what would happen if we closed down most of our overseas bases?

[Jasmin 0]

Quote

So that's a yes then. You would sell the services of the US military to whoever you deem "worthy". Presumably the ability to pay on one of the criterion for being considered "worthy".

When you say pay' do you mean 'by ensuring oil supply'?

(LOL I know its bad etiquette to feed the trolls, but its just too much fun!)

xj

"I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with the earth...but then I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with a car either, and that's having tried both."

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

We do - AND we end up doing any needed renovations or paying for renovations on bases when we leave.

Point in fact - Smiley Barracks in Kaiserslautern, Germany - the government paid several million dollars in renovation fees when they turned the base over to the Germans.

Not 100% true. I know a former US base in Bosnia (although small one) that was left for the "vultures" to tear it apart. It looks like a big pile of garbage now. Sand bags, concrete walls, guard houses, wires...
Maybe you paid for cleanup, and then someone just took the money and did nothing. But maybe it is because it is in Bosnia. They are second class country anyway. They won`t sue the US.

What base? I can tell you that when Camp Dobol and McGovern closed down, the military spent a shit-ton of money bringing in topsoil to restore the area to farmland.

Conversely, when Camp Monteith closed down in Kosovo, the city told the military that removing all the cabling and such wasn't necessary - of course, the city then collected that cable and recycled it....

Quote

OTOH I have to admit the fact that foreign soldiers bring SOME cash into the country (but not so much, I figured that US army ships their supplies from US anyway).

Virtually all logistical support except vehicles (and even many leased vehicles (called TMPs) ) comes from local sources when available.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

So how do you think that foreign countries feel when they have fucking US military bases in their countries??

What, you think that we just go in and start building a base (combat areas excluded)? Fuggin ridiculous. The country signs a contract with the US for that base to be built and supported, so I'm guessing they're pretty ok with it in general.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 2,391]

> There is going to come a time where OUR COUNTRY needs to commit to
> being a clear winner in the world. And I expect it's going to happen
> sooner rather than later. It's going to be vitally important that OUR
> COUNTRY stands as one when that happens.

Yep. We need a final solution. Sure, a lot of our enemies will resist our final victory, but we will be able to crush them like insects. Only once the entire world acknowledges the dawn of the new American century will peace and freedom reign.

[mircan 0]

Well, I passed by there about month ago and the things that I said are still there so if I`m not lying, then I must be using some heavy duty narcotics. And I`m not. It is/was small base near Brcko. In size of four football fields. Don`t know your code name for it. Maybe it was an outpost of some kind. Now it is four football fields of debries. But it is still there.

Quote

Virtually all logistical support except vehicles (and even many leased vehicles (called TMPs) ) comes from local sources when available.

What water do soldiers drink? Which food do they eat? Fuel?
Do they eat kebabs? Local? Buy gas on local gas stations? Maybe on some occasion, but I don`t think so.

dudeist skydiver #42

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Well, I passed by there about month ago and the things that I said are still there so if I`m not lying, then I must be using some heavy duty narcotics. And I`m not. It is/was small base near Brcko. In size of four football fields. Don`t know your code name for it. Maybe it was an outpost of some kind. Now it is four football fields of debries. But it is still there.

Quote

Brcko.... I can't recall if that was McGovern or not. I recall the McGovern camp manager saying that there was a contract to restore the land when the base shut down - that's all I can say on that.

Quote

Quote

Virtually all logistical support except vehicles (and even many leased vehicles (called TMPs) ) comes from local sources when available.

What water do soldiers drink? Which food do they eat? Fuel?
Do they eat kebabs? Local? Buy gas on local gas stations? Maybe on some occasion, but I don`t think so.

I didn't say that they bought gas at local stations or frequented local restaurants - I said that logistical support (foodstuffs and the like) come from local sources as much as possible.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[MegaGoliath11 0]

Or how about having the country we are "protecting" pick up the cost associated with maintaining the base? Kind of a "hired gun"

[MegaGoliath11 0]

yeah why don't we close all bases down overseas! and then we'll kick out all the British Officers/Enlisted who go to military school in the U.S under the exchange officer program. And we'll recall all our American Officers/Enlisted who go to the rest of the world as well.

