63 Republicans vote against resolution expressing support for NATO

[Tigerace117]

Well, they clearly don't support democracy.

I’m not quite sure how a military alliance is supposed to strengthen a country’s internal democratic institutions anyway. Turkey’s a perfect example of how that idea can go bad very, very quickly.

 

[Tbird19482]

It's perfectly okay to not want to support NATO. Personally, I think it should have disbanded long ago. We already have mutual defense pacts with many NATO member nations and it isn't as if NATO is particularly useful or doesn't approach situations that we've already come at via other avenues.

It is because of NATO that we have those defense pacts
and those defense pacts are a part of NATO
I am not for us pulling out of NATO because of what we pay in but we can't finance it all other countries that are in NATO have to pay what they agreed to,
NATO is a very important part of our defense system along with the other countries that belong to NATO
Have a nice night

 

[justoneman]

First off, How about all the countries that are still not paying their proper share of NATO be brought up to date, before any expansion of NATO? Does the USA have more money to throw at NATO? Of course not. Second, what the hell is anything about climate change doing in a NATO Bill?


Of course this shit needs to be rejected.


“Our commitment to shared democratic values is what distinguishes NATO from other military alliances,” said Rep. Connolly. “Without it, NATO is just another military block that does not like Russia. But this commitment cannot remain purely aspirational or rhetorical. It must be operationalized. This is why we believe that we need formal architecture in NATO itself. There are divisions and units within NATO dedicated to collective defense, terrorism, hybrid warfare, cyber, climate change, and all other security challenges. But after 72 years, there’s not even a broom closet in NATO headquarters dedicated to democratic institution building. This Center is long overdue. I want to thank my friend, Mike Turner, for his collaboration on this resolution, and I look forward to working with him further to pass it in the House.”

Turner and Connolly Introduce Resolution in Support of Establishing a NATO Center for Democratic Resilience

turner.house.gov

 

[jpn]

I’m not quite sure how a military alliance is supposed to strengthen a country’s internal democratic institutions anyway. Turkey’s a perfect example of how that idea can go bad very, very quickly.

I didn't suggest it was. It's a deterence to military aggression from without.

 

[dncc]

More than 60 Republicans [nearly a third of the Republican caucus] today voted against a resolution expressing support for NATO and calling on President Joe Biden to strengthen the organization's committement to defending democracy.​

​

Republicans who voted against Tuesday's resolution included most of Trump's most loyal defenders in Congress, among them: Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado; Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina; Matt Gaetz of Florida; Paul Gosar of Arizona; Marjorie Taylor-Greene of Georgia; and Jim Jordan of Ohio.​

​

The "House Republicans for Authoritarians" caucus.

Wasn't that long ago Republicans were personally kissing Putin's ass. Now they do it with their votes.

There are a lot of times when I think we're just fine as a country...then I see a story like this and I really start to wonder.

The commemoration of the 1/6 insurrection and police officer who was killed that the GOP boycotted was another. Shockingly anti-American....

 

[Tigerace117]

I didn't suggest it was. It's a deterence to military aggression from without.

Post 8 mentions a plan for NATO to try and strengthen countries’ democratic domestic institutions….which seems an odd role for a military alliance

 

[jpn]

First off, How about all the countries that are still not paying their proper share of NATO be brought up to date, before any expansion of NATO? Does the USA have ore money to throw at NATO? Of course not. Second, what the hell is anything about climate change doing in a NATO Bill?

That's easy. Climate change is going to seriously destabilize nations around the world as they try to deal with flooding, water shortages, shrinking coastlines forcing mass migrations, horrific weather events, plagues, and so on, all cause or worsened by climate change.

That's why the US military considers climate change to be a primary national security threat.

 

[justoneman]

That's easy. Climate change is going to seriously destabilize nations around the world as they try to deal with flooding, water shortages, shrinking coastlines forcing mass migrations, horrific weather events, plagues, and so on, all cause or worsened by climate change.

That's why the US military considers climate change to be a primary national security threat.

Its bull shit.

 

[jpn]

Its bull shit.

