I propose the name that @DaddleDew@lemmy.world proposed
Now Excluding America Treaty Organization (NEATO)
A new NATO with blackjack and hookers
Comment on Instead of everyone leaving NATO, could everyone else just kick the US out?
lime@feddit.nu 1 day ago
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.
thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 hours ago
Typhoon@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Keep the name and call it NATO: Nations Against Trump Organization
Klear@quokk.au 1 day ago
2na2to
Zombie@feddit.uk 1 day ago
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.
Consensus decision-making is a group decision-making process in which participants work together to develop proposals for actions that achieve a broad acceptance. Consensus is reached when everyone in the group assents to a decision (or almost everyone; see stand aside) even if some do not fully agree to or support all aspects of it. It differs from simple unanimity, which requires all participants to support a decision. Consensus decision-making in a democracy is consensus democracy.[1]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making
Consensus is far more democratic than majority rule, which is the norm in most Western democracies.
lime@feddit.nu 20 hours ago
only if all actors are working in good faith.
Strider@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
How about nay2? Thst way, when it comes to the unavoidable acoustical misunderstandings, it’s also the answer to what’s talked about.
Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 day ago
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.
Damage@feddit.it 1 day ago
I think we should go with GDI, Global Defence Initiative
UniversalBasicJustice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Meanwhile US creates the GWI
Damage@feddit.it 20 hours ago
You mean the Brotherhood of Nod
lime@feddit.nu 1 day ago
doesn’t necessarily need to be short for North Atlantic, could be Not America’s no. 2
PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
Eurovision 2
Cowbee_Admirer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
What if China wants to join? Or Russia? What would be the policy?
14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
the policy shoud be “this is union of democratic countries”
Cowbee_Admirer@reddthat.com 1 day ago
And who decides which countries are democratic and which are not?
Buffalox@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
The standard for NATO has always been to only accept democracies.
I see no reason why we would change that requirement for a new alliance.
I’d even go so far as to make respect of human rights a demand too like we have in EU, so we for instance exclude countries with death penalty.
There needs to be common values that we want to protect, with NATO it was democracy, based on our experience with USA, we need to extend that to include respect for international law and human rights as well as protecting democracy.
frisbird@lemmy.ml 8 hours ago
LOL, how silly.
Russia and China are democracies - they have systems of voting, candidates, politicians fall in and out of favor with the public, etc. In fact, China is innovating on how to get MORE participatory systems into their Republic that aren’t limited to gerrymandered popularity tests.
But human rights? You’re joking, right? Guantanamo Bay. Extraordinary rendition. Abu Ghraib. Vietnam. Cambodia. Laos. Guam. School of the Americas. Iran-Contra. Overthrowing the Shah. Operation Paperclip. Operation Gladio. CIA black sites. Drone striking weddings. Drone striking funerals for people who died at those weddings. Zero Units. Napalm. Agent Orange. Land mines. Somalia. Libya. Iraq. Afghanistan. Kidnapping a head of state. Double tapping fishermen. Spying on all communications of their own citizens. The Five Eyes spying on each other’s citizens and trading the intel back to each other.
You think respect for human rights is required for NATO membership? Do you know what NATO has even done?
Cowbee_Admirer@reddthat.com 17 hours ago
As defined by whom exactly? Chinese citizens will tell you that they’re in a democracy and very satisfied with it, much more so than Spaniards for example (my homeland)
EU is literally funding the genocide of Palestinians with 0 economic or political sanctions to Israel coming from governments. By that logic, all of EU deserves out of NATO immediately. NATO also triggered the Libyan civil war through bombing, bombed Yugoslavia, and many NATO countries directly participated in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.