That's a good question, given that Trump is no longer committed to his NATO obligation with Britain,

You should take the time to familiarize yourself with NATO's Article 5. Specifically this section:

nato.int - Collective defence and article

Collective defence is NATO’s most fundamental principle. Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that an armed attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against them all.

This is what the democrats have read in the NATO charter and they think they can use it as a talking point/attack vector against anyone who calls them out. The problem is...they didn't bother to educate themselves on the issue especially with regards to who was President and the context of the entire NATO charter at the time.

Harry Truman (whose diplomatic corps negotiated the NATO Charter on the United States' behalf) was *not* a fan of European colonialism.

Ergo, the plain text of the charter says this:

“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.

So, no. The Falklands aren't our fight.

Truman's administration did this so that the US wouldn't be running around defending the last gasp of the colonial system in the name of NATO. Ironically he would undermine his legacy by supporting the French in...Indochina.