This is news to me, that some european countries want to exit nato. of course, who needs nato when you have the united nations - if there was only one meeting for the countries of the world, then communications would be easier, instead of needing people to talk to others and then only getting an answer.
So, nato can go to hell for all i care!
Of course, there should be no leaving nato by anyone unless they are represented elsewhere. i am suggesting expanding on the international criminal court instead of investing in nato. i know nato brings intelligence to the west, but, this intelligence could be gathered by a world body - an expose on what is going on each day at various times.
Also, the new body could be open all hours of the day, to let news come in, or, open at american times to assess the news and intelligence of the previous day. of course, this would mean delayed actions take for cases, so, there should be, in my opinion, three shifts of the new body to work all day long, of course.
Or, we could change the name of nato? this would make room for a world body that will receive more funding from around the globe, of course. that or we could just make it more inclusive and change the name. this will encourage people to meet there - i am suggesting two chairs for each country in this new building, one to represent the military and one to represent intelligence, of course, unless they can find someone presentable to deliver both, yes?
Why do these countries want to leave nato? countries hardly complain about costs when they prevent wars, so, including everyone in this will only strengthen the stance of 'the body.' if they want to leave, they are tired of red tape, or, they are trying to craft a 'quite riot,' seeing how many people will follow them, yes? this would make sense, and, this is down to leaders and military people as to where this stands, so;
I am suggesting making new world bodies! this will see one nato for armies, one market overseer body, expand the international criminal court, and interpol should be expanded to represent in every country.
To keep countries from leaving nato, there should be more justification over the markets and economies of these countries - they probably do not have a very powerful economy, yes? this will see their country drop in the eyes of the international monetary fund or i.m.f. as they will have no security themselves. this will mean an immediate down grading on their money, and a steeped up payback of the money to the i.m.f. as there will be less security for those countries, yes?
And, the countries leaving are basically saying they want to attack someone. this is like leaving a camp fire - people have these meetings for peace and security, not because they disagree with the stances of protecting certain countries over others, so;
Protecting america and the west, and listening only to them might be a bit too much to ask, of course. if they were to be heard, at this new u.n. type body, working the same as the united nations, then they would surely want to stay, yes?
