That comment comes off as surpisingly ignorant of the benefits that the US gets by having a buffer zone between it self on either side (Europe on it's eastern flank and the indo pacific on the western flank).

Your whole foreign policy revolves around keeping these areas armed and protected in cooperation with local governments in an effort of keeping conflict from reaching US shores (an evolution of the Monroe doctrine, which started back in the 19th century with keeping European conquest out of the immediate surroundings).

I would highly recommend picking up 'The Grand Chessboard[0]' by Zbigniew Brzezinski, former counselor to Presidents Lyndon B Johnson and Jimmy Carter. It is an excellent light read on the landscape in the mid 90's in regards to US foreign policy and national security. It even forshadows much that has happened recently.

It will truly fill in some gaps.

> Meanwhile, Europe spent the last few decades enjoying cheap Russian energy

Let us not forget that for a long time the US was hooked on foreign imported oil from the middle east, and even in 2021 Russian energy made up a total of 4% of the domestic US energy usage (up since Venezualian sources were not available as readily).

Please don't paint the US as some white knight that does what ever it can to please others on the world stage for altruistic reasons.

At worst it is disingenuous, and at best signals a massive ignorance of the world stage, history and the actors playing on it (again, highly recommend the book[0]).

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard

edit: spelling.

You: "How dare you ....!?"

Later You: "This is why a large portion of Americans could care less about the defense of Europe."

That was easy.

Q.E.D.