Justoneman, as eloquent as always.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

As I said on the other thread, isolationism is stupid, but declaring it “treasonous” is equally stupid. America is diving headlong back into McCarthyism.

No, we’re not. McCarthy was a hero and a patriot who tried to expose the tendrils of foreign ideology in our country.

The current people condemning the right are the people who’s intellectual ancestors should’ve been purged by McCarthy

 

[EMNofSeattle]

More than 60 Republicans [nearly a third of the Republican caucus] today voted against a resolution expressing support for NATO and calling on President Joe Biden to strengthen the organization's committement to defending democracy.​

​

Republicans who voted against Tuesday's resolution included most of Trump's most loyal defenders in Congress, among them: Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado; Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina; Matt Gaetz of Florida; Paul Gosar of Arizona; Marjorie Taylor-Greene of Georgia; and Jim Jordan of Ohio.​

​

The "House Republicans for Authoritarians" caucus.

Wasn't that long ago Republicans were personally kissing Putin's ass. Now they do it with their votes.

Good, we don’t need to be involved in Europe’s affairs and I’m happy to see a cadre of Republicans now in office who support pulling back the GAE

 

[upsideguy]

Again, there’s nothing inherently “treasonous” about isolationism. Yeah, it’s not a workable ideology, but America has had isolationists for as long as there’s been an America. To declare people “traitorous” for subscribing to it is not a good thing.

Agreed. But you are giving these people far too much credit. Most of those people have no coherent political philosophy except the unabashe d adulation of Donald Trump. None of the people on that list have any real thought out political philosophy. If I am wrong, then show me a couple of links the show that any of these people are true isolationists (as in they can articulate why one should be an isolationist).... but, I am not wrong.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I’m not quite sure how a military alliance is supposed to strengthen a country’s internal democratic institutions anyway. Turkey’s a perfect example of how that idea can go bad very, very quickly.

Well what Turkey is an example of was a secular authoritarian country that strictly oppressed the muslim majority, then when a leader was democratically elected and began pulling back outrageous laws like the banning of women’s head scarves then treasonous elements in the military attempted to overthrow said president and they went out murdering Turkish civilians who took to the streets to support their valid government.

It may be true Turkey is going Authoritarian the other way, but that’s what happens when violent overthrow of regimes occurs. Since you love to talk about Chile all the time, do you think Chile would’ve transformed into a vibrant open democracy if Allende defeated the coup? Or do you think with the help of Cuban intelligence that they would’ve purged the entire military,congressional, and judicial structures? You know full well what the answer is.

 

[highroller]

Again, there’s nothing inherently “treasonous” about isolationism. Yeah, it’s not a workable ideology, but America has had isolationists for as long as there’s been an America. To declare people “traitorous” for subscribing to it is not a good thing.

That’s why I said “potential”

Please pay attention

 

[jpn]

The objection was likely to the proposed expansion of NATO into new political missions. It seems very odd that the OP linked article contained absolutely no comments from those who *gasp* voted against the measure. International interference with the ‘democratic institutions’ within NATO member nations (e.g. the USA) should not become a NATO mission.

Interesting opinion. Not one I share.

Liberal democracies (definition here) tend not to wage war on other liberal democracies (there are exceptions, but as a general rule it holds pretty well). Therefore supporting liberal democracy within the alliance makes good sense. Watching Turkey, Hungary, and Poland going down the authoritatian path (egged on by Trump, Tucker, and company) has been hugely concerning.

The fact that many of the same Republicans who supported Trump's coup attempt can't support NATO and liberal democracy at this moment speaks volumes.

It's not that they aren't standing up for their principles--like bloody authoritarianism--it's just that their principles SUCK.

 

[Dayton3]

Those GQP'ers hate democracy and love Putin.

No. Most of the GOPers that so voted were motivated by their loathing of "wokism" and what they see as the LGBT agenda.

 

[justoneman]

Agreed. But you are giving these people far too much credit. Most of those people have no coherent political philosophy except the unabashe d adulation of Donald Trump.

