· 200 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 10, 2026 at 9:08 PM

Strait of Hormuz falls outside NATO's remit, Spain says after Trump's ultimatum

Posted by jackytheblade

🚩 Report this post

200 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
eskimospy212 Apr 10, 2026 +3512
Important note: NATO only covers Europe and North America -at the request of the United States- because at the time it was enacted the US didn’t want to get drawn into defending European colonial empires. 
3512
jakreth Apr 10, 2026 +1211
It doesn't cover the cities of Ceuta and Melilla, that are a part of Spain. So, if Spain is attacked there they cannot invoke art 5, it's funny to be even talking about Iran. Edited: the Canary Islands are indeed included in the treaty
1211
AGreatBandName Apr 10, 2026 +433
It also does not cover Hawaii.
433
SureWouldForest Apr 10, 2026 +102
Wait, really?
102
AGreatBandName Apr 10, 2026 +280
From the North Atlantic Treaty: > For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack: on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer; Hawaii is not in North America, not in the Atlantic, and not north of the Tropic of Cancer so it’s 0 for 3. This talks a little bit about the State Department’s view, at least a couple years ago. Tldr the allies will probably help in some way or another if it’s attacked, but it’s unlikely they’ll agree to add Hawaii to the treaty area. https://case.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=3418
280
Fenris_uy Apr 11, 2026 +188
Hawaii wasn't a US state when NATO was created and the treaty ratified.
188
bakedpatata Apr 11, 2026 +105
It's still a bit ironic since NATO was created in response to WW2 which the US only got involved in after an attack on Hawaii.
105
lesbianmathgirl Apr 11, 2026 +34
That’s a simplification bordering on mistruth imo. It’s true that the North Atlantic Treaty (1949) was based on a diplomatic framework that arose, in part, as a response to world war 2 (starting with the Atlantic Charter between the US and the UK, signed several years *before* Pearl Harbor); however, when it evolved into the NAT it was more of a cold war/anti-communism thing. NATO itself wasn’t formed until after the Korean War.
34
MercantileReptile Apr 11, 2026 +18
From the [NATO](https://www.nato.int/en/about-us/nato-history/a-short-history-of-nato) website: > Accordingly, after much discussion and debate, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed on 4 April, 1949. Korea kicked off June 1950.
18
lesbianmathgirl Apr 11, 2026 +8
As I stated in my comment, the *treaty* NAT was signed in 49, yes—but the treaty isn’t the same as the *organization* NATO. NATO wasn’t formed as soon as the NAT was signed.
8
[deleted] Apr 11, 2026 +1
[deleted]
1
MaelstromTX Apr 11, 2026 +18
Hawaii has been US territory since 1898.
18
jraymcmurray Apr 11, 2026 +16
So that's why NATO didn't help us after Pearl Harbor! /s
16
takeda64 Apr 10, 2026 +32
Had no idea, but looks like that's true: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/hawaii-only-united-states-state-not-covered-nato/
32
Chip_Jelly Apr 10, 2026 +29
Hawaii is not part of North America, it’s a archipelago in the Pacific
29
Dale92 Apr 11, 2026 +23
The A in NATO stands for Atlantic, not America (yes it's not in the Atlantic, either).
23
SureWouldForest Apr 10, 2026 +7
Makes sense, just never considered it
7
kelldricked Apr 11, 2026 +6
Just fun fact to add. 15 years ago 99% of all people in Europe wouldnt have given a f*** about this fact and would have still agreed to help if the US was attacked in Hawaii (probaly still wanted to deescalate in case of 2 major nuclear powers going full war but still). These days? I doubt 30% would want to support. Trump and MAGA have absolutely destroyed relations between Europe and the US (by threating to invade Denmark, starting tradewars, pretending like hundreds of European soldiers didnt die for the US in afghanistan and so much other c***). Its insane how much soft power the US has lost and they gained nothing back for it.
