this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2026
316 points (97.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

45323 readers
784 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 day ago

We don't need to kick out the USA. We should obviously not be sharing Intel any longer but the proof will ultimately be in the pudding. If the USA attacks a NATO ally, NATO rallies to their defence as per article V and the USA is no longer involved.

If anyone else attacks a NATO ally and the USA refuse to abide by article V (despite being the only previous ones to invoke it, dragging many of its (formerly) closest allies into a 2 decade quagmire, then they are no longer in NATO.

If nothing happens and the USA does nothing, we remain in this dog shit status quo

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 216 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Now Excluding America Treaty Organization (NEATO)

[–] MissJinx@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

America looks like that kind of parent that says "you don't need anyone, you have daddy. Everyone else is just jealous of how amazing you are". The problem is that those kids grow up alone and end up depressed and with relationship problems.
I really hope america declaring war to the whole world does not end up being the end of humanity

[–] _Nico198X_@europe.pub 25 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] dukatos@lemmy.zip 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I think this gets discussed in the context of the European Union whenever Poland or Hungary uses their veto power to block something important. Basically, the idea is to start "EU 2" and then not invite the offending countries. Then say that EU 2 replaces EU 1 and refuse to let anyone else tell you otherwise.

[–] _Nico198X_@europe.pub 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

yeah, i think ppl just need to remember: everything about society is made up. these things aren't handed down by God. they are not eternal.

they were made by man, and they can be replaced. all we lack is the will to do so.

[–] TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To be fair, while this is technically true, NATO also has like, staff and infrastructure and shit

load more comments (1 replies)

s/Poland/Slovakia/

[–] lime@feddit.nu 139 points 2 days ago (7 children)

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 that @DaddleDew@lemmy.world proposed

Now Excluding America Treaty Organization (NEATO)

A new NATO with blackjack and hookers

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago (21 children)

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.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think we should go with GDI, Global Defence Initiative

[–] UniversalBasicJustice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Meanwhile US creates the GWI

[–] Damage@feddit.it 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You mean the Brotherhood of Nod

[–] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Eurovision 2

[–] lime@feddit.nu 17 points 2 days ago

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

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago

Keep the name and call it NATO: Nations Against Trump Organization

[–] Klear@quokk.au 15 points 2 days ago
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] favoredponcho@lemmy.zip 22 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The US has access to all of the systems. From a security standpoint they would want to build a new organization.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

And then they will use US made systems. But the vendors will locate some computers in Europe, so it's totally sovereign.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

And we will not take being fired well.

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 56 points 2 days ago

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

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 55 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago (11 children)

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

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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,

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wouldn't be NATO then, it would be EATO

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 16 points 1 day ago

Canada is still in it, Don't get much more "North Atlantic" then that.

[–] ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

The sacred no homers

[–] redlemace@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago

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

load more comments
view more: next ›