Should America Have Troops Stationed Overseas?

[Skull Pilot]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

 

[Claudette]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

I agree.

Why we still have troops in Europe is beyond me.

If something happens let Europe take care of themselves.

We've saved their asses in two world wars and still have troops stationed over there and you can bet we pay rent for every base we use.

As for South Korea?? Those South Korean troops kick ass and can take care of themselves.

The Middle East?? I could give shit one. They want us out and I say we should bet out.

Let ISIS have the place and if they give us trouble nuke the bastards.

 

[Unkotare]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

We are there to protect OUr interests, numbskull.

 

[OKTexas]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

How about you tell where you got your vast military experience. Just so we know we're not dealing with some clueless dumb ass.

 

[DollyLongstaff]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

If Cheney and GW hadn't started this nonsense n the first place, there would be no ISIS.

 

[Unkotare]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

If Cheney and GW hadn't started this nonsense n the first place, there would be no ISIS.

Bullshit (of course)

 

[DollyLongstaff]

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

We are there to protect OUr interests, numbskull.

I think it's time we stop giving Israel money.
As the Repubs say about welfare recipients, if you give them stuff it will make them dependent.

 

[Unkotare]

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

We are there to protect OUr interests, numbskull.

I think it's time we stop giving Israel money....

This is where you realize how irrelevant YOU are.

 

[OKTexas]

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

We are there to protect OUr interests, numbskull.

I think it's time we stop giving Israel money.
As the Repubs say about welfare recipients, if you give them stuff it will make them dependent.

Well if that's your opinion, your welcome to it.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

Nonsense. If the French felt that way, would we be a nation today? Forming alliances and honoring treaties is a perfectly constitutional use of our military. So the question isn't legality, it's philosophical. And Americans decided long ago to reject isolationism and to be involved in the world around us. Isolationists will still gripe, but they will never again prevail.

 

[my2¢]

It isn't a question of where the military is deployed, I see it as having a realistic view of what the military can and cannot do. In post-war Europe there was the Marshall Plan, now we simply crap money away by unsuccessfully trying to wing reconstruction and lose the support of those we intended to help.

U.S.-Funded Iraq Reconstruction Projects Scrapped After Snags New Report Finds Fox News

IRAQ WAR 10 YEARS LATER 15m a day spent on failed projects Latest News Videos Fox News

 

[Correll]

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

We are there to protect OUr interests, numbskull.

Our troops were stationed in South Korea as part of the policy of Containment. It was in our interests to prevent communist expansion.


What are our interests there now?

 

[Correll]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

Nonsense. If the French felt that way, would we be a nation today? Forming alliances and honoring treaties is a perfectly constitutional use of our military. So the question isn't legality, it's philosophical. And Americans decided long ago to reject isolationism and to be involved in the world around us. Isolationists will still gripe, but they will never again prevail.

Isolationism in one thing.

Maintaining vast overseas alliances when our allies are not carrying their fair share and our budget and trade deficits are unsustainable is another.

Russia is not the Soviet Union. The Former Warsaw Pact nations are now members. Several former republics OF the soviet union are now members.

IF they want to deter Russia, they can do it. They just have to spend more than 1% of their GDP on their military.

The French did not ally with US until we proved we were serious contenders and determined and capable of making a serious effort on our own behalf.

 

[Unkotare]

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

Ever thought there is a reason for that, what do you think would happen in Korea if we pulled out?

Not really our problem anymore

South Korea had had 60 years to build up their own military so as to protect themselves from aggression

It's time they took care of themselves

We are there to protect OUr interests, numbskull.

Our troops were stationed in South Korea as part of the policy of Containment. It was in our interests to prevent communist expansion.


What are our interests there now?

The value of US trade in and with NEA is measured in the hundreds of billions (to say nothing of the cost in human lives of any potential conflict there).

 

[g5000]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

And this is no longer the 1950s we now have the ability to attack anyone anywhere in the world without needing deployed forces stationed in other countries.

It's time we pulled back and worried less about protecting other countries let them protect themselves

Never been in the military have ya? As you see in Iraq and Syria, air strikes without boots on the ground mean very little. Do you have any idea what it takes to move an armored battalion, artillery battalion or even a heavy combat engineer battalion 1,000 miles on land much less 3-6,000 miles overseas. It don't happen overnight. Forward deployment of equipment without the soldiers is better than nothing, but you still need people to maintain the equipment.

I've been in the military. 20 years. And you are missing the incredibly obvious. There would be no need to be bombing Iraq if we had not invaded in the first place.

 

[g5000]

Some of our overseas commitments are to protect American interests. But a lot of our overseas commitments are a subsidy of other countries' defense.

One of the reasons Yurp is able to afford single payer healthcare for their citizens is because we are picking up their national defense tab. And they have the nerve to look down their noses at us!

 

[Wyatt earp]

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

And this is no longer the 1950s we now have the ability to attack anyone anywhere in the world without needing deployed forces stationed in other countries.

