Proposal. Remove U.S. Military Members. - Page 4

SlowwHand · February 16, 2003, 19:20

This isn't Bush, DM. You sounding like Floyd now.

Demerzel · February 16, 2003, 19:24

World War I was during the era when European countries believed war was something that could be waged quickly and was a useful tool of diplmacy ( kinda like Bush now

), 1871 Franco-Prussian war was a good example of this. WWI proved this not to be the case anymore.

World War II was started by a madman bent on conquest, no logic can define his actions.

Europe has changed markedly since those days and I somehow doubt that Germany would instantly try to conquer other EU countries if the US pulled out. The US forces in Europe may have prevented a Soviet attack but then again the Soviets were always worried that the US would attack them first, so it's a tie

Can't see the US personnel leaving the UK with just under half of the 99 year leases of bases left to go. Would leave the US isolated indeed if they pulled out of all western Europe.

SlowwHand · February 16, 2003, 20:12

UK isn't wouldn't be under consideration.
The UK is there beside us.

KrazyHorse · February 16, 2003, 20:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
Who traditionally invades european countries? Who invaded South Korea in the past?

The US?

Comrade Tribune · February 16, 2003, 21:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Of course US comes in again and pacifies the situation.

US *created* the situation by arming criminal Albanian warlords.

Ted Striker · February 16, 2003, 21:40

Ya, I guess those mercenaries Slobo hired to exterminate the other side had nothing to do with the situation.

"Hey, not our fault those mercenaries got out of hand." How convenient. Free Slobo!

Of course, the default answer of blaming the US is usally the easiest one.

SlowwHand · February 16, 2003, 21:48

Always.

Comrade Tribune · February 16, 2003, 21:50

The only mercenaries in Kosovo were retired US generals training the gangsters.

Very hard not to blame the US for this.

devilmunchkin · February 16, 2003, 23:29

sloww: if it's not bush, who is it? or is it him and other ppl? i'm just trying to understand......

Zero · February 16, 2003, 23:40

WTf? it went from page 1 to page 5...

HershOstropoler · February 17, 2003, 04:55

Dino:

Quote:

But if the power structures that are now in place in Europe and Northeast Asia are benign, they are not sustainable for much longer. The most likely scenario in Europe is an eventual American exit coupled with the emergence of Germany as the dominant state. In effect, the region will probably move from its present bipolarity (with the United States and Russia as the poles) to unbalanced multipolarity, which will lead to more intense security competition among the European powers.

Is there some sort of competition in america's "academia" who can sprout the most nonsense? I'd say this is a nice one, but still miles from the "monetary union creates all out european war".

The intellectual level of most of those IR pieces is on par with creationism. At best.

Lancer · February 17, 2003, 05:07

Unemployment in Germany has recently exceeded 10%. Have the extremist parties gained any popularity by chance?

KrazyHorse · February 17, 2003, 05:12

Is that high for a Euro country? In 1993 or so our unemployment rate was running at 9-10%...

KrazyHorse · February 17, 2003, 05:13

Spain's was 23% the last time I checked (a few years ago). Apparently they've brought that down a bit recently, however...

Tattila the Hun · February 17, 2003, 05:15

There are about 50 million reasons supporting continued peace in Europe... Even without US troops

Can somebody tell me, what is the "School of America's"?

Drake Tungsten · February 17, 2003, 06:07

I agree completely, Sloww, and the German bases should be the first ones on the chopping block. Either bring the US troops home or rebase them in the friendly countries farther east. They're closer to hotspots anyway and I'd much rather see the Polish or Czech economies enjoy the benefits that come with a large population of American servicemen.

CerberusIV · February 17, 2003, 07:19

It is probably time the US troops pulled out of Europe. The likely outcome would be moves to European unification and certainly greater military co-operation. I am not sure it is better to do what the French government wants rather than what the US government wants but it probably involves less of pissing off the rest of the world. I can't see a more unified Europe suiting the US government though.

As for the UK, about 20 miles from where I am typing this is Menwith Hill, one of the main US electronic intelligence bases outside the USA. About 50 miles away is RAF Fylingdales which will be part of the anti missile system (if it ever works). Go about 120 miles south and you will find the airbase the F-111's that bombed Libya flew from.

