How does admitting two more countries to NATO - both of which punch above their weight militarily - increase the U.S. defense burden in Europe? If you believe that Europe should take a greater role in defending itself, then the additions of Sweden and Finland are exactly the kind of actions you should support.
I don’t think you ever really cease to amaze anyone on this site with your nonsense. Anyway...
Without the United States of America there is no NATO. At the end of the day, the only things that kept the Soviets at bay, regardless of the impotent NATO, was the fact that the United States did have very large military bases in Europe. Massive armor, infantry and aviation assets to repel anything the Russians through at Europe. For decades, leading up to the GWOT, the military training doctrine was still based on fighting the Soviets in the forests and mountains of Europe.
The Soviet Union is gone and has been for a while. With it, should have gone NATO and the ability of all those European countries, whose leadership hates the US but loves the US dollar, to squander their money on lavish social spending and not being able to defend themselves.
As for two more countries, that just two more countries that are in the alliance that the US will be obligated to help. Sh*t has to end at some point.
Hawley voted to admit North Macedonia to NATO. Now he’s just a pathetic and posing minority party contrarian.
Duda’s Poland is willing to spend 5% of GDP on their military. That is the European anchor that NATO needs. They just placed an order for 1000 tanks from Korea. All they need is naval support (from Britain) and air (from US, etc.) to have a fully credible defensive alliance.