| Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Europeans leaders worry Trump wants to fulfill promise to bring American troops home | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 7 2018, 07:16 AM (103 Views) | |
| dcbl | Jul 7 2018, 07:16 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Good guys wear white hats
|
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article214324579.html WASHINGTON After 18 months of Donald Trump's "America First" presidency, European leaders meeting with him next week fear the United States may change its traditional course and begin to bring American troops home from the continent. It comes as nations, especially in Eastern Europe, are lobbying the United States to increase the number of troops on the continent as they worry about combating an increasingly aggressive Russia. Trump has talked about bringing U.S. troops home from around the globe since he was on the campaign trail espousing a strategy he dubbed "America First” but he has yet to act. |
|
Republicans sign checks on the front, democrats sign them on the back…True story! | |
![]() |
|
| dcbl | Jul 7 2018, 07:20 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Good guys wear white hats
|
if they want our troops there then they need to step up and pay their fair share they also need to match our tariff rates man I LOVE this president it is WAY past time that these type of things get done we have been in Europe almost 75 years since the end of WWII these quasi socialist states are able to give so many benefits to their people because WE pay for their defense and Trump is letting them know Germany and China are already offering trade concessions; the Germans will need to step up their monetary contributions for defense or we need to leave; if we MUST have bases over there, move them to Poland |
|
Republicans sign checks on the front, democrats sign them on the back…True story! | |
![]() |
|
| Robertr2000 | Jul 7 2018, 09:12 AM Post #3 |
|
|
| "if that **** wins we'll all hang from nooses" | |
![]() |
|
| Hughmac | Jul 7 2018, 09:19 AM Post #4 |
|
Heads up: we don't want your troops. Look after your own interests, which lie in the Pacific; you would be stupid not to. You had an incredibly narrow margin as top-dog, and you screwed it up without obtaining anything of much import. The US emerged supreme with the collapse of the USSR, but in such a short period, you screwed up big time with Afghanistan/Iraq and now are up to your nuts in China muscling in. The US has been the shortest empire in history. The British Empire held world supremacy from 1815 to 1916 during which time it achieved world-changing goals, such as the prohibition of slavery within the British Empire, followed by the prohibition of the transportation of slaves on the high seas, back by the unchallengeable might of the Royal Navy. The US between 1989 and 2003 - the window of omnipotence - achieved absolutely nothing. Europe doesn't deserve an American presence, and if you have the slimmest glimmer of intelligence you would redeploy to the Pacific where your future depends. Let Europe rot in its own idiocy and defend your own interests, because nobody will do it for you. Cheers Hughmac |
| H4T wrote: [Global] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies. | |
![]() |
|
| Tsalagi | Jul 7 2018, 09:36 AM Post #5 |
|
Well, on principle, sounds nice, but we need ports like Roto, Spain, NAS Sigonella, Italy, bases like Ramstein and Landstuhl for forward projection of power and a central drop off for wounded from any military action outside CONUS, but I agree, 75% we could shutter and still be on an operational tempo. I tend to agree with H, our interests now lay in the Pacific. While I'll never trust the Russian Bear not to once again stretch itself out again, China should be our primary concern |
![]() |
|
| Harambe4Trump | Jul 7 2018, 09:39 AM Post #6 |
![]()
|
We do not need forward projection in fortress America. |
|
Skipping leg day is the equivalent of a woman having an abortion. You're ashamed of it, and it was probably unnecessary. #MAGA #wallsnotwars | |
![]() |
|
| George Aligator | Jul 7 2018, 09:40 AM Post #7 |
|
I would add to Hughmac's acerbic analysis ^^^ that US troop presence is now redundant in this new era of "war without blood." No one on the Eurasian continent is going to run the risk of launching a nuclear attack on an enemy with the capacity to retaliate by second strike. Warfare of the ancient kind leads to that mutually suicidal stage. Conflict will take place in the new style exemplified by the Russian installation of Trump in the US and several victories and near-victories in Europe. The West must wake up and defend itself. We are gearing up for a war that isn't going to happen while losing the war that is already raging. |
| Conservatism is a social disease | |
![]() |
|
| PATruth | Jul 7 2018, 09:51 AM Post #8 |
|
We pay for their defense while they subsidize their industries and provided free crappy healthcare for their people. The US has been accepting this abuse since 1945, it's time it stops. We spend 600+ billion dollars a year on defense and we can't even stop an invasion of unarmed peasants from south of the border. It's mind boggling the rampant stupidity that permeates Washington DC. |
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it." | |
![]() |
|
| Hughmac | Jul 7 2018, 09:58 AM Post #9 |
|
British bases strung out all over the globe were not there in the interest of the local population, but as way stations for global reach. The British Empire brought with it the seeds of its own destruction: self determination, as exploited (righty) by Gandhi. Many US posters confuse (with childlike ignorance) the location of its bases with 'benevolence towards' the local population - US bases are not there as a favour to the local government but as a deployment point for global projection. To defend yourself, you have to be out there on the frontier of your interests. Bases in Japan and Korea are not there to fend the populations of the said country but as logistic neurological centres for forward operations. In boxing, he with the longest reach holds an advantage that can only be negated by the speed of your opponent. The US, like the British Empire before it, uses overseas bases as "reach and speed." Therefore, you don't need bases in Germany against Russia; you need them as second lines to forward operational bases in Southern Europe for North Africa and the Middle East. Bases in conflict zones are vulnerable; those in Southern Europe are not to the same degree as conflict-zone FOBs. Furthermore, soldiers will be more willing to risk themselves knowing that they can be in top-class, military hospitals within 24 hours; we're talking Germany unless you can move them to Spain, Italy or Greece. But, where you are going to need most of your military assets is in the Pacific. China is not Al Qaida, as the West found out in Korea in the 1950. So, 70 years on, China in the 21st Century is much more of an adversary than the USSR in the 1960s. Much, much more. As long as you need fossil fuel you will need to keep a presence in Southern Europe, for your own good; not Europe's, but where your heaviest punch must be is housed is in the Pacific. Cheers Hughmac Edited by Hughmac, Jul 7 2018, 10:03 AM.
