141
49

Instead of everyone leaving NATO, could everyone else just kick the US out?

8h 40m ago by lemmy.world/u/RyanDownyJr in nostupidquestions

Question in title. Just wondering as I saw France had proposed an initiative to withdraw because of the US' shenanigans....

as far as i understand it, nato does not have any democratic principles in its rules because was assumed that everyone in it wants the same thing, so everything needs to be done with full agreement. that's why sweden and finland were blocked from entering for multiple years, turkiye would not allow them in.

so basically, as long as the us wants to be in nato, it will be in nato. better to scrap it and start again. i propose the name na2.

i propose the name na2.

Clever, but I don't see why it should be limited to North Atlantic countries.
If for instance Australia and South Korea want to join, that should be an option.

doesn't necessarily need to be short for North Atlantic, could be Not America's no. 2

I think we should go with GDI, Global Defence Initiative

Meanwhile US creates the GWI

2na2to

Now Excluding America Treaty Organization (NEATO)

Neat.

Neat!

They want it to survive and outlast Trump. Kicking out the US is Putin's wet dream.

Russia can't even handle Ukraine. What are they going to do against the rest of NATO, even without the US?

They aren't going to invade the UK, but they want them out of the EU. You sabotage your enemy as much as possible, even if you're not going to war immediately. Sun Tzu stuff, when your enemy is larger than you, divide them. Take down the strongest military alliance (or cut in half if you want) in history thats been in place for 70 years, yeah that's a huge massive jizz in your pants accomplisment. Your entire framing is frankly wrong,

When the US briefly revoked command and control (think, satellite connections, real time intelligence, missile warning etc) Ukraine suffered heavy casualties quickly. Were thr US to walk away, neither Ukraine or NATO has those same capabilities. NATO minus US vs Russia, in the immediate future would be incredibly bloody and possibly fall in Russia's favour.

Break it up using his puppet in the white house.

They way I see it, USA can't be kicked out but it can leave.

That said I don't see a problem in making a new NATO, without the US and (hopefully) without veto rights

Part of the problem of creating a non-American NATO is that the USA provides a ton of capabilities and logistics that other countries can't possibly afford.

It is the reason why there has been a push to create an EU military instead.

To my understanding no, not unless they break the rules. (Trump breaking rules is as common as oxygen so who knows)

There is no provision and formal mechanism to expel a member state

Just leave NATO and have a secret one without telling us at all.

All we would see is things like "the leaders of such and such had a meeting Wednesday at whatever place"

With blackjacks and ....!

That wouldn't solve the immediate problem, which is adversarial officers being infiltrated at all levels of our defense structures. NATO is much more than government meetings, it has permanent structures that serve as the foundation of European security. If our leaders were not complete idiots there would be a second foundation built around the EU, but the Common Security and Defence Policy is nowhere near ready to replace NATO yet.

You-know-who invited us to secret wink-wink at the you-know-what.

I don’t know how useful NATO is without the USA. The EU, for instance, also has a mutual defense clause.

Cries in Canadian

Edit: I meant to find a more recent article: Canada clinches deal to join Europe’s €150B defense scheme Dec. 1, 2025

Canada has reached a final agreement to join the EU’s €150 billion Security Action for Europe program, two EU diplomats told POLITICO, marking the first time a third country will formally participate in the bloc’s flagship joint procurement initiative.

The agreement was later confirmed by the European Commission.

"This is the next step in our deepening cooperation and symbolic of the shared priorities of the European Union and Canada," it said in a joint statement with Canada.

The breakthrough follows months of technically complex negotiations and was communicated directly to ministers taking part in Monday's Foreign Affairs Council; Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius informed delegations that negotiations with Ottawa had concluded.

Canada’s accession to the loan-for-weapons SAFE scheme gives Ottawa access to jointly financed defense projects and allows Canadian companies to bid into EU-supported joint procurement projects. For Brussels, securing a G7 partner strengthens the credibility of SAFE as it seeks to coordinate long-term weapons demand and ramp up Europe’s defense industrial base.

Under SAFE, third countries can account for a maximum of 35 percent of the value of a weapons system paid for by the scheme; Canada will be able to have a larger share but it will have to pay a fee “commensurate with the benefits the Partner Country and its entities are expected to derive,” factoring in GDP, industrial competitiveness and the depth of cooperation with European manufacturers.

Other issues tackled in negotiations covered conditions on intellectual property control and limits on non-EU inputs for sensitive systems including drones, missile-defense assets and strategic enablers.


We're doing what we can: Canada signs deal deepening European defence and security partnership

Canada and Europe were drawn a little closer together on [June 23rd, 2025] after Prime Minister Mark Carney signed a strategic defence and security partnership with the European Union.