That's it we'll shut ourselves off completely from the rest of the world and especially our military, we wouldn't want them interacting with any foreign military. We'd rather sow seeds of mistrust by building a huge wall. Thats it!

We'll build a wall of fire and flame and use men with guns to keep it tame!

btw. this post isn't really directed at you Shropshire

[billvon 2,391]

>That's it we'll shut ourselves off completely from the rest of the world and
>especially our military . . .

No, JUST our military.

Take Australia. They have no military bases in the US. Yet, believe it or not, you can buy stuff there, travel there, email people there and even go to school there! They even send their military folks to our shores on occasion for training. Startling, I know. But if they can do it, so can we.

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

> There is going to come a time where OUR COUNTRY needs to commit to
> being a clear winner in the world. And I expect it's going to happen
> sooner rather than later. It's going to be vitally important that OUR
> COUNTRY stands as one when that happens.

Yep. We need a final solution. Sure, a lot of our enemies will resist our final victory, but we will be able to crush them like insects. Only once the entire world acknowledges the dawn of the new American century will peace and freedom reign.

COooooooool !

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[MegaGoliath11 0]

I'm not sure when the last time you were stationed overseas, but the huge costly military bases we seem to think are standard data don't exist as they did even back when I came in 1996.

We have reduced significantly. Consider Korea, we have completely shut down the Western Corridor, (where NK would send mechanized units/infantry if a war broke out) The U.S. remains in Korea as a token force, yes its about 20,000 troops, but only 3,500 of that is part of a combat unit. They are reducing the size of that force every year. Leaving Korea is not about saving money, The U.S. and Korea have become intertwined in such a way thats its a huge emotional and political topics.

Now Germany like Korea is getting paid for us to use the land there. U.S Army Europe has also been downsizing. We have already removed
the 1sT Armored and 1st Infantry Divisions out of Germany. Like Korea though leaving completely is both emotional and political. We're like old friends who can't let go of the past.

I think we can all agree though, Iraq and Afghanistan is the problem now. the cost associated with this is staggering.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Yep. We need a final solution. Sure, a lot of our enemies will resist our final victory, but we will be able to crush them like insects. Only once the entire world acknowledges the dawn of the new American century will peace and freedom reign.

You're such a bleeding heart liberal. In your view, America is the bad guy, end of story. That's bullshit.

And I'm personally offended that you would ever associate me with such demented thinking as a "final solution". I want an apology.

There are many countries in this world that don't like us, and it has nothing to do with our actions over the last 100 years. They've never liked us, or anyone like us.

These countries are now reaching points in their histories where than can, and will do their best, to inflict damage on us and our way of life.

When the time comes where we really need to stand up for our way of life (and I'm not talking exporting democracy), our country must do that.

That's my point.

And, I want an apology from you.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

That's it we'll shut ourselves off completely from the rest of the world and especially our military,

I haven't read anyone here advocating that level of "disengagement".

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 2,391]

> In your view, America is the bad guy, end of story. That's bullshit.

Nope. We're sometimes good, sometimes bad. Fortunately, we are more often good than bad. The time that we do the most good is when we serve as an example of freedom and prosperity to the rest of the world. The time that we are at our worst is when we support radical terrorists in their quest to murder civilians, death squads who undermine governments and dictators who use WMD's on their own people.

We should stop doing that. IMO, of course.

>nd I'm personally offended that you would ever associate me with such
>demented thinking as a "final solution". I want an apology.

Didn't you just write that "OUR COUNTRY needs to commit to being a clear winner in the world?" If your answer had nothing to do with military action, then I apologize; I misread your statement.

If it DID have to do with military action, and you really think we need to be "the winner in the world" through projection of military strength, then your sentiment is one shared by pretty much every would-be dictator who wants (sometimes for the best of reasons) to come out on top in the eventual world-wide conflict that they both anticipate and facilitate.

