American Military in Europe

[August1991]

Apparently, there are some 100,000 US soldiers in Europe.

Can anyone explain why? 

[Rebound]

7 hours ago, August1991 said:

Apparently, there are some 100,000 US soldiers in Europe.

Can anyone explain why? 

Cause it beats the hell out of being stationed anywhere else?

Cause it’s a far better forward staging area for conflicts anywhere in the Mideast and Africa? 

[Nationalist]

8 hours ago, August1991 said:

Apparently, there are some 100,000 US soldiers in Europe.

Can anyone explain why? 

1. Because whole towns in Germany rely on the US Military for their economies.

2. Because they're ramping up for what looks like an inevitable direct war with Russia.

It was such a good Idea to send that scruffy bastard Johnson to kill the Turkey peace talks. Don't ya think?

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Cause it beats the hell out of being stationed anywhere else?

Cause it’s a far better forward staging area for conflicts anywhere in the Mideast and Africa? 

Cause democrats like to start wars? 

The answer, of course, is C) Because democrats like to start wars. 

[NYLefty]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

1. Because whole towns in Germany rely on the US Military for their economies.

2. Because they're ramping up for what looks like an inevitable direct war with Russia.

It was such a good Idea to send that scruffy bastard Johnson to kill the Turkey peace talks. Don't ya think?

Wrong, Wrong and Wrong

[Nationalist]

35 minutes ago, NYLefty said:

Wrong, Wrong and Wrong

Really. OK...why don't you give your account of this?

[reason10]

13 hours ago, August1991 said:

Apparently, there are some 100,000 US soldiers in Europe.

Can anyone explain why? 

I graduated from a college that believed in ACTUAL education. In the Global Politics Class, we studied the concept of "rapid deployment.'

FDR lied to get the United States into the European theater to take down the Democrats ally Adolf Hitler, mostly because the increased military spending would bail the country out from the disaster his New Deal had created. It took a mild depression he inherited and expanded it to disastrous proportions.

This created a mentality that if the war is going to be on the other side of the world, it would be best to have the manpower and equipment there as well. Since America (and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic) basically saved Europe from being turned into lampshades by the Nazis, the idea of America being the world's policeman took hold. Democrat presidents likewise got the United States into Asian civil wars, (Truman/Korean War and Johnson/Vietnam War.) The concept of "rapid deployment" means the men and the gear are already in place, in countries were American dollars are spent protecting them. Animal regimes like Iran are prevented from just marching into Israel based on the idea (besides the fact that Israel has one of the most fearsome armies in the world) that it would be simple for American fighter bombers to be scrambled from an aircraft carrier in the Med.

(My brother was stationed on the Forrestal in the late Sixties, and he knew for a fact the fighter jets were carrying nukes.)

Some people refer to this as the Military Industrial Complex, with all the negative hoopla that comes from the term. Ironically, the last time the American federal budget was balanced was in 1969, during the Vietnam War, when Defense spending was the largest item.

Since then, (and you can thank Nixon and a Democrat Congress for this) baseline budgeting has made ENTITLEMENTS the largest budget item there is, and they are growing exponentially.

The ultimate irony is that our LAST LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP was the beginning of a movement to reverse this trend, even by baby steps. He brought peace to the Middle East (FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY) and was hinting that our allies should PAY US for our military presence protecting their countries. He initially was going to target deep pockets like Saudi Arabia and South Korea.

Then again LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP was the OPPOSITE of a neoconservative. He was opposed to the Iraq War, (a war Democrats voted for, as well as Republicans.) That's probably why he ran afoul of the Bush family in 2016.

 

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

1. Because whole towns in Germany rely on the US Military for their economies.

2. Because they're ramping up for what looks like an inevitable direct war with Russia.

It was such a good Idea to send that scruffy bastard Johnson to kill the Turkey peace talks. Don't ya think?

Well, George Patton wanted to have it out with the USSR while we were there at the end of World War II. He said we have the men and the equipment here now. Let's just get it over with or those commie bastards will come at us later on.

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, Deluge said:

Cause democrats like to start wars? 

The answer, of course, is C) Because democrats like to start wars. 

Bush Jr started our last 2 wars. Biden caught hell from Republicans for pulling out of the last one, despite the FACT that it was Trump who negotiated our surrender without the involvement of the Afghan National Government.

AKA, you don't know what you're talking about. ?

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, reason10 said:

I graduated from a college that believed in ACTUAL education. In the Global Politics Class, we studied the concept of "rapid deployment.'

FDR lied to get the United States into the European theater to take down the Democrats ally Adolf Hitler, mostly because the increased military spending would bail the country out from the disaster his New Deal had created. It took a mild depression he inherited and expanded it to disastrous proportions.

This created a mentality that if the war is going to be on the other side of the world, it would be best to have the manpower and equipment there as well. Since America (and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic) basically saved Europe from being turned into lampshades by the Nazis, the idea of America being the world's policeman took hold. Democrat presidents likewise got the United States into Asian civil wars, (Truman/Korean War and Johnson/Vietnam War.) The concept of "rapid deployment" means the men and the gear are already in place, in countries were American dollars are spent protecting them. Animal regimes like Iran are prevented from just marching into Israel based on the idea (besides the fact that Israel has one of the most fearsome armies in the world) that it would be simple for American fighter bombers to be scrambled from an aircraft carrier in the Med.

