"It is NATO that is dangerously diverting our attention and resources to war, and away from the grave threat of global warming." Links to all resources are at the bottom of this post, and I will quote some essential parts and conclusions, to make you understand why I'm even posting this (explaining why blaming NATO is valid and appropriate). "While China and Russia have a limited military presence with 4 and 8 foreign land-bases respectively, the USA operates 87, the UK 17, and France 13 foreign bases. Based solely on the extent of land occupation, NATO has -by far- the largest negative ecological impact of any global conglomerate. This assessment does not account for the environmental damage caused by bomb strikes, where NATO has surpassed every other possible contender or corporation over the past 40 years. [...] In all this the impacts of production stages in the weapons manufacturing industry have not been included, but it needs to be stated that even when discounting those it is undeniable that without the existence of NATO we would not have a global warming problem today." "Here's the awful truth: even if every person, every automobile, and every factory suddenly emitted zero emissions,…