No. We do not want to send billions more to NATO for Climate Change and for "Strengthening Democracies". NATO is supposed to be for defense of NATO nations not for affecting climate change and whatever else strengthening democracies means. If Germany and France want to spend billions of dollars of their own on this political stuff, then they should have at it.

 

[jpn]

Again, there’s nothing inherently “treasonous” about isolationism. Yeah, it’s not a workable ideology, but America has had isolationists for as long as there’s been an America. To declare people “traitorous” for subscribing to it is not a good thing.

True. How do you feel about trying to overturn a free and fair election? Is that "traitorous"? Just trying to guage where you're coming from here...

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The objection was likely to the proposed expansion of NATO into new political missions. It seems very odd that the OP linked article contained absolutely no comments from those who *gasp* voted against the measure. International interference with the ‘democratic institutions’ within NATO member nations (e.g. the USA) should not become a NATO mission.

It also advocates the creation of a "Center for Democratic Resilience" within NATO's headquarters in Brussels, with the center providing member states assistance to strengthen their own democratic institutions.

Turner and Connolly Introduce Resolution in Support of Establishing a NATO Center for Democratic Resilience

turner.house.gov

WELCOME - The Case for a Centre for Democratic Resilience in NATO

nato-pa.foleon.com

[Original material that was deleted re-inserted]

Heaven forbid that any nation should "strengthen their own democratic process". Why if the idea catches on someone in the US might think about doing it in America.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Interesting opinion. Not one I share.

Liberal democracies (definition here) tend not to wage war on other liberal democracies (there are exceptions, but as a general rule it holds pretty well).

What you mean is, different colonies of the GAE don’t declare war on each other.

Therefore supporting liberal democracy within the alliance makes good sense.

No, it doesn’t. You mean supporting compliant pro-American regimes. It’s like in Turkey, where the Muslim majority was strictly oppressed by a secular elite to the point where devout Muslim women either had to renounce Islam or forgo education. When Erdogan tried to change some of these extreme policies, elements within the military egged on by western secularists tried to overthrow him and when the people took to the streets to defend their lawful government they were shot down.

Watching Turkey, Hungary, and Poland going down the authoritatian path (egged on by Trump, Tucker, and company) has been hugely concerning.

Turkey may be authoritarian, but a failed coup will do that. Poland and Hungary are not authoritarian by any stretch

The fact that many of the same Republicans who supported Trump's coup attempt can't support NATO and liberal democracy at this moment speaks volumes.

It's not that they aren't standing up for their principles--like bloody authoritarianism--it's just that their principles SUCK.

America is far more authoritarian now then the GOP ever wanted to make it.

 

[iguanaman]

As I said on the other thread, isolationism is stupid, but declaring it “treasonous” is equally stupid. America is diving headlong back into McCarthyism.

It is time to choose sides so we know where we stand. We are not heading anywhere now. The fascists are still in a minority but they are growing and our democracy is under attack. That is what that vote showed. BTW it is treason to plot against our Constitution no matter what the founders might have said. We can have treason from within without any war being declared.

 

[jpn]

No. Most of the GOPers that so voted were motivated by their loathing of "wokism" and what they see as the LGBT agenda.

All right! The far-right propaganda machine makes its appearance! Where ya been, boy?

That's right! Liberals like me are all obsessed with "grooming" children to be queer and to hate themselves for being white!!! I mean, it's not like teachers have better things to do, amirite?

Keep telling people that! Some actually believe it! Sure worked for Orban this Sunday!

Next on our agenda: Imprison anyone who dares say "Merry Christmas!" Because we just hate that! See? Fox News never lies!!!

 

[MaryP]

No. Most of the GOPers that so voted were motivated by their loathing of "wokism" and what they see as the LGBT agenda.

That's in the resolution?

 

[justoneman]

True. How do you feel about trying to overturn a free and fair election? Is that "traitorous"? Just trying to guage where you're coming from here...

Are you talking about the Steele dosier? Yes that traitorous coup attempt was really terrible.

 

[MaryP]

Well, I haven't been able to find a single one of these 63 explaining what their issue is. If anyone finds one, let me know.