(My brother was stationed on the Forrestal in the late Sixties, and he knew for a fact the fighter jets were carrying nukes.)

Some people refer to this as the Military Industrial Complex, with all the negative hoopla that comes from the term. Ironically, the last time the American federal budget was balanced was in 1969, during the Vietnam War, when Defense spending was the largest item.

Since then, (and you can thank Nixon and a Democrat Congress for this) baseline budgeting has made ENTITLEMENTS the largest budget item there is, and they are growing exponentially.

The ultimate irony is that our LAST LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP was the beginning of a movement to reverse this trend, even by baby steps. He brought peace to the Middle East (FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY) and was hinting that our allies should PAY US for our military presence protecting their countries. He initially was going to target deep pockets like Saudi Arabia and South Korea.

Then again LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP was the OPPOSITE of a neoconservative. He was opposed to the Iraq War, (a war Democrats voted for, as well as Republicans.) That's probably why he ran afoul of the Bush family in 2016.

 

Well, George Patton wanted to have it out with the USSR while we were there at the end of World War II. He said we have the men and the equipment here now. Let's just get it over with or those commie bastards will come at us later on.

He did indeed. At the time, they could have. Today?

[reason10]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

He did indeed. At the time, they could have. Today?

I think LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP had the right idea. If we're going to be in Europe and the far east and middle east protecting them, they should pay us. Or we should just come home.

KKKlinton taught us the sad lesson that ALL the military might on the other side of the world as well as having two oceans separate us is NO guarantee that a major act of war will never occur on our shores. KKKlinton IGNORED all the signs of a terrorist act (which took five years to put in motion, four years under his negligent nose) and President inherited a ticking 911 time bomb.

Trump's idea of securing the borders is another way of making Americans safe.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, reason10 said:

I think LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP had the right idea. If we're going to be in Europe and the far east and middle east protecting them, they should pay us. Or we should just come home.

KKKlinton taught us the sad lesson that ALL the military might on the other side of the world as well as having two oceans separate us is NO guarantee that a major act of war will never occur on our shores. KKKlinton IGNORED all the signs of a terrorist act (which took five years to put in motion, four years under his negligent nose) and President inherited a ticking 911 time bomb.

Trump's idea of securing the borders is another way of making Americans safe.

Perhaps. But Donny said something I always remembered.

Why should the USA and Russia be enemies? Wouldn't an alliance make more sense?

That would have created an alliance so powerful that it could have dominated everything and everyone.

But old habits die hard and the neo-cons would have no more great satin to oppose.

Meh...what could have been...

[Aristides]

17 hours ago, August1991 said:

Apparently, there are some 100,000 US soldiers in Europe.

Can anyone explain why? 

That's less than half as many than in Germany alone during the Cold War.

8 hours ago, Deluge said:

Cause democrats like to start wars? 

The answer, of course, is C) Because democrats like to start wars. 

First Iraqi war. HW Bush. Second Iraq war and Afghanistan. GW Bush. You were saying?

[herbie]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

That's less than half as many than in Germany alone during the Cold War.

Don't confuse them with facts and history.

They've already forgotten about or dismissed NATO

Baw!! They should pay us to have bases all over the place! Baw! The Marshall Islanders should pay us for testing H bombs on their island - we defended them!

[reason10]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

That's less than half as many than in Germany alone during the Cold War.

First Iraqi war. HW Bush. Second Iraq war and Afghanistan. GW Bush. You were saying?

Those were not wars. They were rescue operations.

Democrats like Hitlary voted for the Second Iraq war as well as Afghanistan.

Interestingly enough, LEGALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TRUMP had been opposed to the Iraq war.

2 minutes ago, herbie said:

Don't confuse them with facts and history.

They've already forgotten about or dismissed NATO

Baw!! They should pay us to have bases all over the place! Baw! The Marshall Islanders should pay us for testing H bombs on their island - we defended them!

Democrats were in charge of that.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Perhaps. But Donny said something I always remembered.

Why should the USA and Russia be enemies? Wouldn't an alliance make more sense?

That would have created an alliance so powerful that it could have dominated everything and everyone.

But old habits die hard and the neo-cons would have no more great satin to oppose.

Meh...what could have been...

There is no way America could form a true alliance with the fascist kleptocrat Putin.

Despite Trump's defense of Putin killing journalists, democracy would die as well, and Putin has killed that in Russia, too.

Maybe you would kill democracy for peace, but intelligent people know that would be short lived.

You're proof of what Frum said:

Quote

“if conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy”

despite the probability it would lead to dictatorship.

I know self proclaimed libertarians who believe that a dictator with libertarian policies would be preferable to democracy.

They do not understand that the dictator would abandon libertarianism as soon as they acquire enough power; then they are the only one with freedom.

 

[Nationalist]

5 hours ago, robosmith said:

There is no way America could form a true alliance with the fascist kleptocrat Putin.

