This statement is based on nothing.

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm

In a word no, membership in NATO isn’t a shield against the rest of NATO

Also most people’s actions are on the overall ALL small. Most people make no big ripples. Telling them to either change the world or do nothing is telling them to do nothing.

Ethics are a habit if you can’t give up a tv show what can you do exactly

Ethics isn’t just big things it’s little things as well. I don’t matter I shouldn’t need to do anything just isn’t Left or right wing it is an apolitical thought. Claiming that because you hold yourself to be left-wing and you thought it and thus it is left wing thinking is just flat out wrong. Please explain exactly how Im wrong. Explain how your position is left wing

You didn’t successfully deflate it

You are hardly the arbiter of what is left wing thinking. Fuck ethics im going to concern myself with my own needs is apolitical. Its neither Left nor right.

Instead of not enjoying something why not enjoy something else there is finite time and far more to enjoy than you shall ever find time.

What of value would be lost?

If being a POS takes half of your income potential away people will be less likely to behave so and others will think it less acceptable.

Dismissing the aggregate effect of small effects is dismissing most actual effects. Its ahistorical.

Their right to anything is as fictional as any of his works

https://lovecraft.fandom.com/wiki/Copyright_status_of_works_by_H._P._Lovecraft

His works are public domain. People are profiting who did their own work compiling or creating derivative works

His writing can be good and he personally can be a piece of shit. One has nothing to do with the other. His detractors as it were virtually all hate that he was a racist POS.

You seem to be entirely ignoring comtinual efforts to prevent them from becoming so empowered including murdering their scientists, bribing their leaders, drawing up agreements and them just not pushing it because the natural and expected results is war.

It is reasonable to expect that any given year the US would rather kill them all rather than let them have nukes.

Denmark is a NATO country and Greenland is part of it. As soon as we attack all of NATO is obligated to attack us. They can start non violet by stopping all trade and dumping the dollar crashing our economy.

Even just to the Greenlanders could be a real problem.

People sabatogue blow up poison and casually murder you after giving in.

We can’t murder everyone and the us has been shown to be very intolerant to a few thousand troop deaths not to mention civilian deaths on their side live on TV

It would absolutely be a cluster fuck worse than Iraq

Depends on whose objecting. This arrangement pretty much only works at scale with a combination of religious brainwashing, inequality between and amongst the genders, and a healthy dose of male mortality especially from war.

Inequality among a gender: For instance if bob and Sam both make 70k 5 women aren’t all marrying one or the other in most instances.

Inequality between the genders: Given a complex life path beyond follow in husband’s shadow no matter what or become a parish the chance of instability with more people increases with each member added.

So the first obvious person to object to broad enactment of this idea ought to be women raised to buy into this when it’s not their best option.

Next is society for such groups brainwashing kids.

Then there is the downside of the enabling inequality. Anyone not on the top end of the financial spectrum ought to object to that.

Women ought to object to the idea that they ought to share.

Men not in the top 5-20% ought to object to competing for the remaining women not attached to high status males. Note this is what incels say they are mad about now but there is so much to unpack re their broken brains and it’s just not at this juncture real.

Society should be mad at the very large number of unattached men who normally cause trouble.

Some such societies deal with this by trading women like Pokemon cards and driving off excess men. This doesn’t work without wars to kill them off or somewhere to drive them to.

Basically everyone but a smallish minority of men would be worse off which is why this is non existent in modern functioning society.

There little net effect on society with a small incidence of polygomy just like with lead in the water.