NATO has always been a tool of US imperialism, for the military occupation and control of Western Europe. That is why Sen. Bob Taft opposed it. With the collapse of the economically pathetic USSR, the US has pushed its occupation closer and closer to Russia, as part of the continuing Cold War. (Imagine the reaction if Russia were seeking to include Canada and Mexico in a "defensive" alliance.) Bush has been temporarily stymied in his latest NATO expansion-aggression, but got the OK to install more of the rotten products of the military-industrial complex. Poor Europe--still under the US thumb after all these years.
But aren't these anti-missile systems "defensive"? Think of it this way: if the neighborhood bully, who is always beating people up, comes out one Saturday morning dressed from head to toe in body armor, does anyone think this is "defensive"? If retaliation is made more difficult, a first-strike is far easier. (Link via Drudge)
