Should the U.S. remain in NATO?
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on April 4th, 1949. It is a political and military alliance of member countries from Europe and North America that agree to provide military and economic security for each other. NATO makes all of its decisions by consensus and every member country, no matter how large or small, has an equal say.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes
@9CLWDVD 8mos8MO
The European states are our most vital allies. To abandon NATO would be to abandon Europe. The U.S. can not face the geopolitical challenges of the 21st century alone.
@9FMBRM38mos8MO
I agree because Europe is the first line of defense against Russian aggression, and abandoning them will facilitate the take over of those nations. In terms of China, NATO provides an additional incentive for the CCP to not attack the USA
@9FMF5VH8mos8MO
The US, and the world at large, benefits from close and friendly international relations. Democratic nations should always look out for each others's interests, especially with authoritarian governments rising in prominence. NATO is essential for US and European relations, its a pact of confidence and trust. Pulling out of NATO would send a message of disintrest and apathy, and would lead to losing the good faith that European nations have put in the US.
@9GFVGXKLibertarian7mos7MO
Authoritarian growing powers, such as Russia and China, which seek to dominate their respective regions and expand their power and influence in the region, and the wide reach of NATO provides a source of stability and security for North America and Western Europe, as well as providing a framework and a general sense of values which unite NATO members and allow for common goals.
@TheDesideriusRepublican7mos7MO
NATO should remain in its current form, but it should not admit any new member states. The organisation should similarly demand that all nations part of it should meet the expected defence spending of 2% of their GDP.
@9LNYCXR4wks4W
Number of NATO countries invaded (yet): 0
Number of European (and Eurasian)countries not in NATO invaded by Russia alone: more than 0
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No, it is obsolete and should be abolished
@9GMVXFH 7mos7MO
Why should the US cast away the greatest alliance in the history of Mankind? Isolationism is a fool’s ideology, which failed the Ming Empire, the Japanese, and pre-war US. When threats are knocking at the door, it would be idiotic to hide under your bed sheets and hope they go away. Why should the US do that on the Geopoltical stage, ceding the far east the communist China and Eastern Europe to Putin’s Russia.
@9GLRGJ37mos7MO
Having such a large military alliance benefits every nation that is a part of it and reduces the risk of war
@9GJMSCW7mos7MO
Firstly, NATO's core principle of collective defense acts as a powerful deterrent, ensuring that any attack on one member is considered an attack on all, which has effectively discouraged potential aggressors and supports the US-led international order. Moreover, the alliance has adapted to confront modern security challenges, including terrorism, cyber threats, and hybrid warfare, thereby playing a pivotal role in crisis management and conflict resolution. We have much to learn from each other. Its historical role in maintaining peace and stability in Europe is also undeniable. While there may be calls for reform, NATO's proven adaptability stands as a strong argument for its continued relevance as an essential institution for many member states.
@9CLWDVD 8mos8MO
NATO is the only serious guarantor of security in the western hemisphere. Without it the Europe will become a more violent continent.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No
NATO is a exploitive system america has bombed and exploited several third world countries, NATO makes it that the USA can bully the whole world but the countries getting oppressed can't fight back because then the strongest militaries will be against them.
@9CJ6CB63mos3MO
It’s not a predatory organization, any attacks done we’re done explicitly to save lives, and the risks of destroying it are far worse.
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
Yes, but NATO should focus more on counter-terrorism strategies
@9LZDL4X3wks3W
According to NATO, only 11 out of out of 30 NATO members were contributing their fair share of 2% of their real GDP. (Data is from prior to the joining of Sweden and Finland)
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
No, not until other countries increase their financial contributions
@9FMKJMT8mos8MO
Well, we have found in history that having an alliance of great world powers (at least those posed in the modern era) has always needed the likes of the US to be successful; without the US, it is hard to put into action any sort of repercussions for a nations wrong doing. Therefore, I find it to be of the utmost importance, that the US remains in NATO.
@9GYY6SZ6mos6MO
Don't risk our security over other nations, let them do as they please; defend us, for us, not for them.
