As IF Times

Source: Leaving NATO Would Make The U.S. And The World Less Safe | HuffPost

There has been ample teeth gnashing over recent geopolitical events, centering of course, around the adventures of Donald Trump.  This nemesis of the entrenched status quo has dared to question the arrangement of the decades old NATO agreement.  We did some research on the history of NATO because there should be a reality check on the howls of outrage emanating from the usual quarters.

As the link shows, the formation of NATO post WW2 was envisioned as a bulwark against the intrusion of influence from communist states, namely the old Soviet Union. Financial and military support would be provided to member nations, principally by the US and Great Britain, to rebuild after WW2 and to create stability to those nations with preferred western alliances.  The treaty provided a collective defense: if one of their nations were attacked, then all of the nations were bound to defend them.

This has worked quite well, since in the many years following the war, East Germany is gone and many of the old Soviet satellite states have moved into the western orbit.  The Soviet Union has shrunk to become the Russian Federation and their geographic reach has been reduced considerably.  Economically, Germany, France, Poland, Italy and Spain and many former Eastern bloc nations have flourished in world trade.  There’s no question that Europe has recovered.  And yet, the Americans are still providing the bulk of the funding for NATO’s defense operations even as the contracted amount of GDP spending of member nations for their own defense has fallen.  For those who believe in statistics, here is a graphic depiction of the trend:

This is an old set of statistics sourced from NATO and the trend clearly shows that the US bears the majority of the costs involved not only in absolute dollars but even worse, in terms of percentage of GDP.

So this is very much analogous to a parent giving financial support to their children while they develop and then to see the children buying iPhones and electric cars instead of providing for their own self sustenance.

The bizarre part of this is that while the alliance was established to protect them from an adversary, long since diminished, many of these countries have willingly allowed themselves to be effectively taken over by massive immigration, principally by refugees from Muslim dominated regions.  It’s not a secret that the flood of immigration has brought along all kinds of social and political unrest in the host nations even as funds are funneled towards supporting these policies and away from self defense.  So, while everyone watches the front door for an enemy long gone, their nations are hollowed out, with open arms, by enemies welcomed at the rear door.

Why would they be characterized as enemies?  Well, historically when a group comes into a nation en masse and wants to change the entire form of government, the foundations of religion and the very structure of society including language and law, that was considered an invasion.  NATO is worrying about the dog at the door, long gone, while the mice are ravaging the rest of the home.