The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is an intergovernmental military alliance formed by 28 countries in 1949 after the Second World War. To join NATO each member country pledged to spend at least 2% of their GDP on military spending and defense and defend each other against threats from any non-member country. In a July 2016 interview with the New York Times Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump suggested that the United States would not defend NATO member countries who had failed to increase their military budgets to above 2% of Gross Domestic Product. The suggestion defies a pact made by NATO members when it was formed in WWII that they would defend each other against any attack by a non-member nation. France, Turkey, Germany, Canada, and Italy are countries that are currently spending less than 2% of their GDP on military defense.
No, but add a clause that ensures a "tax" or reparation is made to the US from those countries that need defending (and under 2%) should they need the US military for defense or aid.
"Defending" each other is how wars are started. Hell no.
No country deserves a free ride. Each country has a reasonable responsibility to defend and protect its citizens. But failure of a government to reasonably defend and protect its citizens doesn't absolve other countries from a moral responsibility to protect and preserve life to the best of their ability.
Yes, upon the condition that a lien (of sorts...) is placed on that country, resulting in a gained equitable interest to the People of the U.S. Maybe even going to so far as being a fund of mutual benefit, to the US and the country being protected. This could be practical if that country is better off spending their own budget on something which would bring more benefit to that country, thereby increasing a potential return to the US. Especially since the US has so much invested in its military already.
We should not be expected to fund countries who prosper but do not fund their own defense -- why should we bear the cost when they can afford to do so?
Yes, but only if the country in question is under immediate threat
No, if they spend less than 2% of their GDP they should be removed from NATO.
Yes, but I think there should be a military budget standard that member states must adhere to.
Yes, but we should also encourage better defense planning and infrastructure from these countries
Yes, but only when they are under attack.
So long as they aren't state sponsors of terror i.e. Erdogans Turkey.
Yes but demand they pay their fair share
This does not affect me
I think we should defend the only if they desperestly need it.
We should form a new organization that succeeds NATO with all of its agreements with the added caveat that the countries in question increase their own military spending so that the united states wouldn't have to invest itself as much as it does comparative to the nations in NATO
No, the United states should decrease all military spending
Yes, but reduce US funding to the level of the other nations.
Yes, but strongly encourage minimum spending requirements through incentive programs
It depends on the circumstances, if a region wants to join another country I think they should join. If a NATO country attacks another country with no reason, we shouldn't help.
Depends on the scenario.
you've officially got me confused.
Yes, but our aid should be proportional to their military spending
Yes, there are some countries we should defend, but maybe not all.
Yes, we should be defending NATO allies, regardless of anything.
Yes, but NATO should have percentages of GDP re-evaluated being that this was formed in WWII.
Yes, but restrict employment within NATO.
Yes, but incentivise them to spend more in their military
No, NATO itself should be doing that, not us.
No, we are not the police of the world and should get our own house in order.
@9SVJD4SRepublican10mos
If we make an agreement to defend one another, everyone should reasonably contribute to defense.
If we spent more money on our people and less on the military it wouldn’t be an issue. When I worked overseas I spoke with people from all countries about these issues. Basically the view in most countries is that they can spend more on social programs because the us spends so much on the military. They really don’t care much for us but, we’re tolerated because overall we improve the lives of other countries by saving them money.
Yes, but they must take on a percentage of the cost.
Yes, but with no boots on the ground.
No, if a NATO country is spending less than 2% of their GDP on military defense they have broken the agreement and we are not obligated to defend them.
yes if we are assisting, but need to stop trying to rebuild everyone else's land, focus on us.
Yes, but force members to spend 2% of GDP on military defense.
Yes but we should decrease active spending and be more reactionary
We should defend them but charge them. Somehow make them pay for us defending them.
Yes, but we should keep encouraging these countries to ramp up military spending for those who have not already.
Only when asked and if agreed upon by US Leaders.
Yes, for now. NATO should be disbanded.
Yes, but we shouldn’t use all of our resources on them because they aren’t willing to use their resources on themselves
Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea should be defended. we have no business defending Western european countries. they can fend for themselves, we owe them nothing.
Do not defund any country not contributing at least 2% but do not withdraw.
No, not until we decrease our national deficit.
Yes, as long as other countries in NATO are 'defending' the same amount
No, we should remain neutral but help with aid for those with low military defence budgets
Yes, as long as we are a part of NATO. But require member countries to pay their fair share to the organization.
Yes but defended countries should be indebted for the services rendered.
Yes, but we should charge them for such services if they aren't paying their agreed upon share.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