>There are many countries in this world that don't like us, and it has nothing
>to do with our actions over the last 100 years. They've never likes us, or
>anyone like us.

Agreed. That's not new.

>These countries are now reaching points in their histories where than
>can, and will do their best, to inflict damage on us and our way of life.

Agreed. That's nothing new.

>And, I want an apology from you.

Like I said, if I misread your comment, then I apologize. If not, then perhaps you did not mean to say what you said.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

The time that we are at our worst is when we support radical terrorists in their quest to murder civilians, death squads who undermine governments and dictators who use WMD's on their own people.

You seem to bring this up alot. Do you have examples you can share with us?

Quote

Didn't you just write that "OUR COUNTRY needs to commit to being a clear winner in the world?"

Yes, in every way.

Quote

Like I said, if I misread your comment, then I apologize.

You did. Apology accepted.

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 2,391]

>You seem to bring this up alot. Do you have examples you can share with us?

Sure. We supported Islamic terrorists (the Mujahideen) in the 1980's because we wanted them to kill Russians. We gave them guns, ammunition, plastic explosives and Stinger missiles. We sent advisors to teach them to make IED's. All in all we spent several billion dollars creating a very powerful Islamic terror organization, one that later gave birth to Al Qaeda.

That wasn't such a good idea, as it turns out.

We supported the Contras in the 1980's, to the tune of millions of dollars. According to a report from Human Rights Watch, they then:

* targeted health care clinics and health care workers for assassination.
* kidnapped civilians.
* tortured civilians.
* executed civilians, including children, who were captured in combat.
* raped women.
* indiscriminately attacked civilians and civilian houses.

We supported Saddam Hussein, and sold him helicopters, chemical weapon ingredients and gave him military information to assist him in the use of WMD's against the Iranians. That turned out not to be such a good idea, either.

Next time around we should avoid doing things like that.

>Yes, in every way.

If you mean "every way but militarily" then I agree with you, and I hope we continue to lead the world in things like economic growth, foreign aid and scientific research.

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

The time that we are at our worst is when we support radical terrorists in their quest to murder civilians, death squads who undermine governments and dictators who use WMD's on their own people.

You seem to bring this up alot. Do you have examples you can share with us? Here is a start. http://wais.stanford.edu/USA/us_supportforladictators8303.html Now. You want me to go to the middle east next or africa or asia? Yoy really are brainwashed.

Quote

Didn't you just write that "OUR COUNTRY needs to commit to being a clear winner in the world?"

Yes, in every way.

Quote

Like I said, if I misread your comment, then I apologize.

You did. Apology accepted.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Sure. We? supported Islamic terrorists (the Mujahideen) in the 1980's because we wanted them to kill Russians. We gave them guns, ammunition, plastic explosives and Stinger missiles. We sent advisors to teach them to make IED's. All in all we spent several billion dollars creating a very powerful Islamic terror organization, one that later gave birth to Al Qaeda.

In the 1980s, I was still trying to figure out how to get the buggers off my fingers during timed tests. For reasons I have never fully understood, picking my nose in that environment was comforting.

Quote

That wasn't such a good idea, as it turns out.

Yep. Agreed.

Quote

We supported the Contras in the 1980's, to the tune of millions of dollars. A report from Human Rights Watch, they then:

* targeted health care clinics and health care workers for assassination.
* kidnapped civilians.
* tortured civilians.
* executed civilians, including children, who were captured in combat.
* raped women.
* indiscriminately attacked civilians and civilian houses.

I have always been appalled at the Republican party's propensity, over my lifetime, to happily engage fundamentalists christian groups.

Quote

We supported Saddam Hussein, and sold him helicopters, chemical weapon ingredients and gave him military information to assist him in the use of WMD's against the Iranians. That turned out not to be such a good idea, either.

Agreed.

Quote

Next time around we should avoid doing things like that.