6
Shirkir Apr 11, 2026 +19
Hawaii was annexed by the US and was formally recognized by the US government as being forced to join against their wishes by the 1993 apology resolution. So their was shaky grounds to give it full protection considering it might have been considered a colonial possession and sought independence eventually.
19
BuzzMachine_YVR Apr 11, 2026 +13
It was a colony.
13
LowEmergencyCaptain Apr 11, 2026 +3
High schools USA government taught me this
3
an-la Apr 11, 2026 +7
I believe the original US intention behind AMZUS was a pacific version of NATO. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANZUS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANZUS)
7
SleepishPenguin Apr 10, 2026 +140
It does cover the Canary Islands but not Ceuta and Melilla.
140
imianha Apr 11, 2026 +6
It covers the Canary Islands, it does not cover Ceuta or Melilla.
6
el_grort Apr 11, 2026 +9
It does cover the Canaries, as they are islands north of the Tropic of Cancer, which is how the North Atlantic is defined by the Treaty. Melilla and Ceuta are not, as they are not islands, nor in Europe nor North America. Spain has tried to get the enclaves in Africa covered using the part of the treaty about French Algeria, but this has not convinced allies.
9
hueythecat Apr 10, 2026 +15
Just makes it sound like he’s dealing with shit to his base
15
belgium-noah Apr 11, 2026 +2
The canaries are in the atlantic, north of the tropic of cancer. They are covered
2
That-Advance-9619 Apr 11, 2026 +2
Canary Islander here. The Canary Islands ARE included, so Art. 5 would get activated.
2
ChrisFromIT Apr 11, 2026 +5
The territory covered by NATO does have a bit of leeway, as the US and a few other countries did ask for the UK to invoke Article 5 when Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands, which is south of the Tropic of Cancer.
5
brickne3 Apr 11, 2026 +29
The UK didn't invoke Article 5 though so that argument remained entirely acedemic.
29
lostparis Apr 11, 2026 +7
> as the US and a few other countries did ask for the UK to invoke Article 5 when Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands Where do you get this from? The US was publically unsupportive of the UK in this conflict.
7
NearlyAtTheEnd Apr 10, 2026 +137
Article 5 does not count for defensive wars either. Each country still gets to decide if they want to help - largely. Largely meaning a country isn't obliged to help with offensive weapons or armed forces. https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/collective-defence-and-article-5 NATO's Article 5 is often misunderstood as an automatic trigger for all member countries to declare war, but a strict reading of the treaty reveals it is more flexible than that. While it is a commitment to collective defense, it does not mandate a specific military response from every member "Such Action as it Deems Necessary":  The treaty states that if an armed attack occurs, each member will assist by taking "such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force". This language means that a member country can technically fulfill its obligation by providing non-military aid, such as logistical support, medical supplies, or economic sanctions, rather than combat troops. It's a TIL for many.
137
Superb-Nectarine-645 Apr 10, 2026 +54
I suspect that the response to a request from nato for us action would recieve a signed copy of "The Art of the Deal", and not much else
54
UnoriginalStanger Apr 11, 2026 +13
Yeah a lot of people think article 5 is what makes NATO work but NATO is designed to make article 5 work.
13
ChrisFromIT Apr 11, 2026 +14
On top of that the nation that is attacked must be the one that invokes Article 5, it is not automatically invoked like a lot of people think. Lastly during the Falkland War, the US and a few other NATO countries did implore the UK to invoke Article 5 of NATO and if they did so they would be willing to get involved. So there is a bit of leeway when it comes to what territory is covered by NATO. But interesting fact, as written, Hawaii isn't covered by NATO. But again there is some leeway to that per the Falkland War and the encouragement of the US and a few other NATO countries imploring the UK to invoke Article 5.
14
ssnistfajen Apr 11, 2026 +12
Wouldn't the Falklands fall outside of the coverage as well? It is in the South Atlantic.
