Mexico is not in NATO, and it's not supposed to be

Thankfully Mexicans are not in NATO, it would be a drain on their spending rather than a boost to their defenses. The North Atlantic part of the name excludes Mexico in name, Mexico is very much excluded from the Atlantic by the Caribbean sea, but Mexicos Pacific Coast is a bit longer and less important; I think all together Mexicos coastline is 9,330 KM however I can't find a reliable source for Pacific and Caribbean coasts separately.

Mexico very much represents the border to Latin America for the USA, while of course it would be prudent for Spain to want more Latin American influence in NATO, however Portugal would accept not having Brazil to back up its influence in NATO from the inside.

So Spain can not count on Mexico to join NATO to give more Spanish speakers weight in security concerns, and Portugal can't count on Brazil being the oddest one out in NATO. The oddity of Turkey in NATO does point to tensions with the USSR in the Cold War.

However Turkey is farther from the North Atlantic than Mexico, so chew on that for a bit, and tell me what you think of this odd contrast of Turkey, but not Mexico.

Maybe it doesn't mean a whole lot, but talk about it. Does Mexico deserve a seat in NATO or should Turkey be dropped? Status quo is an allowable answer, but back it up with some reasons.

I thought NATO was put together to fight against the Soviets, and thier Warsaw Pact puppets. Turkey allowed us to have nuclear weapons on station in thier country at that time. My dad fought alongside Turks in the Korean War. I say thats friendship. How many Mexicans were at Omaha Beach? Hell Mexicans cant even whoop some drug lords, what are they going to do for NATO? All NATO is now is a police force, would you want corrupt Mexican cops in your police force?