US plans to cut forces overseas by 70,000

[gaz]

By Peter Spiegel in London
Published: August 13 2004 22:01 | Last updated: August 14 2004 00:51

The US is expected to announce on Monday that it is pulling 70,000 troops out of Europe and Asia in the largest restructuring of its global military presence since the second world war.

People briefed on the plan say two-thirds of the reductions will come in Europe, most of them military personnel stationed in Germany who will be sent back to US bases.

An additional 100,000 support staff and military families worldwide will be part of the realignment.

The changes are expected to be announced by President George W. Bush at a speech to the Convention of Veterans of Foreign Wars in Cinncinatti, Ohio, on Monday.

Although Germany will remain home to the largest contingent of American forces on the continent, both army divisions now based there the 1st Armoured and the 1st Infantry could be moved to US bases.

Germany will continue to be home to sophisticated training and command facilities and to a mobile infantry force which will be equipped with the new light-armoured Stryker vehicles and is expected to form the core of a restructured European presence.

The Bush administration has been re-evaluating the US military's global posture almost since its first days in office. Senior Pentagon officials emphasised that the move was not intended as a punishment for Germany's lack of support in the Iraq war.

In Asia, the reduction is expected to include the 3,500-soldier brigade from South Korea, which was recently deployed to Iraq.

There will also be a shift of some European command headquarters. The navy's European HQ, which has been in London since the second world war, will be moved to Naples.

Financial Times (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/117d14c8-ed63-11d8-a587-00000e2511c8.html)

[aartamen]

The European move is somewhat strange. A whole lot strange, actually. We'll see how it plays out in the long run. But right now I can't imagine a good reason for it.

[Freibier]

Since germany is no longer a frontier state as during the cold war, this move actually makes sense. No hard feelings from our part.

[Deuterium]

If true I'm glad I got my 7 years in Germany while the getting was good. Thanks Germany for being such a great host to me and my family.

89-92 Bad Tolz/Stuttgart
95-98 Stuttgart

[radon]

woot

[BlackRain]

The USA spends $100 billion on forces in Europe and $30 billion in Korea per year.

By providing US tax payer financed security for those countries and receiving nothing but grief; it is long pass time to bring our troops home or redeploy them in areas that are important to US national security.

It is time that our allies took over their own national security and provided their own funds to do it.

[Freibier]

If true I'm glad I got my 7 years in Germany while the getting was good. Thanks Germany for being such a great host to me and my family.

89-92 Bad Tolz/Stuttgart
95-98 Stuttgart
You Amerikaners will be welcome anytime :)

[radon]

If true I'm glad I got my 7 years in Germany while the getting was good. Thanks Germany for being such a great host to me and my family.

89-92 Bad Tolz/Stuttgart
95-98 Stuttgart
You Amerikaners will be welcome anytime :)

This doesen't affect me too much , it' s not reallymy business. But I think people should always be doing the defense themselves as much as possible.

[Freibier]

If true I'm glad I got my 7 years in Germany while the getting was good. Thanks Germany for being such a great host to me and my family.

89-92 Bad Tolz/Stuttgart
95-98 Stuttgart
You Amerikaners will be welcome anytime :)

This doesen't affect me too much , it' s not reallymy business. But I think people should always be doing the defense themselves as much as possible.
That has primarily nothing to do with defense at all. The americans in germany for the most part are just very nice people to have around.

[usa320]

The USA spends $100 billion on forces in Europe and $30 billion in Korea per year.

By providing US tax payer financed security for those countries and receiving nothing but grief; it is long pass time to bring our troops home or redeploy them in areas that are important to US national security.

It is time that our allies took over their own national security and provided their own funds to do it.

My thoughts exactly...

Maintaining the large force we have in Germany right now takes alot of money, personel and it makes security more difficult...

I dont think the Germans are going to get invaded by the Russians anymore, so i think we should maintain ONE airbase in germany, instead of like 5 of em we have now...