12
ChrisFromIT Apr 11, 2026 +8
Yes, that is why it was a bit of a big deal with the US and others wanting the UK to invoke Article 5.
8
FingerGungHo Apr 11, 2026 +5
There’s 0 chance that NATO countries wouldn’t send troops if Hawaii was attacked.
5
Nerevarine91 Apr 11, 2026 +5
They have the right to do so, but it wouldn’t be in their role as a NATO member. They would just be NATO members who also happen to do that, if that makes sense
5
sanderudam Apr 11, 2026 +5
You got any source for that Falkland case? US was not particularly eager to support UK, why were they pushing for UK to invoke article 5?
5
rattar2 Apr 11, 2026 +3
Thank you! I read it and it's pretty short (if nato.int is to be believed. I don't know how to verify if this is the official source and would love some guidance, yes I could Google myself, but I don't have more energy to spend on this than I already have. Life is hard.) Here is the full article 5 ([source](https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/collective-defence-and-article-5)) “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
3
scruffie Apr 11, 2026 +3
.int domains are reserved for organizations created by international treaties; there's [only about 150 registered](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_with_.int_domain_names). So no worries, nato.int is legit.
3
Stargazer1701d Apr 11, 2026 +5
So thoughts and prayers would count as "such action as deemed necessary"?
5
FrostBricks Apr 11, 2026 +3
Daily reminder that Article 5 has only ever been been triggered was for the défense of America. Just one time. For the benefit of the USA. Maybe he should be a little more grateful...
3
Old_Leopard1844 Apr 11, 2026 +5
He was grateful His tower was tallest building in New York after twin towers fell
5
Silver_Middle_7240 Apr 10, 2026 +12
*stares at Vietnam and Korea*
12
Captainboy25 Apr 10, 2026 +35
Look how the turns table now Europe doesn’t want to get drawn into defending America’s colonial empire
35
Salamok Apr 11, 2026 +6
IIRC it is also a defensive pact and doesn't cover actions where one of the members is the aggressor.
6
Nulovka Apr 10, 2026 +4
It doesn't cover Hawaii either.
4
Blueberryburntpie Apr 10, 2026 +3
> the US didn’t want to get drawn into defending European colonial empires. And still got drawn into them, most notably French Indochina (later Vietnam). But at least they avoided the Malayan Emergency or the Algerian War.
3
chaos0xomega Apr 10, 2026 +26
The US was never militarily involved in French Indochina. We financed the majority of the costs and provided a lot of equipment because it was in our geopolitical interests to prevent a communist takeover, but aside from sending some advisors never took an active role there. We only became directky involved after France surrendered control and Vietnam became independent.
26
leisurechef Apr 10, 2026 +2977
Translation: Not my circus, not my monkeys
2977
lostroadrunner22 Apr 10, 2026 +479
Not my pig, not my farm.
479
grandramble Apr 10, 2026 +294
not my cylinder, not my tube
294
Raverjames Apr 10, 2026 +155
Not my Brawndo, Not my electrolytes.
155
Jahsmurf Apr 10, 2026 +125
Not my toilet, not my poopknife
125
TheFlyingBoxcar Apr 10, 2026 +76
Not my Schindler, not my list
76
peepee2tiny Apr 10, 2026 +51
Not my tough acting, not my Tinactin
51
njshine27 Apr 10, 2026 +50
Not my gulf, not my strait.
50
MareC0gnitum Apr 10, 2026 +72
Not my island, not my Epstein.
72
riko77can Apr 10, 2026 +35
Not my President, not my clusterfuck
35
calidownunder Apr 11, 2026 +6
Not my George, not my Strait
6
notnotbrowsing Apr 10, 2026 +29
Not my baby, not my bathwater
29
TepHoBubba Apr 10, 2026 +9
Not my fight, not my war.
9
31nigrhcdrh Apr 11, 2026 +6
Not my Dad, not his jumper cables 
6
Canadian-Man-infj Apr 10, 2026 +7
Brawndo has what plants crave!
