These authors wants America to lead a NATO reinvigorated for territorial defense:
In the 21st century, NATO needs to return to basics, with territorial defense as its primary goal. NATO cannot try to be everywhere in the world doing everything all the time. It should think long and hard before leading and conducting additional out-of-area military interventions. If the member states believe that an out-of-area military operation is needed, it should probably be led by a coalition of the willing outside the formal NATO command structure.
Oh, and from an article cited in that 2011 post, note this:
But the question now being raised is whether the Army's plan to keep some 37,000 soldiers in Europe will survive growing budgetary pressures in Washington. There are increasing concerns in the U.S. Congress that the United States is footing too much of the bill for European defense at a time when some European countries have reduced defense spending. ...
U.S. troop strength in Europe peaked in 1962 at nearly 277,000 soldiers and was still at around 213,000 in 1989. Current plans call for reducing troops from about 42,000 today to the 37,000 by 2015.
Trump didn't invent American exasperation with European defense attitudes. But he did browbeat them into spending more as they pledged in 2014 to strengthen NATO.
Europe could start by eliminating their ambitions to have an EU military force separate from NATO. After that, I just want Europe to be able to defend themselves, be capable of handling problems within a thousand miles of their border, and be able to contribute small contingents of air, naval, and especially ground forces trained and equipped to operate under one of our headquarters for more distant missions[.]
And don't forget the influence America's military presence in Europe has on the freedom of Europe. Don't let the EU push America out of Europe and lose that influence.
And one more thing. Just ... no.
NATO is worth defending as a military alliance and making it more effective.
