But NATO'S always was mainyl anoiut defending Europe - a Sowjet attack on North America was much less feared. The nuclear doctrine came in due to being conventioanlly outnumbered. The nuclera arms race was triggered by the Us, not the USSR (which should not imply that the USSR would not got it started if thy woulkd have been in the nuclear lead in the beginnign years).
If America does not show interest anymore to defend Europe if Europe does too little by itself - why then should the US have an interest to keep Germany as a front state in a defensive war against Russia - to defend Europe that the US it is not interested in defending any longer?
Anyhow, I think Russia is strong enough to destabilise and win some Eastern territories , yes - but it canot overrole all of Western Europe anymore with one big red steam roller like 30, 40 years ago. Its all about Eastenr Eruope,m and the baltic when we tlak about "defending against Russia". That Russia aism ate Germany with its propaganda and destabilzation effort, is due to Germany's economic and political lead role. Divide et impera.
To keep an enemy away, however, always is easier, than to digging him out once he move din and fortified. Thus, defending Eastern Europe and the Baltic must be the top priupority. If Russia would manage to win these territories, I cannot imagine that NATO has the mans to kick them out again. Not materialistically, and not by the psychological attitude of the European people. We do not want to fight any more, and use physicla forc eourselves, and we are a shrinking and aging population, with the loyalties of the masses of foreigners rushing in from the Muslim countries especially being very much in doubt. Its not as if these millions coming in would automatically adapt to us and integrate. Yesterday I read with somne horror that Turkish migrant women in Germany do not have smaller but HIGHER birth rates than Turkish women staying behind in Turkey. That is not in support of this - sinc elong unproven - thesis. Similar trends in France, Sweden, Britain. Already in the early next decade every third person staying in Germany, by then will be of an originally Muslim descent. The native local population in Europe is shrinking everywhere, the foriegn populatiosn, espoecially from muslim coutnies, are in steep raise, not to say: an explosion of birth rates in some instances.
As I also read currently in a comparing book I mentioned in other threads already, (the decline of the Roman republic and the raise of the imperial Roman tyranny), this is one of the many parallels between Rome at the time of Augustus, and the EU today. In Rome it were the falling birth rates due to the good life forming higher appreciation and material freedom for respect of individual freedom and enjoying lkife, which came at the cost of less willingness to take on the burden of foundiogn families, and the the many slaves that got freed at that tiem and that were foreigners, nevertheless gained imemdiate Roman citizenship.
The native historically grown feeling of identity and the values of the native culture were in substantial decline, while forgn views and cultural habits pressed intot the city with almost irrestsitable numerical power. The situaiton became so dire that the Roman legions feared they could not get enough soldiers from native Romans any longer that also were wealthy enough to pay for their equipment. This is the real reason why Sulla reformed the army and turned it into a professional standing army that was paid for and equipped by the state, not privately.
Have I said beforte that I am stunned by that book?! It is brilliant and the quoites, hisotric sources and empoiral evidnece collected by the highly educated author is stunning. If you are interested in Roman history and speak French or German:
David Engels
LINK - Le Déclin : La crise de l'Union européenne et la chute de la république romaine, analogies historiques
LINK -Auf dem Weg ins Imperium: Die Krise der Europäischen Union und der Untergang der Römischen Republik. Historische Parallelen
Funny to read historians and contemporary observers and witnesses from 2000 years ago saying and writing stuff that could have been meant to adress the EU today.
No, wait. Not funny at all. Depressing. It means we have not learnt some important lessons.