7
just-one-beer Apr 10, 2026 +42
the cylinder must remain unharmed
42
HunterFeeFee Apr 10, 2026 +12
Not my GPU, not my PC.
12
Fabulous_Computer965 Apr 10, 2026 +5
Not my kids.
5
Masterchiefy10 Apr 10, 2026 +6
It’s, it’s not a tube
6
IllSalad3669 Apr 10, 2026 +7
Its nahta tumour
7
Ravasaurio Apr 11, 2026 +2
Not my Epstein, not my files.
2
puesyomero Apr 11, 2026 +3
"El que tenga puercos, que los amarre."
3
predatorybeing Apr 10, 2026 +52
Not my circus, not my monkeys, but the clowns know me.
52
TheBestintheWest11 Apr 10, 2026 +5
not my body of water Not my fishes?
5
mikechr Apr 10, 2026 +10
You break it, you've bought it.
10
tripping_yarns Apr 10, 2026 +18
Because Trump’s all hat and no cattle.
18
pipeline77 Apr 10, 2026 +7
Like a dimestore cowboy
7
Xan_derous Apr 10, 2026 +8
Not my chair, not my problem
8
yammys Apr 10, 2026 +7
Not my window, not my defenestration
7
ComprehensiveNail416 Apr 10, 2026 +3
It’s your monkey, you peel the banana
3
Large_Conversation_8 Apr 10, 2026 +3
Not my chair, not my problem
3
mattyjp1996 Apr 10, 2026 +5
Not my wars, not my epstein files
5
nixaler Apr 10, 2026 +5
Not my axe, nor my bow
5
Beardmanta Apr 11, 2026 +2
Couldn't you say the same thing about Ukraine, Bosnia etc?
2
EndoExo Apr 10, 2026 +579
Yeah, for this you'd need the Free Iranian Sea Treaty Organization, or FISTO.
579
The_Snidge Apr 10, 2026 +198
Assume..the...position
198
SouthTippBass Apr 10, 2026 +39
Hands on the headboard chief.
39
makethislifecount Apr 10, 2026 +23
Do not resist!
23
Little-Carpenter4443 Apr 10, 2026 +88
Right now the problem is the Presidential Electorate Dementia Organization
88
lostroadrunner22 Apr 10, 2026 +18
The Straight of Hormuz Institute of Trim Sailings
18
1badh0mbre Apr 10, 2026 +10
Oh, PEDO. I heard they’re doing great things, bigly.
10
hopechooser Apr 10, 2026 +12
Thanks for the laugh, I just spit out my tea
12
scuzzy987 Apr 10, 2026 +7
It feels like I've been fisted daily for the last 9 years
7
wirelesswizard64 Apr 10, 2026 +5
[Fisto intensifies](https://www.listnook.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fi-love-kit-fistos-smile-v0-m44bz854fc4f1.jpg%3Fwidth%3D551%26format%3Dpjpg%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3Dd33fd8f7a639fe4a48615137d72418122581ecc0)
5
Naghagok_ang_Lubot Apr 10, 2026 +18
>*I am programmed for your pleasure.* iykyk
18
Courier-Se7en Apr 10, 2026 +7
Fully Integrated Security Technetronic Officer
7
11oydchristmas Apr 11, 2026 +2
Domo arigato, fisto roboto
2
StephenHunterUK Apr 10, 2026 +6
There was a CENTO: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central\_Treaty\_Organization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Treaty_Organization)
6
Corny_Snickers Apr 10, 2026 +6
I believe for america it's now called Fisted
6
solblurgh Apr 11, 2026 +2
Or Straits of Hormuz Iran Treaty
2
Slight-Ad-6553 Apr 10, 2026 +2
someone like Fallout
2
Speedracer666 Apr 10, 2026 +255
He doesn’t know what remit means.
255
SouthernHighway6412 Apr 11, 2026 +53
Wait… That’s the green guy on the muppet show, right?
