American Military Bases Overseas.

Post Reply New Topic

Money, we pay for bases. Troops spend money off base. We also support the current landlord.

When the Philippines objected, we left. Their objection was give us more money.

Vietnam jumped in with an offer of Cam Ran Bay. An unused Soviet base.

The Baltic States claim to be facing Russian invasion, and demand 10,000 troops to be stationed in each country, along with leases for bases, airfields, which will be surrounded by bars and strip clubs.

On our side, each base has a General, and promotion calls for empty slots. The more bases, the more Generals.

When a General gets his stars, a whole chain below gets promoted.

The Soviets left many bases in the now free countries, who have no use for them. Defending Slovakia from Czech Tourists?

One reason for bases is to keep countries from being overthrown by unapproved parties.

Some bases are penal postings. Korea is known for the worst food and living conditions.

The love of money is the root of all evil. WWII was such good business, The Korean War, Vietnam, wars without reason, kept the money machine rolling. The Cold War maintained full employment when most officers should have been retired.

Since the end of the Cold War, the dissolving of the Soviet Union, US military spending has gone up. The "Peace Dividend", was spent on starting new wars.

Congress funds military spending, and the location of production contracts in their district. Often Congress has an ownership interest in the production. They fund it, and decide what a fair profit is.

Only Congress has been excluded from the Insider Trading Laws. If they are going to give a big contract, nothing stops them from buying stock in the company. Most people are well to do when they enter Congress, and filthy rich when they leave.

War is not just good business, it is a sure thing.

None of the people anywhere on earth have any say so about the actions of their ruling overlords.

Americans do not like illegals, they are ignored.

Europeans do not like multi cultural invasion, but they can only vote for local officials, who then ignore them.

Public opinion has nothing to do with how the world is run.

Trump is such a danger, because he would follow the wishes of those who elected him.

A "faction" is hardly a majority which is what I meant (and you know it) when I said that most people arent bothered by by foreign military in the US.

My ex was stationed in Baumholder,Germany and he never mentioned the locals complaining about the base being there.Maybe because the soldiers spent a lot of their American dollars off base.Maybe people don't like Americans but they sure like the $$$$$.
As for foreign bases here,why would we need them?We don't need help beating anyone off if they invade our soil.We proved that in WW 2.

France rejoined NATO in 1995, IIRC.

The multi-polar world you speak of isn't a fantasy; it actually did exist from at least the 17th until well into the 20th century, when nations like Germany, Britain, France, Japan and the Soviet Union were much stronger than they are today, and didn't take orders from Washington.

No one 'invaded your soil' during World War Two; it was kept at arms length from your country by those two, massive oceans that straddle it. By the way, most of the fighting against the European Axis powers was undertaken by the U.S.S.R., without which the French, British and everyone else that Hitler had his eyes on could never have claimed victory, and the citizens of which would now be speaking German (or dead, if they were somehow 'undesirable' to have around).

The romance may not work both ways. Don't you get the feeling that Britain is backing off from the wonderful special relationship. Remember when Gordon Brown refused to shake hands with your President. Getting involved with Iraq left a divide. So now we have Dave getting very pally with China and Obama saying how much the US still wants that special relationship.

My Dad served on Attu during WW 2.It was American soil.Please don't disrespect those who lost their life defending it.Maybe it's insignificant to you,but it's not to those whose family served there.

Apparently Lintar never heard about Pearl Harbor either. It may not have been a state then but, like Alaska, it was still part of the USA and therefor US soil.

Pearl Harbour, which is on the island of Oahu (so, yes Raptor, I know about it) was not actually invaded by the Japanese. That was the point that I originally responded to, that is, the claim that the U.S. itself had to be defended. It did not have to be, because the continental United States was a safe distance from all the war zones. U.S. territories (like Guam), on the other hand, were directly assaulted, but they simply cannot be compared to the battles that raged in places like Kursk, Stalingrad, Leningrad, Poland, Singapore, Burma, North Africa, where the casualties often ran into the thousands, hundreds of thousands, and even millions. The U.S.S.R. lost 27 million, civilian and military combined, and without which Europe would still be occupied by the Nazis. The U.S. lost less than 200,000. There is simply no comparison to make here.

Then of course there were the French, Poles (who lost a quarter of their pre-war population in the conflict, the highest overall percentage), the British (you might vaguely recall the Battle of Britain), and the Chinese who managed to tie up a considerable proportion of the Japanese Imperial Army.

World War Two was not a Hollywood production; there is a reason why it is called WORLD War Two, and not 'The American Crusade to beat the Krauts and Japs'.

^ So who was it in this thread that said WW2 was won single handedly by the US?

At least Germany had made plans to bomb, possibly nuke, the United States. No, they never succeeded in building the bombers to do it and certainly not the weapons but if the US had stayed totally out of the war who knows what it would have lead to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerika_Bomber

I'd like to point out that eventhough foreign militarys' do not have bases on US soil, they still station troops here regularly for training excercisesdue to the fact that we have a wider variety of terrain than they do. As far as the UK is concerned, they really do not need bses in the US due to the fact that Canada is still a British Commonwealth nation, therefore they would be much more open to British troops on their soil. I know for a fact that the German Bundeswehr has field excercises in both the US and Canada.

UK troops do hold exercises/training in Canada at times, but of course they do not have a base there.

There is no way in Hell USA would ever allow a foreign base in their territory, and I suspect that even if another country proposed it, a serious diplomatic incident would occur.

If the U.S. had stayed out of the war there is no way for us to determine how things may have turned out, but what matters is what actually did happen. No one has here said that the U.S. single-handedly won the war, but they haven't exactly given the credit where it is due either.

True, so why do they always expect others to accept their bases?! We (ie. the people, not the spineless politicians who can't stand up to Uncle Sam) don't want them! They should all just pack up and leave! A.N.Z.U.S. should be dissolved.

(I can see the response coming now. "We saved your asses from the Japs during WW2, and this is the thanks we get?! You owe us", or something along these lines. Well, no, our debt has been paid in full with interest to spare, many times over - ex. Iraq, Korea, Vietnam).