Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Misthiocracy ·
November 1, 2011 at 3:24am
As of October 21, 2011, there were about 49,000 US troops in Iraq. Obama promises that number will be reduced to zero by the end of 2011.
As of December 31, 2010, there were about 103,000 US troops in Afghanistan. That number is scheduled to be reduced to zero by 2014.
These are young, fragile states whose futures remain uncertain, to say the least.
Meanwhile...
- Number of US troops in Germany: over 50,000
- Number of US troops in Japan: over 40,000
- Number of US troops in Italy: over 10,000
- Number of US troops in Britain: over 9,000
Is it just me, or do the military priorities of the US government seem a little off-balance? Why does it make sense to abandon Iraq and Afghanistan but to also maintain a large and expensive military presence in peace-time Europe?
(I suppose one could argue that the government of Iraq has better finances...)
- Comment (31)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
U.S. troops in Europe are partly there for political reasons. But they are also there for training with NATO allies (FWIW), as a forward rapid deployment to potential hotspots (the 173d Airborne Bde. in Italy), and as an advanced support base, e.g., casualties from the Middle East are airlifted to top-notch facilities in Germany; Reagan bombed Libya from the UK. Also, small training deployments to places like Africa (Green Beret detachments) are staged from Europe.
Does it really cost much more to maintain the equivalent of 3 divisions in Europe than it would to put them at state-side posts, naval stations, and AF bases?
Edited on November 1, 2011 at 3:54amJun '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
We need to keep troops in Korea. The North needs to know that if they invade SK, they are picking a fight with America.
Aug '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Please note that I left South Korea off my list. I did that intentionally. :-)
Edited on October 31, 2011 at 10:56pmNov '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Misthiocracy
Please note that I left South Korea off my list. I did that intentionally. :-)
Are not the troops in Japan backup for the ones in Korea?
Aug '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
I'll leave that question to someone who knows more about US military grand strategy.
My post really was meant as a question for those who know more about such things.
The question wasn't meant to be rhetorical.
Oct '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Our southern border.
Oct '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Asia. Philippines. Taiwan. Japan. Korea. Contain the Dragon and the Islamists!
Apr '11
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
First off I thought we are essentially the guarantors of Japanese safety since they themselves are constitutionally pacifistic with only a small self defense force. Also our troops are deployed in these places as other have mentioned not because they are hot spots in need of US fighting men but because they are safe spots as close to the Hot Spots that might need us. Worrying about where our troops are stationed does not seem to be as important to me as worrying about the fact that we are the only western country with a capable military. We should demand that they either give us subsidies for giving them protection or that they raise their own military capabilities.
I don't think either of those is likely. So here we are stuck footing the bill and feeling under appreciated but too upright to just let things go to the dogs to make everyone sorry, and miss the good old Americans.
Oct '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
communism used to be a threat, that's one of the reasons for US presence in asia.
Aug '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Unfortunately, they're needed in Iraq and Afghanistan, because they're on either side of Iran, and the only way to keep them from becoming untouchable like the Norks is to go to war against them.
Apr '11
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
China is going to bust a move on Taiwan. The stars are aligned for Beijing with the Obama administration's refusal to upgrade Taiwan's F-16 fleet.
From the House Foreign Relations Committee Chairwoman's website:
Reacting to news of the exclusion of the F-16s, Ros-Lehtinen said:
"The decision by the Administration not to include the F-16 C/D fighter in this package calls into question the Administration’s commitment to longstanding policy to ensure that Taiwan is able to defend itself from mainland China, as legislatively mandated in the Taiwan Relations Act. This deal has Beijing’s fingerprints all over it."
The Chicoms know how to read tea leaves. If Obama is voted out of office in November I can imagine the time frame being Nov 7 to Jan 20. I know it sounds too creepy but wasn't that about the same time frame that they launched their assault around the Chosin Reservoir.
May '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
One of the US military's highest priorities this century is force projection. It's the reason we have 11 nuclear aircraft carriers, Marine expeditionary forces, cruise missiles, and why we keep flirting with pursuing Conventional Prompt Global Strike capability. If we ever have to fight in Korea again, you can bet we'll be at a great advantage to have those bases in Japan.
Edited on November 2, 2011 at 11:29pmMay '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
I'd do the Southern border.
Oct '11
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
The Southern border is not a military problem, it is a law enforcement problem. We are not facing enemy forces requiring artillery, armor and maneuver. Using the military for police problems is a gross waste of resources and capability and a would be a possible violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. The national Guard is better suited for this mission and not restricted by the Posse Comitatus Act.
Oct '11
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Simple. Global reach, global force. To project power globally requires established basing and logistics overseas to include prepositioning of supplies and combat arms. It is impossible to project sufficient power from the continental US to influence world events. One cannot achieve enough mass to be decisive without the use of nuclear weapons. Forward basing allows conventional forces to bring the required mass to bear in a timely manner.
May '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Fastflyer
Using the military for police problems is a gross waste of resources and capability...
You're right. The purpose of the US military is to kill people and break things, not maintain a 2,000 mile barricade against third world civilian peasants.
Oct '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
take all the military out of europe and move them to asia.
Dec '10
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
As asserted in earlier posts, they are sent to forward bases. While there is a major pull out in Iraq and eventually in Afghanistan, they are redeploying to Kuwait, a small country with a big desire to remain secure. There's also a push to place more assets in the region in order to keep a watch on Syria and Iran. We are also we are having talks with Vietnam regarding the use of Cam Ranh Bay, a subtle message to the Chinese.
As for border enforcement, I disagree with the notion that third world peasants reside there. Drug cartels have an extensive network and have often tested the Mexican military. See: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/mexico/article/Cartels-attack-Mexican-army-788698.php
While "Punitive Expeditions" such as the one conducted by General Pershing in 1916 are archaic by today's standards, the U.S. Military's top obligation is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. That includes the citizens and their right to conduct their lives in peace and safety. A robust defense does not necessarily require a substantial number of troops in a day and age where software technology and drones exist.
Mar '11
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
Many of the commenters make excellent points, with which I agree. I add that the troops listed in Italy and Britain do not include large combat formations, but are comprised of combat support elements from the three big services, and staffs, largely for purposes of NATO training and cooperation. The troops in Germany include combat formations, as do to a lesser extent the forces in Japan.
NATO, despite the lack of political will in many of the constituent governments, is still a viable alliance and represents an important tie between the US and Europe - in many ways, it is the alliance of the West. I would not abandon it lightly. And the Brits are our closest friends in Europe (not to slight some other nations, notably Poland and Norway). We also gave Japan and Korea security guarantees.
We have commitments in the world - commitments which might be a tad more important in the long run than feeding the insatiable entitlement machine, and buying votes for perpetual political power. Our current situation is called a dilemma for a reason. Please don't advocate gutting the one part of the US Government that actually works and is required.
Mar '11
Re: Where Are US Troops Needed Most?
I don't have issues with having manpower overseas for logistical bases to support force projection. However, having combat wings and brigades overseas, Korea Excluded, is absurd in non-war zones, is strategically outdated, and a waste of money. Japan and Germany need to pony up and have large enough militaries protect themselves. I personally think NATO should be dissolved and the same resources go into a Pacific Rim Alliance along the same vein. South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Philippines, and maybe add Thailand/Singapore/Australia/New Zeeland to the mix. All the countries that are ideologically our closest Allies! We still should have logistical bases in Europe and some training, but NATO is a relic of the pass. Europe does not have the capability to fight overseas wars anymore with-out U.S. aid. So we should take them of Military welfare.