@9M2RNL5Republican3wks3W
Just because other countries don't increase their financial contributions doesn't mean that NATO is useless and isn't helpful, numbers in countries is more than one country with more wealth and financial contributions. Just the idea of NATO helps to protect us because if it's war with one, then it's war with all, and all is more than a single country. If there were 100 kindergarteners against 1 teacher, the kindergarteners would probably win, given the fact that they would totally overpower the single force and would overwhelm them with tiny hits.
@9FDD6YJ8mos8MO
America is like the security of the world we need to be involved in conflicts so countries don't get strong and preventing another world war or any type of wars.
@8HR8JJFLibertarian4yrs4Y
Yes, but the United States should not be responsible for funding 50% or more of NATO's operating budget.
@9CJ6CB63mos3MO
We’re not responsible, our percentage is relatively similar to others, we just have more money overall, so the total turnout is larger, while some of those nations actually fund more percentage-wide than us.
Yes, but only on the condition that the other member states are required to maintain their budget quotas and armament preparation. The United States should no longer be the primary armer and cash cow for the alliance.
@Jones4Potus2024 8mos8MO
Yes, but we should lower our financial contribution
@8WBW8DYRepublican3yrs3Y
Yes, but pressure other countries to increase their financial contributions
Yes, but NATO should focus on the protection of developing countries and the like instead of bolstering capitalist interests
@8M8BTP24yrs4Y
Yes, but we need to remove members that do not have NATO's best interests in mind or those nations that are not true allies (e.g. Turkey).
@8PB5CLZ4yrs4Y
@8NXN8FT4yrs4Y
Yes, but we should be less involved.
@8HQ9H3Y4yrs4Y
Yes, but encourage other NATO members to increase their financial contributions
@8T98STH3yrs3Y
Yes, but scale back funding
@8QHFTMW3yrs3Y
Yes, but demand other countries increase their financial contributions
@97874CZConstitution2yrs2Y
Yes, but scale back involvement until other countries increase their financial contribution
@98M3BTM1yr1Y
yes, and increase our involvement
@96HPD9V2yrs2Y
yes but other countries should increase their financial contributions
@8TD6J5R3yrs3Y
Yes, as long as other countries increase their financial contributions.
Yes, and have other countries increase their financial contributions
@98W76V91yr1Y
Yes and the US should increase there money and presence.
@9H8G2T46mos6MO
The NATO Call to arms should not be greater than the American Constitution and need for congress to declare wars.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution6mos6MO
We should withdraw from NATO as well as the UN.
@9CJ6CB63mos3MO
Absolutely not, they’re the first line of defense against Russian aggression, and if that dies, there’s not much stopping Russia or any other power from curb stomping Europe.
@8LMZSFT4yrs4Y
Yes, but other nations should pay their fair share
@9CHRMV511mos11MO
Yes, but NATO needs to only focus on Europe instead of being a gang that bullies countries in the Global South
@9CJ6CB611mos11MO
Perhaps it could help be a way to forge peace between Russia and it's border states. Though with what Russia's doing right now, that's out the window.
@ConstituencyCallerRepublican11mos11MO
Although Russia's actions in recent years have raised concerns, it is worth noting that NATO has been successful in maintaining peace in Europe since its inception. For example, the Baltic states, which were once under Soviet control, have been able to maintain their sovereignty and security with the help of NATO. This shows that NATO can still play a crucial role in fostering stability between Russia and its border states.
However, a stronger and more assertive stance from NATO might be necessary to deter any potential aggression from Russia. What do you think about increasing the military presence in Eastern Europe to ensure the security of these nations?
@9MFX8R76 days6D
While honoring treaties that do not require us to take unjust action, we should seek release from as many treaties as possible, and exempt any foreign governments from any continuing obligations under any treaty made with us.
@9MDD3XT1wk1W
Yes but the scope of contribution to NATO should be taken into account when decisions and actions are being considered. Few country cannot fund an entire organization of other countries that don’t pull any weight, but countries with fewer resources should also have a vote and a say
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...