Today (8-16-04), President Bush announced the withdrawal of up to 70,000 U.S. military personnel plus over 100,000 of their family members and support personnel from Europe and Asia over the next 10 years, starting with Germany...


http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/16/bush.troops.home/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129077,00.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5707856/

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=05ZYEZG4LAIPACRBAEZSF EY?type=topNews&storyID=5988910


Personally, I feel this is a good thing.

I am glad tell ya the truth. Bring em all home.

Ibudin

Aye - good news.
Actually a very good [election] move on Bush's behalf.

Let's face it, those troops are needed elsewhere.

Just a question, were those stationed in South Korea included on the list?

"At the beginning of the summer, a South Korean Foreign Ministry official said the United States had told him it would like to withdraw a third of its 37,000 troops stationed on the peninsula by the end of next year."

Its right down the page...

At the beginning of the summer, a South Korean Foreign Ministry official said the United States had told him it would like to withdraw a third of its 37,000 troops stationed on the peninsula by the end of next year.Probably.

I strongly agree with this course of action, and Bush said it best himself.

The presence of american troops in european countries is a product of the Cold War and the russian threat. Today Russia is as close of an ally to the EU as USA, just on different topics.

Immense thanks to the men and women of the US Armed Forces for being prepared to place themselves in harm's way not only for their country, but for democracy and fledgling liberal republics across the atlantic.

If those troops and support personnel are kept active (and stationed in the US), it means a boost to local economies as well.

It also means more money spent paying the US troops stationed in the US. While they were stationed overseas the country they were stationed at helped contribute to their paychecks. Just another thing to consider.

Very good idea imho.

This may help forstall or at the very least degrade the impace the BRaC was going to have on local economies.

Don't get me wrong, I loved the years I was stationed in Europe. Was very broadening and overall a great time in my young life.

But it's time to mend fences both abroad and at home.

Fandros

/cheer Bush

Its about time, the Cold War ended over a decade ago, Germany and the rest of Europe that hates the US can gets it own army now lol.

Good.


Pentagon officials said Monday the 1st Armored Division and 1st Infantry Division (search (http://search.foxnews.com/info.foxnws/redirs_all.htm?pgtarg=wbsdogpile&qcat=web&qkw=1st%20Infantry%20Division)) probably won't start leaving their bases in Germany until 2006 at the earliest.
The funny thing is the 1st just completed moving to Germany not too long ago.

Any bets on how long it takes people to start complaining that they're gone?

There are some 2 million troops on each side of the korean border, 37k US soldiers more or less won't make a difference. :rolleyes:

This is true but you are seriously underestimating the fire power at the hands of those 37K US troops...I thought I read some where like 10,000 pieces of artillery was pointed at Korea and mass death would occur either way.

Could be some crazy dream I had but could have sworn someone on this forum had it all linked up. Either way your right 32k does not = 2 million nor does 1000 helping out 140k..might as well stay home.

Edit from CNN:

"Tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers and many more dependents are based in several locations across the country and their departure could be a major blow to local economies, such as Wiesbaden, home of the U.S. 1st Armored division in Germany."

Ouch. But like we haven't been saying that all along.

Ibudin

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/08/17/germany.burns/index.html

Already are Crist0, although from an American stand point I'd be bummed to leave. My 2 years spent there were definetly enjoyable, the traveling in particular.


**not complaining, just proof that they weren't totally against us being there**

Germany is just a jump off point for our SF and stuff in that area. We don't really need the mass of troops there.... but just wait until blah-blah-slovachia invades blah-blah-stanzia and see which of the UN members run to help....

A good and timely decision.

I wonder how this will impact NATO's powerbase in western europe.
The only real thing gluing NATO together is the US. Oh don't get me wrong, the rest of the NATO nations are all on amicable terms with the pact and et cetera, but there is now and has been for some time a brewing sentiment towards forming a unified european defense force. I wonder if that process is now accelerated due to the planned removal of american troops from european soil - thus distancing the military "ties of power" Europe's NATO members have with the US.

Kivorn,
We're not removing all our troops from European soil, just replacing some of the heavier divisions with smaller, more modern brigades. A lot of bases will close, but there will still be an American presence there. A good thing on both sides of the coin.