It's time we pulled back and worried less about protecting other countries let them protect themselves

Never been in the military have ya? As you see in Iraq and Syria, air strikes without boots on the ground mean very little. Do you have any idea what it takes to move an armored battalion, artillery battalion or even a heavy combat engineer battalion 1,000 miles on land much less 3-6,000 miles overseas. It don't happen overnight. Forward deployment of equipment without the soldiers is better than nothing, but you still need people to maintain the equipment.

I've been in the military. 20 years. And you are missing the incredibly obvious. There would be no need to be bombing Iraq if we had not invaded in the first place.

it's been a circle for us since the Shah left Iran and we harbored him do you agree?

 

[pwjohn]

If dumbo kept them In Iraq thousands of people would have been alive today, hope the little jiffy lube man from Chicago sleeps well at night knowing he is responsible.

Our military is supposed to protect us not people in other countries

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

And this is no longer the 1950s we now have the ability to attack anyone anywhere in the world without needing deployed forces stationed in other countries.

It's time we pulled back and worried less about protecting other countries let them protect themselves

There is something to what you're saying, but the economic benefits here at home that are derived from America perpetrating a slaughter on the world is an assurance that, that won't be coming to an end anytime soon.

 

[g5000]

You really are clueless, forward deployment is one of the greatest deterrents possible, without it there would have been more wars. It's just that simple.

No one in the countries we are currently stationed is going to be attacking America any time soon now are they?

And this is no longer the 1950s we now have the ability to attack anyone anywhere in the world without needing deployed forces stationed in other countries.

It's time we pulled back and worried less about protecting other countries let them protect themselves

Never been in the military have ya? As you see in Iraq and Syria, air strikes without boots on the ground mean very little. Do you have any idea what it takes to move an armored battalion, artillery battalion or even a heavy combat engineer battalion 1,000 miles on land much less 3-6,000 miles overseas. It don't happen overnight. Forward deployment of equipment without the soldiers is better than nothing, but you still need people to maintain the equipment.

I've been in the military. 20 years. And you are missing the incredibly obvious. There would be no need to be bombing Iraq if we had not invaded in the first place.

it's been a circle for us since the Shah left Iran and we harbored him do you agree?

It's been a circle for much longer than that.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

As for me, I'm sure that America should not have troops stationed overseas because it attracts a lot of hostility, making themselves a target of terrorism and jeopardising the safety of hundreds of millions of Americans. I'm not saying that America should be 'selfish' and not take up responsibility of fighting terrorism. Fighting terrorism IS important and this can be done at home, in a more subtle manner without stationing troops overseas, for example by cooperating with allies.

Thank you Mr. Paul.

We have bases all over the world which benefits us greatly.

Three examples from the Cold War demonstrate the policy advantages of having U.S. military forces prepositioned in Europe:

• Operation Blue Bat: The U.S. military response to the 1958 Lebanon Crisis. In 1958, the U.S. Navy deployed 45,000 men, including 5,000 marines, to the Middle East from Sixth Fleet in Naples, Italy.[10] U.S. Army Europe deployed one infantry unit from Germany to Turkey, and then to Beirut.[11] Throughout the duration of the mission, four U.S. airbases in Europe provided logistical and lifesaving capabilities.[12]

• The multinational force in Lebanon, 1982. In the midst of Lebanon’s civil war, Israel invaded Lebanon in response to an assassination attempt on Shlomo Argov, Israeli ambassador to the U.K.[13] The United States and European allies brokered a cessation of hostilities. After the Palestinian Liberation Organization and Syrian forces had withdrawn from Beirut, the U.S., France, and Italy deployed a multinational force in Lebanon to maintain stability.[14] EUCOM played a key role in providing command and control and logistical support for the U.S. contingent deployed to Lebanon.
• Operation El Dorado Canyon: Libyan air strikes, 1986. In 1986, U.S. intelligence connected a terrorist bombing of a nightclub in West Germany to the Libyan government.[15] On April 15, 1986, the U.S. Air Force in Europe struck a number of Libyan military assets in retaliation for this and other terrorist actions traced back to the rogue state.[16] U.S. fighter-bombers flew from airbases in the U.K. to carry out the airstrikes in Libya.[17] Because France, Spain, and Italy prohibited use of their airspace due to political concerns, the U.S. aircraft flew around the Iberian Peninsula, which required multiple in-flight refuelings.[18] Even so, the flight path from the U.K. to Libya was much shorter than flying from airbases in the United States. The strike force refueled by KC-10s and KC-135s flying from bases in the U.K. and Italy. On the return flight, one aircraft made an emergency landing at a U.S. Air Base in Rota, Spain.[19]

After the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War, the U.S. drastically reduced its troop presence in Europe. However, the U.S. troops that remained in Europe have been more active than ever before. In all of these post–Cold War operations, the forward deployed and prepositioned military capabilities located in Europe enabled the U.S. to respond in a timely manner. It is worth examining notable operations to which U.S. forces based in Europe have contributed since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Keeping America Safe Why U.S. Bases in Europe Remain Vital