53
Fragglerawking Apr 11, 2026 +22
No that's Kermit, you're thinking of someone who lives alone and doesn't socialize with others
22
Feralwestcoaster Apr 11, 2026 +18
Those are hermits, you’re obviously thinking of applications to proceed in development
18
Sakkko Apr 11, 2026 +15
Those are permits, you're thinking about the values that functions approach as the arguments approach some value.
15
Floccus Apr 11, 2026 +14
That's a limit, you're thinking about the highest peak of a mountain.
14
darmabum Apr 11, 2026 +12
That’s a summit. You’re thinking of what mountaineers do, also the word for global weather.
12
-password-invalid- Apr 11, 2026 +12
That’s climate, you’re thinking of a mammal with forward facing eyes and grasping hands.
12
Fit-Cable1547 Apr 10, 2026 +12
Remit doesn't have a W in front, for those that didn't know that. /s
12
puesyomero Apr 11, 2026 +2
Kermit's female cousin
2
Automatic-Apricot795 Apr 10, 2026 +394
I mean duh.  Did nobody tell trump that NATO is a defensive alliance? 
394
Ok-Blackberry-3534 Apr 10, 2026 +113
I did. He looked...distant.
113
Plane_Discipline_198 Apr 10, 2026 +33
That's just his thousand yard stare.... At a child.
33
Antimus Apr 10, 2026 +32
He's already admitted that Putin had to explain to him what NATO is, so let's be honest his understanding is going to be a little skewed. What understanding he has left that is
32
robikki Apr 10, 2026 +125
And only covers the North Atlantic N orth A tlantic T reaty O rganization I mean, it's right in the name......
125
Smileboy67 Apr 10, 2026 +79
If he could read a map he'd be so upset right now.
79
linkardtankard Apr 10, 2026 +50
Please don’t. The dumbass thinks Greenland is nearly as huge as Africa because his orange brain cannot grasp Mercator projection
50
jorgebrks Apr 10, 2026 +9
If you correct him, he'll probably use a sharpie and draw a big ole hamberder around it to make it look bigger.
9
sylanar Apr 10, 2026 +5
I just assume that he thought T was for Trump, and it was his own personal army, that's the only way this makes sense
5
whatproblems Apr 10, 2026 +2
someone should ask him if he knows what nato stands for
2
meanbadger83 Apr 10, 2026 +10
No alligator two owls?
10
kevinlch Apr 10, 2026 +7
Neuralize Arab Tactical Operation
7
sylanar Apr 10, 2026 +7
Neat ass trump organisation
7
Amoral_Abe Apr 10, 2026 +4
Ok... my bad everyone... I may have told him that "NATO has guns and goes Pew Pew Pew to bad guys". But in my defense, I wanted him to like NATO and he's got the mental capacity of a 5 year old.... drug addict. He might have gotten the wrong message out of that.
4
AliceLunar Apr 10, 2026 +5
Clearly not considering he doesn't want to help defend NATO against Russia.
5
Ilmeury83 Apr 10, 2026 +4
He missed history lessons because he was too busy partying with Epstein
4
macross1984 Apr 10, 2026 +167
The whole purpose of NATO is to defend against Russian invasion of Europe and geographically speaking, Strait of Hormuz is way out of the way. US started this as an aggressor and for Trump to give ultimatum for the mess he started, NATO have every right to say no to Trump's demand. If Trump follow through then Europe can start rescinding base usage right all over Europe and ports.
167
Blueberryburntpie Apr 10, 2026 +60
Not to mention Trump did not build any domestic or international support for the war.
60
ComprehensiveNail416 Apr 10, 2026 +34
And honestly, do you think the US would actually fight using their bases in Europe if an invasion happened, or just pull out and try taking Canada and Greenland while there’s no one to help them
34
rainman_104 Apr 10, 2026 +3
The dumb f*** should read up on the flq crisis. And oka crisis. They may topple Ottawa in a day. Canada is ten times the size of Iran.