Our troops could be put to better use elsewhere, botha t home and overseas.

[BlackRain]

Our troops could be put to better use elsewhere, botha t home and overseas.

Those US tax payer dollars could be spent here in the USA for the 100,000 military dependents in Europe alone.

Think of all the money that these 100,000 folks spend a year for food, lodging, trips, gifts, etc. This form of economic stimulus could best be spent elsewhere like here in the USA.

The US spends $4.2 billion a year on Family Housing alone.

The U.S. military budget request for Fiscal Year 2005 is $420.7 billion.

Great resource on military spending: http://64.177.207.201/static/budget/annual/fy05/topline.htm

[Nordic Fire]

But I think people should always be doing the defense themselves as much as possible.
True. I wonder when/if we'll have a referendum on joining NATO and how many attempts it will take until we "vote the right way"...

[KB]

Long overdue. NATO is dead and has been since early '90s...whether anyone wants to admit it or not. IMHO US needs to complete the pull out, to include forces in Balkans. Leave Europe for the Europeans.

[jedisponge]

as good as it sounds to some embittered american's about a few europeons attitudes towards us, we need a few bases anywhere we can get, otherwise what happened in the begining of the war with turkey about now allowing some of our forces there will happen again.

[aartamen]

Europe is important because it is close to the future arenas of war - Middle East, Central Asia, Caucasus. If the troops were moved from Germany to Bulgaria or Bahrain, I'd understand. Moving them to the US, is not conducive to rapid deployment into the area of future conflicts. Tanks and helicopters take very long to move and then reassembling the regiments is a pain.

NATO is not dead. It''s wounded. I suppose I would like to see a military alliance with all the NATO members but without the Germans and French right now, but who knows what the situation is going to be 50 years from now. The old enemy is the same - Russia. Though it's not PC to say that. But I bet the Baltic states are sleeping a whole lot better now, as the East Europeans were before them. Poland is doing so much to express its gratitude for the US (Clinton btw) pushing for inclusion, that it's already worth it. Ukraine sent a regiment to Iraq in hopes of getting in. If there was no NATO, what would we do? Bilateral agreements?
But on top of all that we have a bunch of new enemies (by the 20th-21st century standards, in reality they are pretty old ones). And that's where we the US need the NATO members more than they need us. B/c the Arabs are very close to getting nukes. And than it's no more Mr. Nice Arab.

[usa320]

Europe is important because it is close to the future arenas of war - Middle East, Central Asia, Caucasus. If the troops were moved from Germany to Bulgaria or Bahrain, I'd understand. Moving them to the US, is not conducive to rapid deployment into the area of future conflicts. Tanks and helicopters take very long to move and then reassembling the regiments is a pain.



Weve already got bases in Kuwait, Quatar, Bahrain, Iraq, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan...

Therefore, if forces are needed in the Caucuses or Asia, they should be delpoyed to and based at those bases, not bases in Germany.

[-ile-]

I just hope that the Army recruitment office stays in Germany... I hope to visit there in about two years...

*dreams of a Green Card*

[BlackRain]

Good luck, seriously!

We are always looking for people to come over to the dark side.

[aartamen]

Weve already got bases in Kuwait, Quatar, Bahrain, Iraq, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan...

Therefore, if forces are needed in the Caucuses or Asia, they should be delpoyed to and based at those bases, not bases in Germany.

With exception of Djibouti, which I simply do not know about off-hand, all those countries are Moslem. And may suddenly constrain use of troops from those bases, a-la Turkey. And counting Iraq as a source of troops is way too early, it's going to be a consumer for many years. A-stan too. Also you can't even begin to compare the infrastructure of Tajikistan and Germany. Would you like to be based in Uzbekistan or Bulgaria? There's a tremendous difference. For one Bulgaria has warm sea resorts. Secondly the chances that there's a big indegineous support for those whom the forces based there are going to fight is much lower.

It's not the same.