The agreement opens the door for Canadian companies to participate in the $1.25-trillion ReArm Europe program, which is seen as a step toward making Canada less reliant on — and less vulnerable to — the whims of the United States.

Eventually, it will also help the Canadian government partner with other allied nations to buy military equipment under what's known as the SAFE program.

I am sure you can be invited if we all drop NATO.

It's one of those symbolic initiatives. There may be an official mechanism but right now, it would be a disaster without NATO. Right now, the US has most of the Command and Control logistics (think constant satellite connection, missiled detection systems etc.) That stuff is super expensive and the assumption was that America was an ally, so not a lot of duplication was built in.

A NATO without the US dooms Ukraine and presumably, whatever hits of Eastern Europe Putin feels like holding.

It's shitty, frustrating and awful but it's also the grim, current reality. We didn't realize our allies would become two bit thugs.

I saw France had proposed an initiative to withdraw because of the US’ shenanigans…

Where?

France is leading NATO air and ground troops this year, and I didn't see anything about France leaving NATO when I just checked.

French Lawmaker Files NATO Withdrawal Bid Over Greenland

https://ground.news/article/french-lawmaker-files-nato-withdrawal-bid-over-greenland_0a19a5

Clémence Guetté, Vice President of France's National Assembly, submitted a parliamentary resolution calling for France to withdraw from NATO's integrated command structure, citing President Trump's threats to seize Greenland from NATO ally Denmark as evidence the US-led alliance threatens world peace.

So one politician from France submitted a resolution in the French government to do it.

And you...

You honestly and legitimately think that is the same thing as:

I saw France had proposed an initiative to withdraw because of the US’ shenanigans

Like, you didn't just go and try to find a source but didn't read it. You just don't understand how what that says and what you said are vastly different things?

I understand words matter so maybe I used too forceful of words describing what they (or this one person) is doing. Sure, not all of France is pushing it, but the stone is starting to move down hill I guess.

shenanigans

Our shenanigans are cheeky and fun

US will leave NATO.

Destabilizing the world is so much better when America isn’t involved 🥰🥰

What we need is to concentrate power into the hands of a single benevolent ruler with absolute authority. I suggest Winnie the Pooh.

Or you know maybe we should abolish this bad institution.

NATO should be dissolved, it's an old relic of us imperialism that has no place in society

yes. as a geniune western citizen typing with my western democratic hands, i also support dissolution of nato.

Not everyone outflanking you to the left is a Russian agent.

Arrogant liberals always assume they are immune to propaganda. Here you are supporting US imperialism and hegemony, the same things they accuse other nations of doing.

no, i am just being sarcastic towards stupid commies.

Arrogant clanker-adjacents feigning emotion when their propaganda is called out.

The most downvoted and most upvoted comments, both say the same thing.
People are werid.

Because the most upvoted one thinks NATO is a good thing, but since one unreliable country cannot be kicked out, it should be replaced with another alliance with slight changes. This comment just says NATO BAD.

NATO is bad tho, because it allows the US to draw other countries into our imperialist wars and allows its members to threaten non-members with reletive impunity.

To quote Blinken "If you're not at the table, you're on the menu". A NATO without America could be benign tho.

I wouldn't say it's that bad. NATO is only defensive, so other members have no obligation to join US wars. I admit, NATO conditions can be used to pressure members, but since everyone is hating attack on Iran or Venezuela, the influence isn't that big. And sometimes the members fight even against each other in proxy wars, for example US vs Turkey in Syria.

GoddlessCommie's take is valid.

Nato is the core organizing instrument of western imperialism. Nato is like Israel's Iron Dome missile defense shield. It's easy to look at it and say, 'Well how could anyone object to a tool of defense??' But if you know anything about war then you know that establishing an unbreakable defensive capability is what allows an imperial army to slaughter their weaker targets with impunity.

I'm not co-signing GodlessCommie's point. But we gotta ask: did you like Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan? Korea? Venezuela? Nicaragua? Georgia? Libya? Ukraine? Gaza? Because arguably, all of this shit rests upon the conditions established by NATO and US imperialism. So... It's not unreasonable to ask whether NATO has actually fostered peace or just fostered peace for the people who wage wars.

Could you explain exactly how NATO and US imperialism led to Russia invading Ukraine?

I wrote a long answer and then accidentally hit the back button and don't have the patience to retype it.

The short version is that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the invasion of Ukraine. I don't want any confusion about that.

NATO's influence was that the US has been advancing against Russia for decades even after their country collapsed, and it was obviously nakedly escalatory. Combined with the US is overall foreign policy, which has always been imperial, we've acted as though putting a gun to someone's head and telling them to stay cool was an actual way of calming things rather than the exact opposite.

I'm not saying that a version of NATO couldn't have done what it claims to do. But that's never been the version that has existed.