Withdrawing troops from Germany?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

[quote="Dr Exiled" post_id=1236425 time=1598461788 user_id=18909]
[quote="Temp. Admin." post_id=1236228 time=1598316792 user_id=19208]
Sounds like a fantastic idea to me.
[/quote]

I agree. Let's turn inward for a while, fix our infrastructure, concentrate on local supply chains, disbanding monopolies, etc. We don't need to be the world's policeman (Bush's deceptive position in 2000).
[/quote]

I think I’m leaning toward this - and have said I’d like to see the military cut down to a 1/3 of its current size. In fact, a lot of Left-leaning types have been saying for years that we should cut our military budget way, way down and use the money to fund domestic programs, take the debt down, and focus on infrastructure projects. Our military budget at $700B+/year seems immoral when we have so much to deal with domestically.

I suppose the only things that give me pause is this plays right into other hegemonic powers’ plans, and ultimately if a hot war were to kick off would we be looking back wondering why we reduced our global footprint? I honestly don’t know.

- Doc

[_Themis]

The world's free police is the UN, paid for by countries that offer up money and soldiers to try and make the world a better place. The US has avoided this area and opted to do their own policing in areas that they think will benefit them.

Why can't Germany police itself?

Are you really this stupid. The US does not police Germany. Germany is just a strategic place to put NATO forces to act as deterrent to Russian aggression. These forces are not doing any policing. That is not their purpose. You don't want a world where Russia and China control most of it. It's bad enough now with Russian influence in the white house. That needs to end, but won't until Trump is not president.

[_Themis]

I agree. Let's turn inward for a while, fix our infrastructure, concentrate on local supply chains, disbanding monopolies, etc. We don't need to be the world's policeman (Bush's deceptive position in 2000).

The US is not really doing any policing except maybe in Afghanistan and Iraq, but it doesn't cost mush to do maintain that. The US can spend significantly less on military and not worry about invasion of the US or it's NATO allies. Afghanistan and Iraq were also places the US decided on it's own to invade, and Iraq everyone agrees was a mistake of a republican administration. Funny that Ajax types are isolationists, but want to spend even more on military. The US learned a hard lessen from WW2 that isolationism does not work and makes the US less safe.

[_Jersey Girl]

This thread isn't about Bernie and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. It's about a plan to withdraw U.S. troops from Germany.

What scares you about Russia taking over Europe? They want the same communism that the modern Democrat party wants. I would have figured you'd have wanted that.

I haven't said anything about Russia.

[_Jersey Girl]

Why?

We're not the world's free police service. Who cares what Prime Minister Merkel thinks. She's not paying for the army. The American taxpayer is!

You're worried about taxpayers paying for the Army? So, is it okay with you that the tax payers pay for the Air Force, Marines, or the Navy in USAFE? Do you know what you're talking about? Police the world? Are you at all familiar with what our mission in Germany actually is?

The plan is to withdraw approx. 12K troops from Germany. Germany, ajax, not Europe. The plan is to rotate approx 5K plus troops stateside and approx. 6K plus to other positions in Europe, leaving the rest in Germany for the time being and consideration is being given to move HQUSAFE to another location in Europe.

So what you are getting all enthused about is actually rotating approx. 5K (and change) troops back to the states?

Do you know anything at all about anything you are commenting on? Feel free to correct my above if you have corrections to make.

[_Temp. Admin.]

The US is not really doing any policing except maybe in Afghanistan and Iraq, but it doesn't cost mush to do maintain that.

It doesn't?

The US learned a hard lessen from WW2 that isolationism does not work and makes the US less safe.

Isolationism worked just fine until Roosevelt ordered the Pacific fleet away from San Diego and into Pearl Harbor.

[_Gunnar]

Isolationism worked just fine until Roosevelt ordered the Pacific fleet away from San Diego and into Pearl Harbor.

Are you suggesting or implying that the USA would be better of than it is now, if it never entered WWII, and, as a consequence, the AXIS powers of German, Italy and Japan won the war and took over and ruled virtually the entire rest of the world with the exception of the USA? How long do you think we could have continued to maintain our Independence and democracy had that happened?

And what is the likelihood that Japan would have refrained from eventually attacking the Pacific Fleet in San Diego, had it remained there instead of being ordered to Pearl Harbor?

I do admit, though, that it is not entirely implausible that Roosevelt, recognizing the near inevitability that Japan, Germany, or both would eventually have turned their sights on conquering us, after defeating their more immediate neighbors in Europe and Asia, might have felt it prudent to provoke Japan into attacking us to get us into the war early enough for us to make a difference, and that he felt that moving the fleet to Pearl Harbor might have been an effective way to accomplish that.

[_Jersey Girl]

I suppose the only things that give me pause is this plays right into other hegemonic powers’ plans, and ultimately if a hot war were to kick off would we be looking back wondering why we reduced our global footprint? I honestly don’t know.

- Doc

That's the conundrum, isn't it? We'd be less able to mobilize and respond. Would missiles be our only recourse?

[_Themis]

It doesn't?

No it does little in the way of policing. Most of what the US has done militarily has been for what it thought was in the US's best interests.

Isolationism worked just fine until Roosevelt ordered the Pacific fleet away from San Diego and into Pearl Harbor.

No it was not working fine. The US was no longer in the 1800's when it could try and ignore what was going on in the rest of the world. The 1900's brought that to an end, and the 2000's we are interconnected so much and in so many ways that are impossible to separate. What happens in other parts of the world impact the rest of the world for both good or bad. Putting your head in the sand will not make it go away. The US has to be very involved or it will find some very negative consequences for not doing so.

[_Themis]

I suppose the only things that give me pause is this plays right into other hegemonic powers’ plans, and ultimately if a hot war were to kick off would we be looking back wondering why we reduced our global footprint? I honestly don’t know.

- Doc

I suspect the US does not need to spend the money it does on military to hold back hegemonic powers like Russia and China. It should be doing things like the TPP which would create the world's largest economic free trade zone. This was to counteract China's growing economic power and influence it was exerting around the world. But Trump was the fool and was trying to get rid of anything Obama did, good or bad.