Should NATO become a global organization to protect democracy and freedom?

[Jersey2]

Should NATO become a global organization for protecting democratic countries and their freedom? Yes I am aware of it’s name and it’s current scope.

Some likely candidates: Japan, Australia, South Korea, Australia would be members. Who else do you think?

Yes

No

Results

Updates

+1 y

Women say no to global NATO. I wonder why?

Updates

+1 y

Last day for input

[exitseven]

The deadbeats are not paying their fair share as it is so we do not need to make it bigger so the US has to fund it for the rest of the world.

[Losalt]

Actually, they are.
Look up peruns videos about the topic.
Each member reduces the costs for the US for any given capability.
And provides economic and non-military geopolical benefits.

[exitseven]

@Losalt I looked at this a few months ago. The US is paying way more than the rest of NATO put together. Why do you think they all hated PresidentvTrump? He was making them pay what was agreed upon.

[Losalt]

The US is also first of all earning more as a result of NATO and also spending less then if trying to achieve the same geopolical goals without said NATO members.
Each member doesn't increase military spending for the US at all, it's the opposite.
Also, the spending of the rest of NATO combined exceeds US spending, and add the US into the mix and the alliance exceeds China and Russia.
Given the cost differences the US can't hope to keep up with China alone, but NATO easily does.

[exitseven]

@Losalt those were not the figures I saw. The US paid 50 billion for the Ukraine and the rest of NATO paid a little more than 1 billion. Most paid nothing.

[Jersey2]

@Losalt I find that extremely hard to believe. Of it were true the head of NATO wouldn’t be saying that everyone needs to meet the 2% floor. It sounds like made-up garbage from Canada and Germany.

[Losalt]

What don't you believe?
The total sum spent by other countries in dollar value is higher for NATO excluding the US then what the US is using.
2% is a goal because the US has pushed for that goal.
But honestly it's a unrealistic goal.
The US can do it because it's essentially a continent.
When you factor in that the US earns back much of that spending in taxes from your own military industrial complex you're using far less money then you think.
Likewise a lot of the spending in the US is wasteful spending that has nothing to do with your capabilities and everything to do with essentially buying voters even if that spending could be better used elsewhere.
Then you waste money on political remaches over every possible decision because of all your checks and balances, further increasing prices.

Again, check out perun on youtube and you'll get a far more nuanced view on these matters.

[Losalt]

@exitseven
Sure, you have sent military equipment *worth* more money.
Because you have gigantic stockpiles.
This isn't new spending for the most part, just equipment you're going to replace anyway.
But first of all Europe has actually paid to keep the Ukrainian economy going, including money needed to keep fighting, like money to fund the army.
Secondly, I'm not talking about Ukraine, I'm talking about military spending overall in general prior to the war.
And unlike you we've been hit by the Russian gas embargoes hurting our economy, you haven't had to deal with that barely being customers to begin with.
Thirdly, we're the ones that paid for all of the infrastructure needed to send resources into Ukraine.
Without European nations it would have been impossible for the US to help Ukraine.
We're doing the maintenance of the Ukrainian equipment, transporting in resources, producing a lot of the ammunition, etc.

[exitseven]

@Losalt hardware costs money and the US is shipping it over there as fast as the Russians can blow it up.

[Losalt]

Most of that money is money you already spent, not with Ukraine or Europe in mind at all, but with China and other objectives that benefit your country in mind.

[Losalt]

Essentially you export security in return for unfair trade deals, artificial boosting of the value of your currency, purchases of military equipment and other services from the US, etc, etc.

[Jersey2]

@Losalt Nonsense. Our leaders give away trade deals and it’s maddening.

[Losalt]

@Jersey
You *think* that you're getting the rough end of the stick as a country, but you're not.
The issue for you guys isn't that the US has bad trade deals, but that they're designed to benefit your upper class even as they hurt other countries.
Of course, it doesn't help that the US is poorly run in *general*.
Your leaders know how to fight wars, they're rather crap at a number of other areas...

[Losalt]

@Jersey2
Damned, forgot the 2...

[Jersey2]

@Losalt The richest, most powerful, technologically advanced, most productive and most fun country is poorly run… we must be the luckiest too I guess. Yes we have our issues but we talk about them openly including on the internet where others can take only the negative and make assumptions.

I’ve been to Norway, it’s nice and the people are nice but nothing special. You have natural resources that keep you going. I see you might be raising your military spending from a small 1.4% to the 2% floor. The weapons we donated cost money. Real money. And they destroy Russian tanks and ammo dumps but need to be replaced now as we dug deep into our inventory used to fight a major war with little else coming from NATO. This conversation is why many Americans agreed with Trump that we should get out of NATO as there are a bunch of countries who expect the US to do everything, pay for everything and then they bitch about it… like the bitches they are.

Finland gets it, Poland gets it, the UK gets it, the Baltics get it but then there are those who expect to sit back, do little and complain.

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO

[Alexandrubaschet08]

You from USA don't understand why exactly pay more and the other less.
Only you and the East Block pay 2%.
But West Europ give hight quality life to thous solgers and theyr familys. USA is encouraging the solgers to take even theyr wifes and kids to get free healt care, natural food, education, public transport and culture

[Lliam]

NATO is just a force for U. S. military aggression. It creates hostility. It should be disbanded.

[Jersey2]

It was useful for protecting Western Europe as well as parts of Eastern Europe. I think Poland and the Baltics would not see it the way you do. The Baltics would be done by now for sure.