Despite Trump's defense of Putin killing journalists, democracy would die as well, and Putin has killed that in Russia, too.

Maybe you would kill democracy for peace, but intelligent people know that would be short lived.

You're proof of what Frum said:

despite the probability it would lead to dictatorship.

I know self proclaimed libertarians who believe that a dictator with libertarian policies would be preferable to democracy.

They do not understand that the dictator would abandon libertarianism as soon as they acquire enough power; then they are the only one with freedom.

 

Ahhh David Frum. The wannabe Yankee Canadian. Works for the Atlantic, if I'm not mistaken. TDS suffering, short, little never-Trumper. He's the POS who wrote all those speeches for Bush to justify leveling Iraq.

Huh...think I'll take a pass on li'l David's opinion.

 

[NYLefty]

17 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Really. OK...why don't you give your account of this?

If you've ever been to Germany you'd know whole towns don't really on our military dollars being there. Towns in Germany are largely supported by local tourism and tourist from other EU countries.

As far as ramping up for a war against Russia that's a bit of a stretch. Troop numbers are way down with the lowest numbers since the cold war. And NATOs combined military force is something right wing Americas darling Putin would never or could ever fvck with. He can't even get thru the Ukraine for crying out loud.

[Nationalist]

10 minutes ago, NYLefty said:

If you've ever been to Germany you'd know whole towns don't really on our military dollars being there. Towns in Germany are largely supported by local tourism and tourist from other EU countries.

As far as ramping up for a war against Russia that's a bit of a stretch. Troop numbers are way down with the lowest numbers since the cold war. And NATOs combined military force is something right wing Americas darling Putin would never or could ever fvck with. He can't even get thru the Ukraine for crying out loud.

I have been to Germany many times.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/02/removal-of-us-troops-from-germany-will-gravely-affect-local-communities

[NYLefty]

20 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I have been to Germany many times.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/02/removal-of-us-troops-from-germany-will-gravely-affect-local-communities

Yea you rightwingdingalings have been predicting Germany's demise ever since they've surpassed us as a society shortly after WW2 with their universal healthcare will destroy them, immigration will kill Germany, Americas right wing hero Putin will destroy Germany last winter with gas line shutoff. 

And sourcing the Guardian is not only laughable but limp dick'd

[Rebound]

21 minutes ago, NYLefty said:

Yea you rightwingdingalings have been predicting Germany's demise ever since they've surpassed us as a society shortly after WW2 with their universal healthcare will destroy them, immigration will kill Germany, Americas right wing hero Putin will destroy Germany last winter with gas line shutoff. 

And sourcing the Guardian is not only laughable but limp dick'd

I agree. Germany has done everything that American conservatives describe as the “destruction of America,” and the result is an economy that’s stronger than America’s. 
 

Germany has national healthcare. 
Germany has very strong labor unions. 
Germany granted instant citizenship to millions of impoverished East Germans and integrated them into their nation. 
Germany then accepted the EU, with a common European currency and centralized regulations. 
Germany allowed workers from any EU nation without any immigration process.  
Gay rights and abortion, too. 
 

All that, and Germany’s kicking a$$. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by Rebound

[Nationalist]

28 minutes ago, NYLefty said:

Yea you rightwingdingalings have been predicting Germany's demise ever since they've surpassed us as a society shortly after WW2 with their universal healthcare will destroy them, immigration will kill Germany, Americas right wing hero Putin will destroy Germany last winter with gas line shutoff. 

And sourcing the Guardian is not only laughable but limp dick'd

Ok...I'm sure you'll believe WAPO...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/german-town-fears-loss-of-us-army-base/2012/03/23/gIQAoNzzeS_story.html

OOPS...better load up on Viagra. It's Friday and you might just need to wake that wet little wet noodle of yours.

[Nationalist]

18 minutes ago, Rebound said:

I agree. Germany has done everything that American conservatives describe as the “destruction of America,” and the result is an economy that’s stronger than America’s. 
 

Germany has national healthcare. 
Germany has very strong labor unions. 
Germany granted instant citizenship to millions of impoverished East Germans and integrated them into their nation. 
Germany then accepted the EU, with a common European currency and centralized regulations. 
Germany allowed workers from any EU nation without any immigration process.  
Gay rights and abortion, too. 
 

All that, and Germany’s kicking a$$. 

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6264/no-go-zones-germany

Lol...

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Ok...I'm sure you'll believe WAPO...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/german-town-fears-loss-of-us-army-base/2012/03/23/gIQAoNzzeS_story.html

OOPS...better load up on Viagra. It's Friday and you might just need to wake that wet little wet noodle of yours.

An article from 2012. Really?

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6264/no-go-zones-germany

Lol...

Almost every developed country is struggling with economic refugees these days. No one lining up to get into Putin's Paradise though.

[Nationalist]

8 minutes ago, Aristides said:

An article from 2012. Really?

Yes really. It shows clearly that US bases support countless German towns.

Something you disputed...and were wrong about.

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Almost every developed country is struggling with economic refugees these days. No one lining up to get into Putin's Paradise though.

Of course not. Putin said long ago, refugees are welcome, but they will become Russian or don't come.