|
| H4T wrote: [Global] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies. | |
![]() |
|
| Hughmac | Jul 7 2018, 09:59 AM Post #10 |
|
Myopic, Mr PA, very myopic - H |
| H4T wrote: [Global] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies. | |
![]() |
|
| Hughmac | Jul 7 2018, 10:05 AM Post #11 |
|
You never cease to amaze me with your puerile, simplistic reasoning - H |
| H4T wrote: [Global] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies. | |
![]() |
|
| PATruth | Jul 7 2018, 10:13 AM Post #12 |
|
The US government responds to changing global tensions and realities about as quickly as the continents shift. What's really at stake is billions of dollars we pour into foreign economies. Once again, the US taxpayer is picking up the tab to prop up the EU. |
|
"No. No he won't. We'll stop it." | |
![]() |
|
| Tsalagi | Jul 7 2018, 10:22 AM Post #13 |
|
If we had not had facilities in Germany, many of wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan might not have made it back home. We're not propping them up, they have militaries conducive to their actual needs, those bases are heavily subsidized by the host nations. The bases are for our purposes. As has been made necessary by our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan |
![]() |
|
| dcbl | Jul 7 2018, 10:25 AM Post #14 |
![]()
Good guys wear white hats
|
That's one of the more interesting posts you have made Hugh I have to say that I tend to agree |
|
Republicans sign checks on the front, democrats sign them on the back…True story! | |
![]() |
|
| dcbl | Jul 7 2018, 10:30 AM Post #15 |
![]()
Good guys wear white hats
|
Bingo We need to have the strongest navy in the world, but 35000 troops in Europe is way too damned many to have in Germany |
|
Republicans sign checks on the front, democrats sign them on the back…True story! | |
![]() |
|
| Harambe4Trump | Jul 7 2018, 10:47 AM Post #16 |
![]()
|
Don’t engage in Iraq or Afghanistan |
|
Skipping leg day is the equivalent of a woman having an abortion. You're ashamed of it, and it was probably unnecessary. #MAGA #wallsnotwars | |
![]() |
|
| Harambe4Trump | Jul 7 2018, 10:48 AM Post #17 |
![]()
|
Occam’s Razor has always been beyond your grasp. |
|
Skipping leg day is the equivalent of a woman having an abortion. You're ashamed of it, and it was probably unnecessary. #MAGA #wallsnotwars | |
![]() |
|
| Hughmac | Jul 7 2018, 12:43 PM Post #18 |
|
On the contrary, If you, H4T, repeatedly make unrealistic observations, the simplest explanation is that you never had a grip on reality in the first place, rather than your possessing a profound and all-encompassing grasp that you unwittingly conceal from us owing to the concussion brought about by a near miss from a meteor strike. Cheers Hughmac |
| H4T wrote: [Global] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies. | |
![]() |
|
| Hughmac | Jul 7 2018, 12:47 PM Post #19 |
|
Two points: A) The Royal Navy, for example, at its heyday, needed to control supply ports all over the planet, hence the growth of the empire along sea routes. To secure such ports, you need to be able to control their environs. B) 35,000 troops is more or less the amount that you have kicking around Korea at the moment, I believe - correct me if I am wrong. Cheers Hughmac |
| H4T wrote: [Global] nuclear annihilation is preferable to the pre-Trump immigration/refugee policies. | |
![]() |
|
| dcbl | Jul 7 2018, 02:04 PM Post #20 |
![]()
Good guys wear white hats
|
we have SIXTY FIVE or more thousand in Europe 25K or more in Korea we need to scale back, time to quit being the world's policeman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_deployments |
|
Republicans sign checks on the front, democrats sign them on the back…True story! | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com FOREIGN* & DEFENSE · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2









10:26 AM Jul 11