US to punish German 'treachery'

Gangerolf · February 16, 2003, 14:24

http://www.observer.co.uk/internatio...896573,00.html

Quote:

America is to punish Germany for leading international opposition to a war against Iraq. The US will withdraw all its troops and bases from there and end military and industrial co-operation between the two countries - moves that could cost the Germans billions of euros.

Quote:

'We are doing this for one reason only: to harm the German economy,' one source told The Observer last week.

'Our troops contribute many millions of dollars. Why should we continue to support a country which has treated Nato and the protection we provided for decades with such incredible contempt?'

Another Pentagon source said: 'The aim is to hit German trade and commerce. It is not just about taking out the troops and equipment; it is also about cancelling commercial contracts and defence-related arrangements.'

way over the line imo. probably not good for the future of nato either?

Ted Striker · February 16, 2003, 14:26

If you believe the article that is.

Ted Striker · February 16, 2003, 14:29

The article just sounds like something people have discussed in a thread on Apolyton actually, so I wouldn't take it for being accurate.

Though, from a strategic standpoint, it might be time to move the army headquarters southeast. Since that's where all the action is going to be for the next 50 years.

DanS · February 16, 2003, 14:39

We are going to pull out a lot of troops, use prepositioned depots more, and set up bases further east. We might be able to do some other small stuff. But overall, how could we end "industrial cooperation"? It's just silly.

DinoDoc · February 16, 2003, 14:39

Given the collapse of the USSR, what exactly is wrong with moving forces around?

Spiffor · February 16, 2003, 14:43

These sources seem unreliable at best.
The US will move their troops further East, now that it can have bases nearer to Russia, but I don't think it has anything to do with punishing Germany.
I think the true diplomatic calculations bahind the scenes are much less hysterical than what they were on the stage last week.

Sava · February 16, 2003, 14:45

I doubt the article's legitimacy, but nevertheless, it wouldn't surprise me.

Datajack Franit · February 16, 2003, 14:46

How proud, how arrogant at the same time...

DanS · February 16, 2003, 14:46

but I don't think it has anything to do with punishing Germany

It does have something to do with it, but the economic impact of the punishment is relatively small. It's an accelleration of a process already under discussion.

GePap · February 16, 2003, 14:49

The US is correct to move forces if their current configuration is not optimal. Those forces don't protect Germany anymore since the threats to Germany today are not ones dealt with with tanks. As for ending industrial cooperation with Germany...idocy. I remember this company, DaimlerChrystler.....

Gangerolf · February 16, 2003, 14:49

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Given the collapse of the USSR, what exactly is wrong with moving forces around?

probably nothing. it's this part that worries me:

Quote:

Another Pentagon source said: 'The aim is to hit German trade and commerce. It is not just about taking out the troops and equipment; it is also about cancelling commercial contracts and defence-related arrangements.'

but let's hope it's not true. the article does seem a bit unreliable, lots of "sources" but no names..

DanS · February 16, 2003, 14:55

This is a more balanced article on the subject...

Quote:

US Ponders Reducing Troops in Germany Over Berlin's Iraq War Dissent
Thursday, February 13 2003 @ 08:14 PM GMT

"Hunter added that troop realignment in Europe might include the transfer of US bases to 'more cost-friendly environments' in some of the East European nations .."

BERLIN - The United States is considering to reduce its troop presence in Europe, especially Germany, following Berlin's hardline opposition to an imminent American attack on Iraq, the European edition of the American military daily Stars and Stripes said on Thursday.

According to the report, the Armed Services Committee of the US House of Representatives is scheduled to hold hearings in two weeks to discuss slashing American troop presence in Germany.

The Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Duncan Hunter was quoted as saying that Germany's and France's opposition to the use of military force to oust Saddam Hussein has 'brought the issue of (US troops in Europe) to the forefront'.

Hunter added that troop realignment in Europe might include the transfer of US bases to 'more cost-friendly environments' in some of the East European nations that have recently joined or been invited to join NATO.

"With an expanded number of European allies, the US may have the opportunity to base its forces in new locations with lower training and development costs," Hunter added.

Of the roughly 100,000 American troops in Europe, 71,400 are in Germany. German-American ties have reached a new post-World War II low point over Berlin's dissent to back a US military intervention in Iraq.

71,000 troops is quite a lot. Never knew it was that much...

Lancer · February 16, 2003, 15:11

The Sovs are burnt toast. The only point to NATO now is to keep the euros from attacking each other. Since the two countries that historicly fight are now engaged in funky buttlovin', there's not much for us to do there anyway.

I say we move the forces to France.

GePap · February 16, 2003, 15:19

While I support moving forces as needed, moving forces as part of political retribution would be a bad move: it would make the US look petty, and bring into question our sincerity to the defense of Europe, if all one state has to do is disagree and we get all prissy. Moving forces ot make them cheaper to maintain and better positioned to the days threats: Good thing. Moving them as political punishment: bad thing.