[Lliam]

It was created to defend against the USSR, which no longer exists. Now it just keeps expanding like cancer.

[Jersey2]

Nothing wrong with expanding if countries want to join because they still want safety against Russia. They were joined with Russia in Soviet times and Putin has made no secret that he wants them back. He was starting with Ukraine but that has been a mistake.

Now China threatens its neighbors along with North Korea. Democracies should and are working together but a new global NATO would be best.

[Lliam]

Thanks for the MHO, bro. That surprised me. :-).
What the world needs is safety from Israel. But NATO is fine with it's constant aggression.
☮️💟

[GreatBigCircles]

Nato is already a bit dysfunctional at times because of how expansive it is (particularly because of Turkey and Hungary, but that's a big political thing of its own). Additionally, a lot of people misunderstand what Nato even is. It's a defensive pact that also facilitates cooperative military's development and coordination (so that when the time comes for everyone to defend each other, they can work together. Also helps developing equipment that works together).

But there are other defensive treaties and agreements, some formalized and some emerging from inter connected defense agreements between several nations (The India, Japan, Austrlia, South Korea bloc comes to mind).

[Jersey2]

I think it is a bit dysfunctional but Germany is the dysfunctional one. They only care about themselves and cheat in what they should pay into the defense. They are a terrible Allie really.

Turkey has a right to reject Sweden as Sweden does not come down hard on what are terrorists to Turkey. Sweden then can’t expect Turkey’s soldiers to die to protect Stockholm. Turkey has the second largest army in Nato while Sweden has about 6,000 soldiers and perhaps 20,000 total military. They couldn’t even defend Stockholm much less such a long coast line. Yes, they have a handful of subs and some jets but not enough to be powerful. The Finns on the other hand are a welcome addition. Hungary will do what Turkey does in this matter as they did with Finland.

The world would be better off with one defense organization. Perhaps a new one or an expanded NATO. Countries like Germany will yet again get in the way of world peace though I suspect.

[goaded]

Nobody wanted a fully armed Germany since 1945, including the Germans.

[Jersey2]

@goaded since 2014 we have wanted a Germany that commits to 2% for military spending which isn’t fully armed.

[Snakeyes7]

Freedom? Are you nuts? NATO, UN, WEF and WHO, should all be disbanded. These organizations want to be the dominant centralized power. They have been talking about and trying to get a world-wide tax for businesses so that they can't flee to other countries for climate purposes.

If these nutjobs take power over the world, we are screwed because there will be no place to flee to if these guys decide to have their way with the little guy, and I guarantee you they will.

[Jersey2]

Fair enough

[Alexandrubaschet08]

YES I AGREE AND I THINK WILL BE ANOTHER GRATE STEP TO A UNITED ONE SINGLE GLOBAL NATION

[Jersey2]

At least world peace.

[Anonymous]

The more states join NATO the less effective it is at doing everything. NATO would need its rules changed to allow enforcement against member states. Then NATO would become a goverment.

[Anonymous]

Disband NATO. Or just let the Europeans actually PAY for it for a change. I mean everyone is terrified of Russia, right?

[Jersey2]

If we don’t get a global NATO, I agree with that… but everyone needs to step up and pay their share.

[OddBeMe]

Isn’t it already? I mean not fully spherical, more Europe localized but international for sure.

[Jersey2]

It has international ties that are getting much stronger due to China. What prompted this question is if that current momentum can used to raise NATO up to the global level and secure peace and stability if not for the world then for democratic countries. No one would take on such a large military, not even China and Russia combined.

I could see the 4 Asia Pac members along with others including India, Israel, Mexico, Brazil and others such as Egypt perhaps. The world has a chance at stability but I actually think countries like Germany just won’t step up and it will be a lost opportunity. So we will endure wars for another 80 years until stronger convictions for world peace prevail.

[boobliker]

it would think so yes, but never in my lifetime.

[Jersey2]

It’s a shame the world won’t come together. In that case, the US should return to isolationism. Let Germany fend for themselves. We have enough to protect ourselves and can lower costs by downsizing in Europe. The world though would be better banding together but like I said countries like Germany are selfish.

[Siri137]

You're trolling, correct? :D

[Jersey2]

Not at all. It’s happening anyway whether formalized or not. Next week I believe Japan, Australia, South Korea and New Zealand will be at the NATO meeting like they did last year. NATO will likely open an office in Tokyo although that might take a little while more to iron out. As soon as the Ukraine war ends, Ukraine will join. Turkey will eventually let Sweden in.

Pay attention and you will learn more.

[Siri137]

No, I meant what you said about "protecting democratic countries and their freedom". That HAS to be a joke, surely. :D

[Siri137]

Ukraine will NEVER join NATO, because Russia will put a stop to that nonsense. What do you think the war there is all about? Who here hasn't been "paying attention"? You should, you'll learn more. :P

[Jersey2]

Putin will be dead soon enough. If he isn’t murdered he will die of his serious health issues. He cannot stop the war as it means the end of him personally. Once he is gone, it will end and a weakened Russia with a new leader will want out of the war as it is too much of a drain to keep going. So, the war will end with Putin’s death and then Ukraine will be free to join NATO.

[Siri137]

Dream on mister! Putin will be in office long after every other Western "leader" has been booted out. NATO and the EU will collapse, and good riddance to both!

[Jersey2]

Fantasyland. He is sick and that can’t be stopped. Deadman walking.