55%
Yes
45%
No
44%
Yes
36%
No
11%
Yes, and refusing to defend other NATO countries sets a dangerous precedent for the balance of global power
6%
No, we should not defend any NATO country that spends less than 2% of their GDP on military defense
3%
No, and we should withdraw from NATO

Historical Results

See how support for each position on “NATO” has changed over time for 244k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

See how importance of “NATO” has changed over time for 244k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.

 @8JCJLWV from Texas answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, but should strongly encourage such nations to increase their support for NATO

 @5495QKWfrom Kentucky answered…3yrs3Y

No, but add a clause that ensures a "tax" or reparation is made to the US from those countries that need defending (and under 2%) should they need the US military for defense or aid.

 @547W2M2from North Carolina answered…3yrs3Y

 @548HSP8from Nebraska answered…3yrs3Y

We should not be expected to fund countries who prosper but do not fund their own defense -- why should we bear the cost when they can afford to do so?

 @5485KZ2from Minnesota answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, upon the condition that a lien (of sorts...) is placed on that country, resulting in a gained equitable interest to the People of the U.S. Maybe even going to so far as being a fund of mutual benefit, to the US and the country being protected. This could be practical if that country is better off spending their own budget on something which would bring more benefit to that country, thereby increasing a potential return to the US. Especially since the US has so much invested in its military already.

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “NATO” news articles, updated frequently.

Other Popular Questions

Explore other topics that are important to America voters.