Gatekeeper · February 16, 2003, 15:28

If the U.S. military believes such moves are necessary, then it may be advisable to carry them out. If this is being done out of purely political spite — and offers little to no military advantage — then I'd look at it twice before doing anything.

It's easy to preach for the break-up of NATO — heck, I've done it once or twice — but when it actually becomes a possibility, wow, things suddenly get a reality-rooted perspective on them suddenly.

Gatekeeper

Comrade Tribune · February 16, 2003, 15:37

I can visibly imagine the Germans trembling.

[Now I wonder: Should I add those 20+

, or...?]

Provost Harrison · February 16, 2003, 15:40

I thought it was known for many years that the US intended to relocate many bases to Poland...so I don't think this is a particularly great surprise, although if Dubya has phrased it in such inflammatory terms, he isn't going to be doing himself any favours by pissing off Germany and France, two of the largest industrial powers in the world.

DinoDoc · February 16, 2003, 15:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
although if Dubya has phrased it in such inflammatory terms,

It's the Guardian. They probably made up most of the quotes.

Ozz · February 16, 2003, 15:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
Since the two countries that historicly fight are now engaged in funky buttlovin', there's not much for us to do there anyway.

Turkey and Greece, Right?

DuncanK · February 16, 2003, 15:52

I don't agree with those troops being there at all. It's not that I think Europe should be punished. If we pulled them out any set back that the local economies could easily be remedied. I think we should pull them out because I think the US is too visible these days. Let the Europeans protect out interests over there. We protect their interests over here.

Comrade Tribune · February 16, 2003, 15:53

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
It's the Guardian. They probably made up most of the quotes.

You are probably a bit paranoid (as if we didn´t know that

), but even if this were true: It still means that the Guardian, together with most Brits, is on the side of Europe, and Blair is increasingly out on a limb...

DinoDoc · February 16, 2003, 15:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
You are probably a bit paranoid

Probably. But they do have a well known bias when it comes to reporting on the US. The BBC seems to be the best foreign outlet for news I've seen so far.

monkspider · February 16, 2003, 15:57

I think this is a great proposal. No longer can the democracies of Europe be coerced by America's gunboat diplomacy.

DanS · February 16, 2003, 16:00

"The BBC seems to be the best foreign outlet for news I've seen so far."

FT!

Provost Harrison · February 16, 2003, 16:07

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc

It's the Guardian. They probably made up most of the quotes.

I didn't think he'd do that (or should I rephrase, his advisors wouldn't let him do that

)

Dr Strangelove · February 16, 2003, 16:07

Perhaps some of our leaders are forgetting that "industrial co-operation" cuts both ways. There are quite a few US companies that supply material to militaries in Europe and the Far East. If these countries begin to fear that the US will use a sort of boycott of their military industries in order to coerce them into playing ball, they may re-think their use of American military suppliers.

DuncanK · February 16, 2003, 16:26

Quote:

Originally posted by monkspider
I think this is a great proposal. No longer can the democracies of Europe be coerced by America's gunboat diplomacy.

Don't forget. The're there to keep the peace. And for that the've done a good job. If you don't want to be coerced anymore you're gonna have to keep the peace yourselves.

Nubclear · February 16, 2003, 16:31

I hope we punish China to, by declaring an embargo on everything. And those evil commies in Russia!!!! And France too! Maybe Pakistan as well....And lets stop food aid to North Korea (Oh wait, we did that already). Lets remove our troops from Saudi Arabia, those muslim terrorists hate us so why should we be there? And those evil phillipinos.....Lets punish them too!

And those canadians.....They hate us as well those terrorists. Lets lock our border with them and declare an embargo. Tony Blair isn't gonna last much longer....when hes out, embargoes and possibly an invasion comes in.

Those Mexicans really suck....Theyre protesting war too! Lets just eliminate NAFTA and get done with it. And close the border and expell all dem mexicans. Maybe we'll send them to Madrid. SPEAKING OF WHICH, the spanish people also hate us! Lets just nuke them....Hey, they killed thousands of innocent native americans! And Taiwan...its not like their helping us much. And lets just get rid of South Korea, they hate us too. And those EVIL finns!

I hear that they have good relations with RUSSIA!!!!

They MUST be eliminated.

Oh yes, and of course: The germans. I mean, they killed their own people! They had a dictator! It ONLY makes sense!

Datajack Franit · February 16, 2003, 16:36

good point Tass

DinoDoc · February 16, 2003, 16:40

Quote:

Originally posted by DanS
"The BBC seems to be the best foreign outlet for news I've seen so far."

FT!

I don't have much experience with the Financial Times. How would you rate thier reporting compared to the BBC?