3
UnoriginalStanger Apr 11, 2026 +4
While Trump and his administration is incapable of good communication the academic side of things are pointing to action in Iran potentially being good for the EU in hurting Russia's chances of military power. Both as a supplier of military goods to Russia but also in a potential China - Taiwan situation that would present an opperunity both in Europe as well as the middle east with the US preoccupied. In better times all this type of stuff would have had many months of communication.
4
kwyjibo1 Apr 10, 2026 +122
Trump has talked nothing but shit about NATO and now he turns around and is practically begging them for help. The man is deranged.
122
KhaoticMess Apr 11, 2026 +26
I read an article that talked about how he doesn't seem to understand that his actions have future consequences. It makes so much sense.
26
Doughtnutz Apr 11, 2026 +3
Just like a toddler.
3
clevercookie69 Apr 10, 2026 +81
I love Spains stance throughout this shit show. I wish my country would show the same strength
81
grip0matic Apr 11, 2026 +5
We already got into a war by supporting the US and the people were against it at the time over blatant lies. Now with a government that is the opposite of that one it's basically expected to stay away but also to tell him that calling names to allies and threat them is a no-no. What do we actually get by behave like obedient vassals as the orange pedo wants? Oh, nothing? While China is giving us priority for ours exports...
5
IceMysterious3056 Apr 10, 2026 +31
The US should’ve seen Iran’s move coming after that unprovoked attack. This isn’t a NATO issue… and Iran has the right to defend itself too.
31
TBT_TBT Apr 10, 2026 +14
The US has all the intelligence in the world, so obviously they knew this was coming after the attack. And they did it anyway. Which is......... not very smart.
14
dunkindonato Apr 10, 2026 +15
Doesn’t help that the US has a President who thinks he’s better than experts. No intelligence in the world can go against a gigantic ego.
15
hagenissen999 Apr 11, 2026 +2
Not like Hegseth would listen to or bring along recommendations from actual experts at the Pentagon either.
2
megaplex66 Apr 10, 2026 +81
Sounds like Trump doesn't hold the cards.
81
StinkyHeXoR Apr 10, 2026 +15
He is only playing shit games and wins shit prizes. None of the games he plays involve cards. Only shit.
15
mister-rik Apr 11, 2026 +7
The only leverage Trump had was the Iranian regime didn’t particularly want their shit blown up. Trump played that card BEFORE asking for anything. The ‘art of the deal’ ladies and gentlemen.
7
foul_ol_ron Apr 10, 2026 +14
And he should have said please.
14
DredPRoberts Apr 11, 2026 +5
Best he can do is lower tariffs to 15%.
5
cjyoung92 Apr 11, 2026 +3
He’s a few cards short of a full deck, that’s for sure 
3
dr_crispin Apr 11, 2026 +2
Pretty sure that specific deck’s card-case is more than 50% unpopulated and had been for quite some time.
2
Cristoff13 Apr 11, 2026 +14
Trump doesn't ask or negotiate, he just demands. But its mostly bluff. If the other NATO nations just ignore him, probably nothing will happen.
14
oldteen Apr 11, 2026 +5
He also tries to create leverage, attempting to force desirable outcomes.
5
Significant-Self5907 Apr 10, 2026 +37
That is erudite diplomatic speak from an ancient, cultured country telling Trump to f*** off & stay fucked off.
37
kadmylos Apr 11, 2026 +27
I shit in the doorway and its everybody else's problem. Bye.
27
Laurizxz Apr 11, 2026 +9
Cant we just attack russia and force the US to come finish the war
9
hagenissen999 Apr 11, 2026 +2
FFS, why didn't someone think of that 4 years ago?
2
Rock-Ski-Golf-Repeat Apr 10, 2026 +58
So sad how underprepared the US and Israel were for their bombing campaigns. Now we all get to suffer because of their ineptness to strategize.
