New arguments, or new rationale from republicans in terms of why they might not stand with nato, even for a vote like that? well, a lot of it, there were not a whole lot of explanations that came out. you did see some of the more long established nato critics basically saying that they do not like the idea of being a home to this alliance. i think what struck me from some of the other reactions that i saw from more ranking members, was the idea that this commitment should not be open-ended. that this should not be something where we should be unequivocal in our continued support for nato. so i think that is where we start to get into these issues of, if this really comes to ahead. if you see the republican party, not necessarily opposing fiddling unsweetened joining the alliance, but maybe casting things in a more ambivalent away, like he has in the past when it comes to ukraine joining nato in 2015, he was
What struck me from some of the other reactions that i saw from more ranking members, was the idea that this commitment should not be open-ended. that this should not be something where we should be unequivocal in our continued support for nato. so i think that is where we start to get into these issues of, if this really comes to ahead. if you see the republican party, not necessarily opposing fiddling unsweetened joining the alliance, but maybe casting things in a more ambivalent away, like he has in the past when it comes to ukraine joining nato in 2015, he was very noncommittal about that. it really is a situation in which, there is going to be pressure on some of these republicans to tow that more nato skeptical line. and it may not manifest itself in the senate, where there have been more independence of trump from senate republicans, but i think the party as a whole would be forced into some kind of uncomfortable conversations if their leader is not going to come on board and en