Police say they've arrested 3 people after an anti-NATO protest that included two car fires and left some businesses with smashed windows.

Anti-NATO protesters gathered again in Montreal on Saturday to demand Canada withdraw from the alliance, a day after a demonstration organized by different groups resulted in arrests, burned cars and shattered windows.

the purpose of the protest was to demonstrate against what he called NATO’s “complicity with Israel’s military while it’s conducting its genocide in Gaza, … war crimes in Lebanon, Syria” and that “it’s enforcing illegal occupation of Palestinian territories.”

However, Allard rejected accusations of antisemitism. He said the protests were against the actions of the state of Israel and not Jewish people, adding that earlier this week the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

  • @[email protected]OPEnglish
    -37•9 hours ago

    Arguing against NATO for the reasons they state just means more people will suffer like the Palestinians do.

    I don’t know why you say this. NATO has been supporting Israel, not Palestine

    • RubberDuckEnglish
      29•4 hours ago

      That was not my point. NATO is a stabilizing force. If you remove it, Russia and others will just go on the war path and more people will suffer…

      I acknowledge the suffering of the Palestinians and think that needs to stop. In the past I argued that the war crime angle against Netanyahu should be picked up by the icc… and now they ruled there is enough evidence to issue an arrest warrant.

      But NATO does not support these atrocities. Countries in NATO do… but how does the NATO organisation do that?

      This seems to be of the same mold as “the UN does not do anything but talk” yeah… the UN is a talking organisation… that’s their goal… keep people in dialogue and serve as a platform to hopefully have member countries do stuff.

      NATO is a defense alliance… member countries not actively doing something against Israëls agression does not mean that it would be up to NATO to do something.

      • @[email protected]OPEnglish
        -13•6 hours ago

        I’ll try to put things into some historical perspective, as briefly as I can.

        NATO was supposed to be a stabilizing force against the Soviet Bloc. During the cold war that was the rational.

        Some claim that it was a tool to confirm and maintain US military hegemony and I tend to agree with this take. After approx 1993, through its interventions this started to be more and more obvious, especially to those living in the global South.

        • RubberDuckEnglish
          8•5 hours ago

          When did NATO go to war outside the Iraq war? I seem to have missed that.