@9FMNMPF2yrs2Y
I think what this argument also ignores, is that the Europeans take a different political perspective on defense spending.
@B45CSS33mos3MO
NATO has a policy that states that "an attack on one is an attack on all." Regardless of military defense spending, the US should defend all NATO members in any given situation.
@B263Z5F 7mos7MO
It stands to benefit us more regardless because it maintains the world order we’ve set up which we benefit from greatly.
This completely defeats the purpose of a military alliance, no? Why would we let them in then be selective based on how much they spend? Completely pointless. You can make the arguement that they should spend more money but not that they should not be defended.
@9ZZSM46Republican 7mos7MO
I sort-of agree becuase I think they should be putting more effort in if theyre going to get the same help as a country putting in a lot more money.
@B2Z3P8H5mos5MO
That would set a dangerous precedent, dictators worlwide would see that the US would not protect some of it's closest allies
@9ZJ7Z4W8mos8MO
We should defend NATO country's that spend less than 2% becasue they help us in other ways, such as trade.
@CMCwarProgressive 5mos5MO
NATO countries with a smaller overall GDP don’t have the economy to raise their defense to 2% of their GDP. Plus, saying that we won’t defend our allies just because their GDP’s smaller will threaten NATO’s position as a military alliance against enemies like Russia and China.
@9L58VGS1yr1Y
At the 2023 Vilnius Summit, NATO Leaders agreed a new Defence Investment Pledge, making an enduring commitment to investing at least 2% of GDP annually on defence.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.