Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: 1K0N on June 14, 2004, 12:48:30 PM
-
Why is it necessary to keep two US divisions in germany?
What purpose does it serve?
A reduction of troops is being advised by the DOD but some germans complained that the result would be german job loss..
I would think that Germany would prefer the troops pulled out but not from what I have read in the media...
Who is still a threat in europe that requires US troops deployed in Germany?
I haven't seen a good answer to this question yet lately...
Someone help me out here..
IKON
-
I don't know why, but isn't US troops still South Korean and Japan?
-
Originally posted by 1K0N
Why is it necessary to keep two US divisions in germany?
I haven't seen a good answer to this question yet lately...
Someone help me out here..
IKON
Isn't Ramstein our major air base there, for hopping into central Europe and the Near East? Whenever something goes down in that part of the world, it seems like everybody flows through Ramstein AFB.
-
Just a matter of time. RMAFB is closing next year. That would leave Ramstein. They are cutting back on ground troops now.
It still is quick hop to the ME from Germany. Facilities are here.
Plus they need to stay- otherwise I will lose my PX.
-
Over the last decade the RAF have pulled out of Bruggen, Laarbruch, Gutersloh, and Wildenrath. The RAF have no aircraft in Germany at all now. The British Army still have quite a lot of troops and bases there still though.
-
Sausages, Beer and a fondness for leather shorts?
-
The why from the US stand point is global projection of power. The why from the German stand point is increadable amounts of US dollars flowing into thier economy.
That equation seems to be under review but has worked very well for both parties for many years.
-
The why from the US stand point is global projection of power. The why from the German stand point is increadable amounts of US dollars flowing into thier economy.
Aside from the practicality during the cold war and the general power projection, I believe it bought some degree of influence where foreign policy support was concerned that we have worked to maintain. We no longer seem to be able to count on that. They’re all big, well developed countries now and they’re more than willing to disagree with the US as it suits their interests (not that there’s anything wrong with that :)). They are also willing and able to compete economically. Time they paid more for their own defense out of those GDPs and we supported more local economies in the US. IMO.
Interesting question though, would a US pull out lead to increased defense spending in Europe? Is there still a local, percieved threat that would prompt larger militaries?
Charon
-
don forget about Spangdalham....that's an airbase in Germany as well. Think of Germany as the Ohair of Air force bases....it is a major hub.
-
Oktoberfest
(http://www.lakearrowheadvillage.com/images/oktoberfest.jpg)
-
Economic reasons are the only ones for us being there in Germany and Japan. And since the SK no longer want us there(the populace, not the government), we should leave there as well. Time for some "base closures" abroad as well as in the US.
-
It's a fallacy that U.S. bases abroad generate 'huge' ecomonic returns for the community. The host countries have to foot larger infrastructure costs and other than bars, local merchants don't see much benefit. The military personnel do most of their shopping on the base, yet the taxpayers of the country have to pay for roads, water, sewage, waste disposal, etc.
As an example, when the U.S. military was forced to leave The Philippines about 15 years ago, many argued that it would devaste the local economy. Yet the result was less crime, a cleaner community and a free-trade zone established on the property has improved the local economy far beyond the anticipated return.
-
global pork
-
Read this Rolex, starting on page 26. Then come back and post links to your assertions.
http://www.bicc.de/publications/reports/report04/report4.pdf
-
I suppose I could just use the link you posted... :)
Page 33, Paragraph 2:
"Not all the money paid to America soldiers and civilians, however, was spent in the economy of the host country. In fact, the majority never stimulated the regional demand for goods and services but rather was spent in the shopping and social facilities operated by the United States."
Page 34:
"From a macroeconomic point of view, the total volume of the contract expenditure and the private consumption of U.S. personnel had been of marginal importance to the German economy in 1989; with the number of military dollars spent in Germany cut virtually in half, the economic factor of the American demand for German goods and services has become even less significant. Together, the financial transactions of the US Forces in Germany in 1993 made up US$2.7 billion - a negligible proportion of the national German economy as a whole in the same year."
SYSTEM: Rolex landed two victories in a P-40B of the Assertion Squad
-
Don't pick and choose. The report details who it hurts, which is the same as in the US. Bases in urban areas are fine, but the ones located in rural areas are hard hit. The overall loss of revenue is well over 200 million of the German play money, so it is not insubstantial.
-
Originally posted by Lizking
The overall loss of revenue is well over 200 million of the German play money, so it is not insubstantial.
But that's not trade, that's just US dollars coming into Germany. And they had already had $40,000,000,000 US dollars last year because of the the US trade deficit with them.