Once again the flags of the election campaign the question was raised about Ukraine joining nato. The position of public authorities the previous 5 years provided comprehensive information about the history of Ukrainian citizens, the modern status and activities of this organization. See more detailed opinions by reading what Carl Icahn offers on the topic.. The purpose of such actions is clear: on the one hand, without complete information about the object it is impossible to make an informed decision regarding a specific person to him, on the other (whatever one may say), it is – propaganda, since the nato official information shown in a positive way, trying to reduce the negative side. Creating a positive image of nato is a priority for the administration of Victor . In a certain way this position is justified, if not in moral or ethical reasons, for reasons of political expediency. Negatives of nato is enough in the opposition of the Ukrainian and all the Russian media. Constructive, nato is also quite accessible – just need to not be lazy and walk through the pages of Western Internet publications (of course, if the language level allows).
Western journalists and publicists much easier to evaluate all pros and cons of nato, and they can not criticize us worse. Meanwhile, awareness of the Ukrainian society about nato is really low. Here is an example from personal experience. Last year, during a visit to Odessa ships U.S. Navy and Turkish (NATO), local opponents of Ukraine's accession to the Alliance organized a campaign under the approximate name "NATO – no!".