Tech billionaire Elon Musk agreed on March 2 with a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, for the U.S. to exit NATO and the U.N.

“I agree,” he wrote in response to a post from a right-wing political commentator saying “it’s time” for the U.S. to leave NATO and the U.N.

The news comes after several Republican lawmakers submitted a bill on the U.S. exit from the U.N., claiming that the organization does not align with the Trump administration’s “America First” agenda.

The U.S. was among several countries, including Russia, Belarus, Israel, and Hungary, that voted against a U.N. resolution at the end of February condemning Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Both NATO and the U.N. were founded by the U.S. and other victors of World War II to promote diplomacy and cooperation between nations as well as to prevent another global war.

Musk, an unelected official, currently heads the so-called U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, which has cut significant amounts of government spending, including life-saving foreign aid.

U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized fellow NATO countries for their perceived lack of contributions to the military alliance and has called for a spending target of 5% of GDP for all members.

Kyiv sees NATO membership as a crucial safeguard against future Russian aggression, but Trump said in February that Ukraine “can forget” about joining the alliance, suggesting its bid was a trigger for the war—an argument echoed by Russian state propaganda.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 hours ago

    The US intentionally leaving the organizations they have domination over as a means to exert soft power globally would certainly be good for weakening the US Empire. This seems like a case where the architects of Empire failed to raise successors and as such the ones with the reigns are now “true believers” in the architects’ web of lies.

  • Mark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Perfect, I’d rather they step away and let us remake it into a n EU group.

    Leaving the US inside the NATO still gives them veto rights.

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    13 hours ago

    If the US leaves the United Nations, does that mean they lose their security council veto power even if they somehow rejoin later?

    Seems like something the other former global superpower, Russia, would be very happy to see happen.

    I fail to see how this advances America’s interests whatsoever. Republicans are huffing glue again.

    • gressen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      8 hours ago

      That’s a similar case to UK leaving the EU. They had a lot of provisions just for them - tax exempts etc. If UK decides to rejoin they will have to renegotiate the terms and EU will not want to grant them the same relief as they had in the past.

  • VodkaSolution @feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    (talking about governors) “I prefer the bad ones over the dumb ones, because the bad sometimes rest” cit.

  • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Nato is the only reason we European country bought those ultra expensive F35 paying billions to purchase and operate them.

  • Geobloke@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Leaving NATO would cost the US over $100 billion in arms sales annually, so they won’t do it. But to have and eat their cake they just don’t need to honour article 5

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Idk, Trump already tried it at the end of his last term. These people don’t have the USA’s best interests in mind.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      14 hours ago

      To be perfectly honest they should probably kick the US out of it

    • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Russia magically inherited the USSR’s security council seat even though they are not the USSR. When the US collapses, which part gets their old seat? (I vote we give it to Canada personally)

      • jaxxed@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        It was a good idea to give Russia a seat to balance power. There probably should not be any vetos.

      • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Russia was always Russia. It was the seat of the USSR so it just stayed with Russia. If the US withdraws it gives up its seat. Canada would happily accept a permanent seat on the Security Council with veto.

    • WarlockoftheWoods@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Good. It’s faaaar past time america stops policing the world and having a seat at the big kids table, trump is a child. I do however think it’s far past time Europe polices Europe, no one will ever take over the US so we have no need for the UN. We don’t need to pay for all those other countries defenses or be involved in theor policies. Let them sort it out.

  • Srh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    138
    ·
    1 day ago

    Leaving the UN would mean giving up US veto power. This would be one of the stupidest decisions of all time. No wonder Elon wants to do it.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        For making an argument to appeal to musk, that’s besides the point. In fact because the veto power being used for bad it is probably is a more appealing point

      • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Maybe they used it to object to serving English food for lunch once. That’s probably the only time it’d be justified

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          I don’t know if the EU/NATO can actually exist without US backing; those are fundamentally US projects created to serve US interests (not that the dumbass Trump regime understands this), without the US they’ll enter crisis.

          The last time Trump was President we had Brexit. How long until another Euro skeptic government forms? Germany saw AfD achieve its best result in the history of the party, and it’s only a month into Trump’s term.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Another way to phrase this: In the absence of US hegemony, the endless wars inflicted on the Global South will finally come home to the imperial core. Millions can be slaughtered all over the world and it’s not world war, it’s only “world war” when it happens to white people.

              The chickens are coming home to roost.

              • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Not really. Oppression and civil unrest will come home, car bombs and Troubles style. Nuclear armaments preclude other things.

                But if the US goes and the EU does not step in, the era of soft power global diplomacy is over. People like Musk will take over the reins and we will have colonialism like never before.

                We already see what a power with unchecked power can do in Gaza. Imagine the US doing that, just to the whole of Latin America.

                The only people who will face your “just retribution” is the working class everywhere, but as an ML, you must be symphatising with them. Do you?

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  What even is soft power? Sanctions are siege warfare by other means, intended to inflict suffering in the population to destabilize the country. Meddling by USAID, World Bank, and the IMF are intended to subvert democratic power and prop up dictatorships and ensure continued underdevelopment for maximum exploitation and the generation of superprofits. Meanwhile, covert action by the State Department and intelligence apparatus leads to endless regime changes and coups and civil wars and mass slaughter.

                  “Soft power” is a myth. It only looks soft because it doesn’t involve US troops directly fighting and dying for the empire. Furthermore, colonialism was defeated by anticolonial resistance, not US soft power. Neocolonialism, too, will be defeated by resistance. Israel failed to defeat Hamas, and when the US does Operation Condor 2 and Monroe Doctrine 2 it will fail as well.