Apart from the (censored) intelligence from Menwith Hill, which country really needs US bases in the UK? (Hint: not the UK).

TheStinger · February 17, 2003, 07:22

I used to live in Harrogate about 7 miles form Menwith HIll, it was nice to know I'd get nuked soley for the precence of that base.

Starchild · February 17, 2003, 09:22

Don't let the Germans have all the fun. Leave the UK too!

Chemical Ollie · February 17, 2003, 09:54

The economic contribution from perhaps 100 000 US soldiers in a rich and populated country like Germany is like a fart in Cosmos. Let them leave. The cold war is over.

SlowwHand · February 17, 2003, 12:05

What's to laugh over is, many of you that say "Yes, go, go" have never been around without U.S. troops stationed there.

When I say, "Pull the Service Members Out", I mean that's it.
Over. Finito. Done. You're on your own, Kid.

But I'm glad to see my idea supported.

DinoDoc · February 17, 2003, 12:11

Roland: I won't be able to give a real response to the thread for few days due to studying for a test (It cuts into the time I can devote to researching useless things). I really regret posting that article though.

Sava · February 17, 2003, 12:16

you need to study?

Starchild · February 17, 2003, 12:31

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
What's to laugh over is, many of you that say "Yes, go, go" have never been around without U.S. troops stationed there.

Actually Sloww, I've lived around Americans a lot. Ten years in the good ol'USA itself.

What I've seen is that we in the UK, your closest ally, don't exactly get much out of the so called "special relationship". You gonna tariff our steel and help fund the IRA than we should be sitting down and having a serious think about letting you use our bases. Especially when you use our bases to pressure our government into supporting an untested, impractical missile defense system that makes us a target by anyone wanting to get all triggerhappy.

Tingkai · February 17, 2003, 12:46

Don't pull the US troops out. Why should European prosititutes be punished for because of the way politicians behave.

Pekka · February 17, 2003, 12:55

I reaaaaally don't believe there is a good reason for the US to stay in Germany, well at least not military reasons. Germany is safe now, and they have their own military, and alliances. However, Germany needs those US troops there, because they bring lots and lots of cash with them. Now, this is very beneficial for Germans, but I don't know the importance of this to the US. They should just pack their bags and leave, if Germany won't even support them. Why stay? There are many reasons to leave. Schroeder brought this down to them himself.
And the US won't be the bad guy, since Germany is not in danger.

Besides, it's BS for others to cry for help all the time, meaning people wanting US troops to their lands. Every country should make sure that they can defend theirselves by themselves, with no help from others. Or else they are nothing but whiny old women. I reckon if you don't have the will to protect your country, then you really don't care about its safety and therefore should not be in power to begin with. It's the leaders FIRST responsibility to make sure that own people are safe now, and in the future. That means army without others help.
If you can't take care of yourself, you must have good buddies to protect you, but you MUST train yourself to be able to protect yourself asap. Or, you really have to treat your buddies right, and not piss on their shoes.
You can't make military alliance and then act on your own, only when it suits you. You have to also do the messy stuff that you wouldn't want to. If you don't pay back others help, even if it's free, you're not a good buddy.
I think it's the least the US can ask. They have the alliance, and are only asking their help, which is their responsibility. Instead of helping, they only take the money the troops bring with them and smile and not help. I'd leave the first moment I could. I won't stick around in places I'm not wanted.

Pekka · February 17, 2003, 12:57

They should help the US, and be glad to have the opportunity to do it! You have to give in able to recieve.

Spiffor · February 17, 2003, 12:58

I'm from France, where there is no American base (thanks to our beloved De Gaulle), and I can insure you we have no problems with that. I support Sloww's idea as stonrgly as I oppose war in Iraq

SlowwHand · February 17, 2003, 13:09

If I ran the circus, I wouldn't lift a finger to help France again.

laurentius · February 17, 2003, 13:35

If I ran the circus I wouldnt have the guts to be such a *ss to link WW2 and Gulfwar2 together..