Maybe? Probably? I'll be interested in hearing cases for and against.
What does NATO provide to the US? I still see two arguments for remaining in NATO. First, while NATO is a military alliance, it also fosters good economic ties and influence. Second, the assurances it provides helps prevent other nations from feeling the need to develop their own WMD's. Part of the reason that the UK feverishly developed nuclear weapons post WWII was because they were not convinced the US would come back to Europe and fight the Soviets.
Nuclear states can project power far beyond their economic status would indicate, as should be very apparent at the moment. People with them do not want anyone else to have them. Which is why the whole framework of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is "Club of people that have these, and no one else is allowed to, mmkay?"
I do think there are some hazards in defensive pacts. Local fights turn into big fights.
Also, how does it play out if a NATO member is attacked while actively engaging in hostilities with a non-NATO member? If, for instance, Poland decides to hand over MIG's to Ukraine, consolidates and preps them at Mińsk Mazowiecki, and the Russians decide to flatten them on the ground in Poland, is that an article 5? What if Poland started to enforce a no-fly zone, and gets hit? At what point does a NATO member's actions cause them the loss of article 5 protections?