                  Have some revolutionary optimism. Stop being a doomer.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Mostly it’s just the USA vetoing anything including the word Palestine, except for this one time in March last year China vetoed something including the word Palestine so the USA didn’t even get the chance. Here’s a list of Vetoes with links to the documents HERE

        warning: some of them can be a little doom-foreboding so maybe don’t read it if you enjoy your sanity

        Given the only UN Vetoes since 1989 were from USA, Russia, or China they haven’t been used for much good in general, but there was this one time in January 1990 that they vetoed a denouncement by Nicaragua over the US invasion of Panama following the military general’s takeover and abuse of power to deal in drugs and human trafficking.

        Although there is the nuance that he, General Manuel Noriega, and other militant factions had ties to US Intelligence before that.

        Although there is the nuance that he murdered those other factions upon taking power.

        Although there is the nuance that he and others also had ties to multiple other intelligence agencies around the world.

        Although there is the nuance that the only reason Nicaragua had anything to do with any of this is that the USA ended up moving troops through the Nicaraguan Embassy in Panama and beating up Nicaraguan Envoys who tried to stop them.

        Although there is the nuance that the heavily armed US Troops in an active war zone showed great restraint in not seriously wounding or killing any of the men during the brawl.

        Although there is the nuance that the US Troops supposedly stole a bunch of stuff while they were there.

        Although there is the nuance that throughout all of this, the Nicaraguan envoy Ferrey spoke very favorably of Panama’s then brutal, newly formed, militarty dictatorship who, as I mentioned before, ran a lot of drugs and human trafficking operations. The military were probably searching for somebody that they didn’t find, assuming the Nicaraguan’s to be co-conspirators.

        Fun fact, the document LINK HERE still lists the full name of the USSR in 1990 lol.

      • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        66
        ·
        1 day ago

        The poor kid didn’t do nothing you know… Let’s not start hating a four year-old because of his terrible father.

          • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            47
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I know. But I’m always uncomfortable when I read that “meat shield” thing. He’s too young to be included in any discussion or remark regarding his father. When he’s older, if he turns out to be a shithead too, there’s plenty of opportunities to bash on him too. But for now, I think he should be left out entirely, for the sake of giving him a chance not to become a shithead.

            Same reason why I happily bash on Don Jr. and Eric but never on Barron Trump.

            • BillDaCatt@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              76
              ·
              1 day ago

              I get what you are saying, The kid is not the problem though. Describing the child as a “meat shield” is not a dig against the kid. It’s about what Elon Musk, the child’s father, is doing to him. Elon Musk is wearing his own son over his head to keep from getting shot when he goes outside. He is using his own child as a human shield. Elon Musk has turned his own flesh and blood into a meat shield!

              • Maeve@kbin.earth
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                18
                ·
                23 hours ago

                It’s extremely abusive behavior. If he cared about his children he would post child support and be around with them doing wholesome, life-affirming things.

            • CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              57
              ·
              1 day ago

              That doesn’t change the fact his father is using him as an anti-assassination accessory. It’s in no way criticizing the kid, but calling out his father’s abhorrent behavior. In fact we should call it out because maybe it will shame Musk into stopping (of course it won’t).

              • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                23
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                That doesn’t change the fact his father is using him as an anti-assassination accessory.

                Do we even know that for sure though?

                I always thought the “meat shield” thing was a tasteless joke that someone came up with when the Herr Musk brought the kid to the Oval Office and turned the White House into a fucking daycare center. As far as I know, it’s not like Musk brings the kid everywhere he goes: he’s got his deputized SS goons to protect him.

            • CobblerScholar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              28
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              First off A man is using his child as a prospective bullet sponge because he knows his behavior has made people want to kill him and you want to leave that out of the discussion? The kid isn’t the one doing one of the worst things a human can do

              • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                19
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                First off A man is using his child as a prospective bullet sponge

                Honest question: how did you come to that definitive conclusion?

                What I saw was Musk putting his son on his shoulders. My dad used to do that with me, and plenty of dads do that with their children, and they don’t use them as bulletproof vests. Did you deduce this is what Musk was doing because he’s so obviously a psychopath, or did you see something physically different from what other dads do in his handling of his son?

                I’m not trying to stir up controverse. I can well believe Musk did use his son to protect himself, knowing what a terrible man he is. It’s just that I really didn’t see anything out of the ordinary when he put his son on his shoulders - aside from the fact that doing that in the White House was inappropriate. So I’m genuinely curious to know how everybody has come to that conclusion.

                • overload@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  11
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  20 hours ago

                  It’s unprofessional to be carrying the kid everywhere, potentially into meetings where state secrets are discussed. Certainly a lot of what’s happening is unprecedented, but the kid is just such an odd prop to have around, coupled with that Elon doesn’t otherwise seem to care about parading his children before now, that it leads to the conclusion that it is either a stunt or as protection.

                • Sanguine@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  23
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Fair enough. Its within the realm of what could be considered normal father behavior… However, go look for photos of Elon out in public pre and post Luigi.

                  Report back what you find.

        • reiterationstation@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 day ago

          14ish years from now “will no one rid us of this damn billionaire’s kid?!”

          When you plant shit seeds you get…

          • cybersin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            You are criticizing the child of a fascist for the actions of his father, and using fascist rhetoric to do so.

            Disgusting.

          • Maeve@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Reproduction of the physical is not the issue. Reproduction of abhorrent ideals is, though.

          • meeeeetch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            23 hours ago

            It’s well documented that he’s estranged from one of his kids. And it’s not like his behavior has gotten better over time.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      No please wait until after the US left those groups. They have been blocking so much important stuff for decades, i cant wait for the UN to get rid of the US. Then you can guillotine him.