Moving troops from Korea troubles me, though. A former roommate of mine spent three years as a forward observer on the DMZ. He knew that he was nothing more than a speed bump if NK decided to march across while other units were mobilized. But the symbolism that we would be there was a powerful message to NK. While I still believe we are committed to defending South Korea, it bothers me that NK might read it differently.

Ibudin,
I remember that post also, I believe it was a long time ago on the old boards and probably didn't make the move. NK does have a large amount of artillery pointed at Seoul in hardened positions just across the DMZ. Jane's estimates that 300,000 to 500,000 rounds per hour could be directed across the DMZ ( only about a little under a tenth could actually reach Seoul, though that could still be devestating ). You can read part of the article here ( have to subscribe to see it all )
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/africa_middle_east/news/idr/idr031111_1_n.shtml

Fil

US troops won't be moved from Europe, especially now with the current nuclear concerns. All I can say is don't be over 6 feet tall and go to Korea, you'll probably get put on the DMZ.

damn, i was hoping to get stationed somewhere in italy, oh well las vegas it is!

'Germany is just a jump off point for our SF and stuff in that area. We don't really need the mass of troops there.... but just wait until blah-blah-slovachia invades blah-blah-stanzia and see which of the UN members run to help....'

- *puts head in lap and cries*
Oh noz, the Picts are com1ngz0r!11

Btw, Buffalo Soldiers rocks.

The only real thing gluing NATO together is the US. Oh don't get me wrong, the rest of the NATO nations are all on amicable terms with the pact and et cetera, but there is now and has been for some time a brewing sentiment towards forming a unified european defense force


This was the original point of NATO to begin with. The whole idea was to have a strong European alliance (sort of like the EU!) and a unified European defence force both to stabilize Europe and to prevent Soviet incursion. Naturally what stopped this from being a reality for so long was France, the international foreign policy disaster force of the last century. NATO was a stop-gap measure intended to provide for European defense and stability until a few countries (mostly Germany) could be rebuilt as sovereign nations commited to European defence.

Eisenhower tried more or less the same thing in Southeast Asia with SEATO but it didn't work out as well.

Heh, Kerry blasting Bush about this saying how bad of an idea it is..then..



The Bush campaign also pointed out that Kerry appeared receptive to the idea of troop redeployment just two weeks ago.

"If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world — in the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps," Kerry said on the Aug. 1 broadcast of ABC's "This Week."

If he really works on it, I think he can cut his flip flop time down even further..days or maybe even hours!

Yea cristo, because it's totally impossible that he thinks troop redeployment is a good idea, but how Bush did it is poor!

I agree that we haven't seen the end of the US presence in Europe for a while yet, but again, I'm still curious how this will affect the NATO alliance on a political level.

Considering that Kerry's main bitch is that we're withdrawing troops from South Korea period, and not how we do it...and that he specifically mentioned just such a move himself 2 weeks earlier...I'd say your point is not valid, Talid.

Id say that redistribution of troops in such numbers from South Korea goes right to the heart of "how". WTF do you think "How" refers to? Means of transport?

So, NK and Iran are working together to build ICBMs and our response.. take 10k troops from the border of North and South Korea. Message to Kim Jong Il? "keep doing what your doing baby.."

Id say that redistribution of troops in such numbers from South Korea goes right to the heart of "how".
Hardly, he is NOT complaining about how it is being done but that it is being done period.

Someday it'll sink in.

Crist0's right. Kerry's just trying to feed some fear. Whatever Bush does right, Kerry's response is ... I would have done it better. No big surprise here.


The economy is good... I would have done it better.

Afghanistan was good... I would have done it better.

I voted for the power to go to war in Iraq... but I would have done it better.

I believed that Saddam was in imminent threat... but I would have done it better.

I believe in tax cuts... but I would have done it better.

The Patriot Act is good... but I would have done it better.

Department of Homeland Security is good.. but I would have done it sooner.

It's like the exit strategy and "plan to win the peace" debates. It really doesn't make sense or have historical reality, but it sounds good.