[jrmenon]

Not just the Nordic model, but even the achievements of some European countries (notably Germany) and Japan, would have been possible without US security guarantees?

Essentially the US/Nato is the main protector of Western interests, and American taxpayers ( + deficit financing ) essentially props up these 'regimes' - granted they are more democratic, and there is a great deal of autonomy than a traditional vassal states arrangements.

[Zigurd]

That is a remarkable interpretation of what, in reality, is a situation where the US demands tribute in the form of onerous intelligence tie-ups that lost their purpose when the Soviet Union dissolved and treaties that spread bad US IP laws to places that have no desire to be screwed up that way.

We now pimp the "Global War on Terror" as a substitute, but some guys in caves with a few kilos of explosives just isn't as compelling as an industrial superpower with h-bombs.

[mogrim]

Alternatively, NATO provides legal and moral support to the centuries old concept of buffer states - the US provides military support to stop the spread of communism, which is left unchecked would have reached the US isolated in a hostile world.

As a European (with a keen interest in history) I'm not ungrateful for US aid, but to suggest that aid was entirely selfless is incorrect. (You may wish to draw parallels with the French support that made the American revolution a success, a similar situation...)