US examining removing Troops from Germany

[*bfine32*]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-assessing-cost-of-keeping-troops-in-germany-as-trump-battles-with-europe/ar-AAzlSzT?ocid=spartanntp

Quote:The Pentagon is analyzing the cost and impact of a large-scale withdrawal or transfer of American troops stationed in Germany, amid growing tensions between President Trump and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, according to people familiar with the work.

This would be a move I would absolutely applaud. I've said for years we should move our bases from Europe to the Middle East. This would cut on deployments and perhaps work to westernize the ME

[Au165]

(06-29-2018, 11:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-assessing-cost-of-keeping-troops-in-germany-as-trump-battles-with-europe/ar-AAzlSzT?ocid=spartanntp


This would be a move I would absolutely applaud. I've said for years we should move our bases from Europe to the Middle East. This would cut on deployments and perhaps work to westernize the ME

As long as we move them to Poland I am okay with it. The idea of having no force at Russia's doorstep is a mistake. I do think the massive hit we take on the infrastructure we already built in Germany needs to be considered though in any financial analysis.

[jj22]

(07-02-2018, 10:03 AM)Au165 Wrote: As long as we move them to Poland I am okay with it. The idea of having no force at Russia's doorstep is a mistake. I do think the massive hit we take on the infrastructure we already built in Germany needs to be considered though in any financial analysis.

This is just an (sad) attempt to sell an Ally out to please Putin prior to their "summit".

[Benton]

(07-02-2018, 10:03 AM)Au165 Wrote: As long as we move them to Poland I am okay with it. The idea of having no force at Russia's doorstep is a mistake. I do think the massive hit we take on the infrastructure we already built in Germany needs to be considered though in any financial analysis.

Ultimately, isn't that what NATO was supposed to be?

To the OP, awesome. Reducing the number of bases (not necessarily troops, but bases) is long, long over due. 

[Au165]

(07-02-2018, 11:06 AM)Benton Wrote: Ultimately, isn't that what NATO was supposed to be?

To the OP, awesome. Reducing the number of bases (not necessarily troops, but bases) is long, long over due. 

You could argue the U.N. is supposed to be the world police everywhere so why do we end up doing it the majority of the time? The reason we do it is because it furthers our own national defense strategies. We do very little from a military stand point that isn't based around some sort of self serving interest. 

[Benton]

(07-02-2018, 11:09 AM)Au165 Wrote: You could argue the U.N. is supposed to be the world police everywhere so why do we end up doing it the majority of the time? The reason we do it is because it furthers our own national defense strategies. We do very little from a military stand point that isn't based around some sort of self serving interest. 

We did it in the pa$t to $tabilize market$ and make $ure American companie$ operating in other countrie$ (mining re$ource$ or u$ing lax law$ to develop technology) didn't experience too much turmoil. 

But in the push for America to be more 'global market friendly' we've devalued American products and labor to the point where wages are shrinking. We can't continue to have US workers paying to make sure US companies have a stable place to relocate US dollars. 

[Dill]

(07-02-2018, 11:17 AM)Benton Wrote: We did it in the pa$t to $tabilize market$ and make $ure American companie$ operating in other countrie$ (mining re$ource$ or u$ing lax law$ to develop technology) didn't experience too much turmoil. 

But in the push for America to be more 'global market friendly' we've devalued American products and labor to the point where wages are shrinking. We can't continue to have US workers paying to make sure US companies have a stable place to relocate US dollars. 

I understand your concern about stabilizing the world economy in the interest of US corporations--not US workers. But that is the sort of problem that ought to be managed by domestic policy. It won't fix itself by a retreat from the world.

I am concerned, however, about what the alternative will look like.  The has already massively reduced its bases in Europe.

I worry about further reductions. 

[Yojimbo]

We have 800+ military bases, costing $100bn a year, around the world. I’d cut that to 10.

[*bfine32*]

(07-02-2018, 08:26 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: We have 800+ military bases, costing $100bn a year, around the world. I’d cut that to 10.

It is a difficult answer. There are places in the world that our presence is required to ensure freedom, but Germany is no longer one of them. 

Let's build bases in Africa, Middle East, Central America. Europe is stable and can fend for themselves. 

[GMDino]

(07-02-2018, 09:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is a difficult answer. There are places in the world that our presence is required to ensure freedom, but Germany is no longer one of them. 

Let's build bases in Africa, Middle East, Central America. Europe is stable and can fend for themselves. 

[Benton]

(07-02-2018, 09:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is a difficult answer. There are places in the world that our presence is required to ensure freedom, but Germany is no longer one of them. 

Let's build bases in Africa, Middle East, Central America. Europe is stable and can fend for themselves. 

Whose?

Are we really concerned with an African country... any African country... disrupting any Americans domestic freedoms?