompetent, they must have known the >extraordinary extent of Soviet de-mobilization. They (unlike the Americans) >had a country to rebuild > >2. But read the New York Times for a month after the end of the war with >Japan. They were very much worried about a recurrence of the 1929-39 >depression. How to convert to non-military industry?? With Nato, they >didn't have to. > >3. They wanted to include West Germany in their empire (sphere of >influence, whatever you want to call it). Germany could not be re-armed >without upsetting the French. But if that re-armament (and the subsequent >market for American military hardware) were done under international >control, no sweat. So Nato was born. And West Germany, rebuilt with >Marshall plan aid, was part of a Western economic alliance. > >4. Stalin had to retrench. To rebuild a shattered country. He was quite >willing to accept a united unarmed, neutral Germany, whose development >would have been subsidized by the Marshall plan. Political fate to be >decided by elections (which Stalin knew the communists would lose, so the >unarmed neutral Germany would not be communist). This idea was completely >unacceptable to the Americans. > >5. I am inclined to doubt whether Nato would end if Canada pulled out >(although as things stand there is little danger of that. We are the first >satellite). The Europeans may already be a bit restless with the >neocolonial status that they have under Nato. But it is not simply that the >US and Canada are the only non-European countries in Nato. Nato is an >extension of and an instrument of US imperial policy. A couple of years ago >the French had suggested that Nato's southern commanded be headed by a >European. No way! The admission of some middle and eastern European >countries represents a bonanza for U.S. "defence" contractors. To be in >Nato one must have standard equipment, weapons, electronics. For the >Military-Industrial-Complex, it matters not whether this equipment is >financed by Polish, Czech, Hungarian or U.S. taxpayers. The odds are that it >is the latter. And it is after all a captive market. > >6. Now Mr. Chretien is making noise about Russia being admitted to Nato. >One wonders why? Is he a stalking horse for his Washington masters, to bring >Russia into the American Empire? One doubts whther the Russians would be >allowed any real power. They would be more like Belgium, or Iceland. They >are bankrupt. But think of the military contracts if Russia joined Nato! >And again, U.S. taxpayers would probably pay for most of them. Unless the >U.S. were to accept the billions of counterfeit US dollars now being printed >by the new capitalists (mafianos) in Russia. > >7. As things stand, I am extremely doubtful that Canada would ever leave >Nato. Our present government would never do anything to offend the U.S. >administration. Note how quickly Canada joined the U.S. in rejecting >European proposals that everybody stop subsidizing petroleum and nuclear >industries. > >Jordan Bishop. Ottawa, 18.07.2001 > ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Richard Sanders Coordinator, Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade (COAT) A national peace network supported by individuals and organizations across Canada 541 McLeod St., Ottawa Ontario K1R 5R2 Canada Tel.: 613-231-3076 Fax: 613-231-2614 Email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Web site: <http://www.ncf.ca/coat> Help build opposition to NATO PA meetings in Ottawa, Oct. 5-8, 2001! Join the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" list serve: Send the message: subscribe no_to_nato to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> ______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Kole, Thanks for you comments. I have forwarded them to two people -- Dick and Jordan (their emails are in the CC line of this email) -- who have worked on a list of reasons for Canada to get out of NATO. We need to add your points too. I hope you can help us with this effort. We want to create a web petition for Cda out of NATO for the COAT web site. We also need a strong statement to summarize why. Do you know of the existance of any other petitons against NATO, or statements which briefly summarize the reasons to be against NATO? Our next magazine issue will be on this topic. Cheers Richard 1. NATO was promoted by its founders, among them several Canadians, only for defence against the Soviet Union, which no longer exists. 2. History shows that military alliances like street gangs provoke counter alliances and eventually war 3. NATO's military capabilities are overwhelmingly those of the US. NATO is the USA with its European allies. 4. NATO constantly offers military solutions to diplomatic problems. 5.NATO's war against Yugoslavia broke numerous international laws, Geneva conventions, as well as contravening the NATO charter. 6. NATO members are less than 10% of the members of the UN. General Assembly which was intended to be the major body to deal with world problems. 7. NATO provokes China/Japan/ Korea/India to increase military spending diverting resources from essential needs. 8 NATO will eventually provoke an anti-NATO alliance of China/Japan/Korea(unified) and India. 9 Canada's NAFTA partner Mexico is not a member of NATO or any other military alliance. 10. Canada, out of NATO, could join the Middle Powers Initiative with Mexico and New Zealand to oppose nuclear weapons. 