Politics

10176 readers

200 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

circularfish@beehaw.org

knokelmaat@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

112

Marjorie Taylor Greene introduces amendment directing Biden to withdraw from Nato (www.independent.co.uk)

submitted 1 year ago by trashhalo@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would direct President Biden to withdraw the U.S. from NATO. She argues that European countries are not reliable partners and are not paying their fair share of NATO obligations, while the U.S. pays around 4% of its GDP to defend NATO countries. Greene claims that European countries could and should pay more to ensure NATO security instead of relying on U.S. taxpayers. She introduced the amendment on the same day that President Biden expressed the U.S.'s "ironclad commitment" to NATO at a NATO summit in Lithuania, where NATO leaders also declared that Ukraine's future is in NATO

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HQC@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So weird to suggest leaving NATO as the solution to other participants allegedly not contributing their fair share. I guess this is one of those "take the ball and go home" compromises I've heard about?

[–] mnrockclimber@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

This whole "paying their fair share" is sort of a red herring too. I remember when Trump was talking about this and saying NATO was ripping us off. That's not how this works. In 2014 NATO countries agreed to spend 2% of their budget on defense. This was so the countries would have a military deterrence and wouldn't just be relying on the USA on other countries to step in if they got in trouble.

If the other countries don't spend that much, no one is "owed" any money. No one got ripped off. The USA didn't suddenly incur a bill or spend money to make up that shortfall. Those countries simply don't have as large of a defense program as NATO would like.