58
VertexBV Apr 10, 2026 +22
Think of all the warehousing money the US is saving now by emptying their ordnance stockpiles!
22
Araminal Apr 11, 2026 +2
It was a DoGE plan all along!
2
U_Sound_Stupid_Stop Apr 10, 2026 +20
Israel seems to have gotten exactly what it wanted, while the US, and the rest of the world, is left holding the bag... It's not very surprising, trump is a babbling fool but netanyahu, not so much, he knew how Iran would react.
20
Gintokiyoo Apr 10, 2026 +4
But ChatGPT was in the strategy room and told them "Amazing idea, here is how you should do it....". Little did the LLM know, they didn't roleplay some game strategy.
4
me_version_2 Apr 10, 2026 +12
Ummm this whole thing has been about giving Israel free rein to do to Lebanon what they already did (unchallenged) in Gaza. They got exactly what they want, which is why they continue to bomb Lebanon while the US slowly realise they have been outplayed. The issue to solve here now is barely anything to do with Iran, it’s Israel.
12
nygdan Apr 11, 2026 +24
NORTH ATLANTIC treaty org. in fact an attack on HAWAII is excluded from Article 5 activation.
24
rsa1 Apr 11, 2026 +6
Do you think Trump could point at the Atlantic Ocean on a map? For all we know, he thinks Iran is next to the Atlantic Ocean.
6
Soggy_Quarter9333 Apr 10, 2026 +8
All this turmoil, all those deaths, all the destruction, just because Hegseth wanted to make money with his shady deals.
8
blubaldnuglee Apr 10, 2026 +11
This has been, and always will be, about the Epstein files.
11
cre8ivjay Apr 10, 2026 +26
Trump is singlehandedly causing the entire world to wake up to the fact that hegemons just bully the rest of the world around. I mean blatantly so (we all knew before but said little - see Carney's speech in Davos). While he's torching the world to watch it burn, we may all learn from it. I hope we do.
26
MuJartible Apr 11, 2026 +3
Hegemons are only that as far as they have allies that follow them. This guy is working actively to lose all US allies, like if he was, hear me out, working for their enemies. Make of that what you want.
3
Euler007 Apr 10, 2026 +19
Can you say no to the Fifa peace prize recipient when he tells you to attack another country?
19
Dark-Cloud666 Apr 10, 2026 +15
Nato is a defensive alliance. Thus we dont need to help with a war the U.S. and Israel startet.
15
khaloisha Apr 11, 2026 +5
Trump's ultimatum is like China's ultimatum. Anyway, f*** off pedophile, it's your war.
5
timify10 Apr 11, 2026 +5
Great response... NATO Article 5 is not a green light to wage an illegal war and beg your NATO allies to help.
5
sneijder Apr 11, 2026 +6
The bigger risk is the Iranian allied Houthi rebels and the Red Sea (Suez canal) Europe has been patrolling that for two years in anticipation (Operation Aspides) The current Iranian situation is totally the responsibility of the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aspides
6
You_are_the_Castle Apr 11, 2026 +9
Good, let Israel and the United States of America solve this. NATO is a defense pact, so we are under no obligation to help out. Even if it is painful for a while, we shouldn't sacrifice our soldiers for a global screw up.
9
Intro-Nimbus Apr 10, 2026 +11
Spain has read the treaty. Trump won't read.
11
SPCEshipTwo Apr 11, 2026 +4
Funny how I understand how NATO works but the leader of the most powerful country in the world doesn't.
4
melj11 Apr 11, 2026 +10
NATO is a defensive pact between member nations. It doesn’t start wars.
10
Wonderful-Pause1048 Apr 10, 2026 +13
I wonder that Trump doesn‘t know it meanwhile… must be very resistent for learning
13
GabeDef Apr 11, 2026 +7
Is Trump the first US President to surrender?
