The United States should withdraw from NATO.

Resolution: The United States should withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.I will first rebut my opponent's arguments and then make my own showing why the United States should not withdraw from NATO. REBUTTALSThe core of my opponent's argument seems to be that NATO was originally intended to protect Europe from the USSR.Now, it may be true that Europe no longer faces a threat from the USSR. However, the real issue here is not whether Europe needs protection but whether the US has more to gain than to lose by withdrawing from NATO. That should be the biggest factor on which the United States must base its decision on.1) Original Intent & ExpenseMy opponent's only argument showing how the US could benefit from leaving NATO is that the United States is spending a lot of money on NATO. However if the United States withdraws from NATO, it can no longer expect NATO countries to support it in the same level as they currently do. As I will show, NATO is a very tight-knit alliance.Everytime there is a war, the US would need to spend even more money. The lower amount of support would lead to more spending on war. As a country that is currently engaged in three different wars, the US cannot afford to cut itself out of a formidable alliance and go solo.The total spending on National Defense for the US in 2010 was $693 billion [6]. The spending on NATO was $515 million[7]. That is less than 1% of our total defence budget. Considering the benefits of having 19 countries on our side, it is a small investment. 2) Such a need for Europe no longer existsThe issue here is not whether Europe needs protection but whether staying in NATO is beneficial to the United States. While the Soviet Union may longer exist, there are new threats such as terrorism and wars in the Middle East that threaten both Europe and the United States. A strong alliance is necessary. The original need of NATO is irrelevant to a discussion on whether the US should leave NATO as new needs have cropped up. OPENING ARGUMENTS(A) NATO is a Powerful AllianceThe countries in NATO include the most powerful western European nations such as the UK, France, and Germany. As a continent, the economy of Europe is greater than that of any other continent [4]. The United States is part of a very tight-knit alliance. In fact, Article 5 of NATO says that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all [2]. Many countries in NATO are developed countries with a strong military. Such a clause makes the United States a part of a very formidable alliance. The United States is currently in multiple wars and losing the support of NATO members will undoubtedly make our enemies stronger and more confident.My opponent points that EU takes care of threats against Europe, but again the issue here is, who will take care of threats against the United States? Sure, Europe may still support the US, but will it be in the same level as the legendary Article 5? Will European response be as quick as it was after 9/11? Is it advisable for the US to go solo when it is engaged in 3 wars, military strength non-withstanding? There are strategic and locational advantages that the US cannot get after withdrawing from NATO merely by having a lot of military power.The United States can place military operations in NATO countries allowing it to have a military presence in Europe to balance the threat of war in the Middle East. Despite the fact that the United States has the most powerful military in the world, it is not the same as having powerful allies, which have their own military and intelligence agencies which can support the US military and make it even more powerful.My opponent's point that NATO is not intended to protect US borders is easily negated by Article 5 which clearly mentions that North America will be defended as well.(B) NATO proved that it will help the US in times of need When the United States was attacked on Sept 11, 2011, NATO states regarded it as an attack on all 19 members of NATO invoking article 5 of NATO [3].As a result of 9/11, the members of NATO agreed to do many things for the United States [3] including providing access for the United States to ports and airfields on the territory of NATO nations for operations against terrorism [3].NATO radar aircraft were sent to help patrol the skies over the United States; in which crewmembers from 13 NATO countries flew over 360 sorties [3] in operation Eagle Assist. NATO also performed Operation Active Endeavor to prevent the movement of terrorists and WMDs [5].In short, when the US was attacked, all NATO nations took it as an attack on them and rose to the occasion to help the United States. It is highly beneficial to the United States to be in such a close alliance with many powerful countries which have proved that they are ready to preserve and protect the United States.My opponent says that NATO's original purpose was to protect Europe, not the US. However, as I have shown that since NATO does in fact protect the US currently, the original purpose 50 years ago is irrelevant. NATO protects the countries that need protection. At the end of WWII, Europe needed protection so NATO protected it, but now the US needs protection from terrorism and NATO has shown that it is willing to protect the US. (C) The actual process of withdrawal will cause the US to lose political influenceWhile the US may spend more on NATO than European countries, the US also wages war much more than Europe does. European countries support wars that were mostly started by the US. It is only fair that the US spends more. Withdrawing will make the US lose the polical power that the US has with Europe and European countries will be less willing to support the US in its wars.ConclusionThe decision on whether to leave NATO must not taken on the grounds of original intent. As the decades passed since WWII, it can be seen that Western Europe and North America have made new enemies in Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The United States should not withdraw membership from a powerful alliance that has proven time and again that it is ready to support the United States in times of need in exchange for less than 1% of its spending on defence.Sources[1] http://www.nato.int...[2] http://www.nato.int...[3] http://www.nato.int...[4] http://www.university-world.com...[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...[6] http://www.whitehouse.gov...;(Download Table 3.2 and look under total national defence)[7] http://www.outsidethebeltway.com...