NATO engages in the rhetoric of peace but actions speak louder than words, George Szamuely, author of the book, 'Bombs for Peace: NATO's War on Yugoslavia,' told Radio Sputnik.
"NATO has mastered the technique of speaking out of both sides of its mouth," he said.
"Since the end of the Cold War NATO has continually sought to use various tasks to justify its own existence, so it's continually trying to invent some new task for itself: we've had the global war on terror, we've had humanitarian intervention, we've had the Libya attacks, we've had its involvement in Syria."
"Now they've gone back to the tried and true, which is Russia, largely because the public isn't really that convinced that we need this sprawling 28-nation military alliance just to fight a bunch of Islamic terrorists."
"Only recently President Obama announced that he's quadrupling the money for what he calls the European Reassurance Initiative, which involves putting more men and troops into Central and Eastern Europe."
"It should be possible given that there is no conflict of interest between Russia and NATO, other than what NATO itself has created by its relentless expansion to Russia's borders and its idiotic commitments made in 2008 that it would try to scoop up Ukraine and Georgia into NATO."
"Hillary Clinton is very much a figure within the military-industrial complex, she has never come across a military intervention that she didn't approve of, she is very belligerent," he warned.