11. NATO has a "first use" nuclear weapons policy, i.e., it will use nuclear weapons in war evne before such eapons have been launched at them. In NATO, Canada is complicit in NATO's support for the possible use of nuclear arms. 12. Canada's role in UN peacekeeping, a Canadian tradition founded by our own Prime Minister Pearson, is compromised by our membership in war-fighting military alliance. 13. European countries, 56 years after the end of Word War II, need to take responsibility for their own security. Even without Canada and the USA total European defence capabilities are vastly superior to any potential enemies. 14. NATO presence in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia should be taken over by the European Union and the UN 15. NATO's powerful core members are all former masters of vast empires, the British, the French, the Germans, the Dutch, the Belgians and the Spanish. Former colonies, today's Third World, still suffer from tragic distortions and inequalities from over 200 years of political and economic imperialism. 16. Canada, as a member of the Commonwealth, could follow the examples of neutral New Zealand and Australia. 17. Canada and the U.S. are NATO's only non-European members. Canada'a presence justifies that of the U.S. Without Canada Europeans would replace NATO with their own regional security arrangement. ---- At 11:21 AM 18/07/01 -0400, you wrote: >Richard, to the notes below I would add that I don't think that Nato has >ever really been about defence against the Soviets. It is about establishing >AMerican imperialism. > >To: Richard >from: Jordan Bishop >re: Nato/otan: Some remarks > >1. I cannot believe that any sane person ever thought that Nato was >necessary to defend the West against a Soviet invasion. Unless US >intelligence services were extremely incompetent, they must have known the >extraordinary extent of Soviet de-mobilization. They (unlike the Americans) >had a country to rebuild > >2. But read the New York Times for a month after the end of the war with >Japan. They were very much worried about a recurrence of the 1929-39 >depression. How to convert to non-military industry?? With Nato, they >didn't have to. > >3. They wanted to include West Germany in their empire (sphere of >influence, whatever you want to call it). Germany could not be re-armed >without upsetting the French. But if that re-armament (and the subsequent >market for American military hardware) were done under international >control, no sweat. So Nato was born. And West Germany, rebuilt with >Marshall plan aid, was part of a Western economic alliance. > >4. Stalin had to retrench. To rebuild a shattered country. He was quite >willing to accept a united unarmed, neutral Germany, whose development >would have been subsidized by the Marshall plan. Political fate to be >decided by elections (which Stalin knew the communists would lose, so the >unarmed neutral Germany would not be communist). This idea was completely >unacceptable to the Americans. > >5. I am inclined to doubt whether Nato would end if Canada pulled out >(although as things stand there is little danger of that. We are the first >satellite). The Europeans may already be a bit restless with the >neocolonial status that they have under Nato. But it is not simply that the >US and Canada are the only non-European countries in Nato. Nato is an >extension of and an instrument of US imperial policy. A couple of years ago >the French had suggested that Nato's southern commanded be headed by a >European. No way! The admission of some middle and eastern European >countries represents a bonanza for U.S. "defence" contractors. To be in >Nato one must have standard equipment, weapons, electronics. For the >Military-Industrial-Complex, it matters not whether this equipment is >financed by Polish, Czech, Hungarian or U.S. taxpayers. The odds are that it >is the latter. And it is after all a captive market. > >6. Now Mr. Chretien is making noise about Russia being admitted to Nato. >One wonders why? Is he a stalking horse for his Washington masters, to bring >Russia into the American Empire? One doubts whther the Russians would be >allowed any real power. They would be more like Belgium, or Iceland. They >are bankrupt. But think of the military contracts if Russia joined Nato! >And again, U.S. taxpayers would probably pay for most of them. Unless the >U.S. were to accept the billions of counterfeit US dollars now being printed >by the new capitalists (mafianos) in Russia. > >7. As things stand, I am extremely doubtful that Canada would ever leave >Nato. Our present government would never do anything to offend the U.S. >administration. Note how quickly Canada joined the U.S. in rejecting >European proposals that everybody stop subsidizing petroleum and nuclear >industries. > >Jordan Bishop. Ottawa, 18.07.2001 > ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- Richard Sanders Coordinator, Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade (COAT) A national peace network supported by individuals and organizations across Canada 541 McLeod St., Ottawa Ontario K1R 5R2 Canada Tel.: 613-231-3076 Fax: 613-231-2614 Email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Web site: <http://www.ncf.ca/coat> Help build opposition to NATO PA meetings in Ottawa, Oct. 5-8, 2001! Join the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" list serve: Send the message: subscribe no_to_nato to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
