Apparently 51% of the American public wants U.S. forces out of Europe.
Prof. Mead is sure that policy would be bad. And perhaps it would. But he isn’t examining both sides of the coin. It’s not that he’s avoiding:
And it’s reasonable for people to ask why we should spend so much of our money to provide a security shield for countries who refuse to carry their fair share of the common burden.
It’s also reasonable to ask how much of Europe’s infantalized outlook and economy-destroying social programs is due to Uncle Sam underwriting security for three generations. The correct answer is, “A lot.”
All-in-all, I’m with John Q. Public and against the Professor. I’d happily stay if Europe paid a fair share. But otherwise, I’d say Prof. Meads’ concerns are outweighed by the benefits of Western Europe having to grow the hell up.
And if it’s too late, then NATO is a trap and America should escape sooner, not later. Or it might have to gnaw off its own foot.
World's Only Rational Man 
I fully support the idea. Many EU countries are downsizing their armies. The Germans, for example, have reached a stage where their military is no longer capable of defending Germany. They’ve massively reduced the number of tanks and have reached a state in financing this whole thing where regiments can no longer practice with weapons like RPGs.
In Austria, yes I know we’re not in the NATO, the most recent decision is to no longer train on heavy equipment. Tanks, artillery, all that stuff, no longer to be used and trained with.
In the current situation, if the proverbial crap hits the proverbial fan, who will have to defend Europe? The US. You don’t want to risk the lives of your soldiers on a continent where most people hate them. Anti-Americanism is perfectly fine these days. It now goes hand in hand with a rising anti-Semitism.
Plus, the bases in the EU are very expensive. Rather focus on where it actually matters: Asia.