7
KommanderKeen-a42 Apr 10, 2026 +6
Also... we attacked. NATO is a defensive pact. If anything , NATO needs to defend them (if it wasn't outside their remit).
6
BookLuvr7 Apr 11, 2026 +3
Geography and history have never been his strong suits, apparently. Except for Nazi history, if you believe what his ex wife said about him.
3
FoulMoodeternal Apr 11, 2026 +3
To be clear, The US is in violation of Articles1,2,and 8 of the NATO treaty
3
loyalone Apr 10, 2026 +5
It's true, and a another valid reason for not supporting an unjust war.
5
NineInchPythons Apr 10, 2026 +5
I fear that Trump will just try and bullshit his way out of doing anything and just leave it to the EU to solve anyway. He's not going to go attack Iran again because he knows they will just tank the world economy before the midterms, and Iran has no reason to do anything other than keep the Strait hostage. China is happy to keep buying c**** Iranian oil, besides they already have a ton in their stockpile. That leaves the EU gets stuck with the problem.
5
AliceLunar Apr 10, 2026 +9
America doesn't even want to support a defensive war in Europe on NATO borders, yet the problem is that Europe doesn't want to join a pointless offensive war completely unrelated to them?
9
good_not_long Apr 10, 2026 +8
Again, NATO is a force that only exists once attacked, otherwise it’s just a collection of countries that don’t want to send their armies to join your silly war.
8
go_faster1 Apr 11, 2026 +5
North Atlantic. Hormuz is nowhere near North OR Atlantic
5
ikiice Apr 11, 2026 +2
We should send Americans some dog sleds from Greenland
2
Nervous_Tourist_8699 Apr 11, 2026 +2
He is right. It is all academic though as the toddler would not honour treaty obligations on Putin’s instructions
2
ryanasimov Apr 11, 2026 +2
Everyone besides Trump already knew that, but here we are, explaining the obvious, yet again.
2
bahumat42 Apr 11, 2026 +2
NATO is defensive in nature. By engaging in an offensive war America has forfeited those automatic protections. Sure some nations may choose to assist but they aren't obliged to.
2
labroid Apr 12, 2026 +2
Wait - the US President working for Russia is using his ignorance of NATO to try to quit NATO and improve Putin's position? Say it isn't so!
2
RichieNRich Apr 10, 2026 +14
Spain makes a valid point.
14
zombiekoalas Apr 10, 2026 +7
To think I would see Nato telling the US off in my lifetime. Glad other nations respect us again.  Unlike other times the US called on them in dubious scenarios....like Afghanistan...or when Nato member nations assisted in Iraq..... Can we go back and save the gorilla to get out of the worst timeline.
7
jakreth Apr 10, 2026 +13
In Iraq NATO as a organisation didn't participate, every country that did was acting on their own. In Afghanistan the US invoked the article 5 and NATO countries complied, including Spain.
13
Typingdude3 Apr 10, 2026 +4
Problem with that is if the US just leaves, then it becomes a NATO problem whether he likes it or not. Toll booth will become permanent and more costly. The rich Saudis and other oil monarchies aren’t going to die fighting Iran.
4
teflon_soap Apr 10, 2026 +10
Tolls of 2 million per ship is about an additional dollar per barrel. The next administration can grapple with the farce that this loss was in a multitude of ways, should there be one.
10
SwampTerror Apr 11, 2026 +2
NATO is defensive, not offensive. Isnt it so strange trump doesnt get it? NATO isnt for picking fights. Trump can do it alone with his tin soldiers.
2
Cabbages24ADollar Apr 11, 2026 +2
MAGA has failed
2
FishSawc Apr 10, 2026 -2
Mark Rutte is the biggest d*** rider. He’d sellout the whole of the EU if he could to appease the US overlords.
-2
dshookowsky Apr 10, 2026 +3
Is he a sellout or is he just fluffing Trump because everyone knows that's what raises Trump's flag? Could be subservience could be manipulation. I don't know enough to say which.
3
← Back to Board