Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Germany lost its teeth after WW2 and they're happy to rely on the US to be their sole mechanism of defense.

This is of course not technically true at all.

Preventing Russian westward expansion is the primary reason NATO exists.  So, no, it's not an indirect threat to NATO's mission.

Again, like I said, remaining a NATO alliance member might or might not be beneficial to the USA.  Some here have argued that NATO has outlived its usefulness and that's certainly possible.  But that's an entirely different discussion.

As long as the US remains an active member of NATO, then this IS a problem that is right there on our front doorstep.

This is just not true. Preventing the possibility of USSR and communism expanding into Western Europe and getting west of East Germany was pretty much the purpose of NATO. The "evil empire" is no more. USSR crumbled over 30 years ago. Hello. Russia does not = the USSR, nor is Russia a communist state.

This is a simple f***king issue. If you want I'll link you the declassified documents that prove WITHOUT question that the US gave assurances to Gorbachev that if USSR withdrew and allowed for the reunification of Germany, NATO would not move one inch eastward towards their borders. What did the US do immediately after USSR fell? They continued to aggressively expand NATO - a MILITARY ALLIANCE - eastward. The US went back on it's word. And having a hostile military alliance right on their borders - is not something any country would want.

The US isn't just an active member of NATO. They are THE member of NATO. The entire thing is propped up and controlled by the US. IF we left it would disintegrate in two seconds flat. The people of Europe don't give two flying f**ks about NATO. It doesn't even track with them.

France is actively sending their politicians to Russia to attempt to avoid hostilities, just this week Macron went to Moscow hat in hand to kiss Putin's ring and beg him to play nice.  Putin, laughed at him and released through their state department that there's no point in making deals with France because they don't represent the power of Europe. 

Germany lost its teeth after WW2 and they're happy to rely on the US to be their sole mechanism of defense.

You're RIGHT when you say it's time for the US to let these wealthy countries stand on their own feet, but you're completely wrong in your belief that they're not concerned about the situation right now.

France and Germany don't want hostilities because they are both in general anti-war countries. France was one of the only NATO countries to stand up to the US during the Iraq War. Germany especially does not want hostilities because they buy a sh*t-ton of their energy from Russia.

will never happen. god I wish it would, but the powers that be in the US will never let that happen.

Which powers that be?  Who will never let it happen?

Which powers that be?  Who will never let it happen?

President/Congress. There will never be a President to pull the US out of NATO and even if there was by some miracle one that tried, he'd get shutdown in two seconds flat by congress. 

LRT FACTS. Has NATO ever promised Russia not to expand east? - LRT

Did The West Promise Moscow That NATO Would Not Expand? Well, It's Complicated. (rferl.org)
Did The West Promise Moscow That NATO Would Not Expand? Well, It's Complicated. (rferl.org)

Russia’s draft agreements with NATO and the United States: Intended for rejection? (brookings.edu)

Russia’s belief in Nato ‘betrayal’ – and why it matters today | Russia | The Guardian

LRT FACTS. Has NATO ever promised Russia not to expand east? - LRT

Did The West Promise Moscow That NATO Would Not Expand? Well, It's Complicated. (rferl.org)
Did The West Promise Moscow That NATO Would Not Expand? Well, It's Complicated. (rferl.org)

Russia’s draft agreements with NATO and the United States: Intended for rejection? (brookings.edu)

Russia’s belief in Nato ‘betrayal’ – and why it matters today | Russia | The Guardian

I just read the first article - and well it's flat out bullshit.

A) There was never a written agreement, nor was it ever claimed that there was one by anyone. There were assurances made- and those assurances didn't come from NATO - NATO is a bullshit nothing - they are a banana republic completely controlled by the United States - as they always have been since it's inception and still are today. Gorbachev's discussions weren't with NATO - they were with the United States - and the assurances he got came from the UNITED STATES. Declassified US state department documents and declassified documents by British and French government prove this without question.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

US gov't being the lying bastard conniving d*ckbags that they are - are now basically saying nahhhh don't matter if we gave our word- doesn't matter you didn't get it in writing bro - our word means nothing.