I think our country's leaders over the last 50 years have been very driven by what is commonly referred to as "Cold War Thinking". Thank god they were good at what they did, because that war never went hot. If it had, our planet would have died.

One of my favorite books is Richard Rhodes, "The Making of The Atomic Bomb".

http://www.amazon.com/Making-Atomic-Bomb-Richard-Rhodes/dp/0684813785/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224790807&sr=1-1


I read this book every other year, because I always learn something different. The book is that good.

We need a very strong national defense. Way above every one else, by orders of magnitude. And, we'll need that for the next 100 years.

Quote

If you mean "every way but militarily" then I agree with you, and I hope we continue to lead the world in things like economic growth, foreign aid and scientific research.

No, I really do mean all of the above. That includes militarily.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Thanks for sharing the Stanford link. I read it. With these examples, there was more than just the US "supporting dictators". I seriously doubt our country was the only source of funds. I've never checked that out, but that's my understanding.

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 2,391]

>We need a very strong national defense.

Agreed. The key word there is "defense" not "offense."

>No, I really do mean all of the above.

Then we shall continue to disagree. If we really become the sort of military power who needs to be the clear winner in every dispute, everywhere, then the world will take us down as it has taken down other countries bent on world domination.

Adams put it best:

"She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. . . Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. . . . She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."

I will do what I can to keep us from making the same mistake Adams warns us against.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

"She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. . . Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. . . . She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."

Ah, shoot. I have to go study this now. I will not treat is as a timed test ;-)

We are all engines of karma

[MegaGoliath11 0]

it was sarcasm. please apologize!

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

>We need a very strong national defense.
Agreed. The key word there is "defense" not "offense."
>No, I really do mean all of the above.
Then we shall continue to disagree.

bill, you're taking my words out of context.

Quote

>We need a very strong national defense.

Yes, I said that.

Quote

Agreed. The key word there is "defense" not "offense."

Yes, you said that.

Now, you're a smart guy, and you have a non-trivial impact on these debates. The next sentence you replied to:

Quote

>No, I really do mean all of the above.

...does imply that I advocate both strong defense and strong offense. That is taken completely out of context in our discussion. And, you know that. I was referring to things that OUR COUNTRY needs, and had absolutely nothing to do with being an offensive power.

It seems to me, that anytime military power is discussed in this forum you always remember "our atrocities".

The reality, IMO, is OUR COUNTRY has done far more good in this world than not. There are many cultures on this planet that do want to impact our way of life n a negative manner. And, that reality is not going to change anytime soon.

Am I advocating we go and drop nuclear weapons on them? Absolutely not. I personally favor a far more conceptually simple idea to deal with this problem - kill the money. Let the rest wither on the vine.

I'm still trying to understand the poetry piece you shared... It's pretty powerful stuff.

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 2,391]

>does imply that I advocate both strong defense and strong offense.

Right - and that's where we disagree.

>It seems to me, that anytime military power is discussed in this forum you always
>remember "our atrocities".

Yep, primarily to counter people who can only remember the wonderful things the nearly perfect projection of military power has caused. We have surely done both.

We live in an imperfect world. Allies become enemies. Intelligence can be twisted, distorted, even just plain wrong. Plans go awry. Given all that, even a well-intentioned military effort can have seriously negative and paradoxical consequences. Which is a good reason to reserve our military for defense of our country, rather than as political tools to reshape the world in our image.

>The reality, IMO, is OUR COUNTRY has done far more good in this world than not.

I agree. And 95% of that has come from our economy, our generosity, our charity, our leadership in science, medicine and agriculture, and our example of freedom and liberty.

>I personally favor a far more conceptually simple idea to deal with this
>problem - kill the money. Let the rest wither on the vine.

Again, here we agree. Use our economy as a tool instead of our military. It might be painful (i.e. vastly higher oil prices) but compared to the military alternative almost always wins.

[downwardspiral 0]

Gentlement I present to you....Drew Dix.

If we had two more just like him we could march into hell and extinguish the fires.

www.FourWheelerHB.com