What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Trump withdrawing 12,000 troops from Germany (1 Viewer)

gianmarco

Footballguy
Just burn it all down on the way out.

Germany troop withdrawal

The US is to withdraw nearly 12,000 troops from Germany in a move that has attracted bipartisan congressional opposition and roiled key allies who see the move as a blow to NATO.

President Donald Trump's decision to pull thousands of troops will take years to execute and will potentially cost billions of dollars to bring about, according to US defense officials.

The plan to pull US troops from the long-time NATO ally has been met with broad bipartisan opposition amid concerns that it will weaken the US military's position vis a vis Russia, however the Trump Administration has decided to proceed with the move.

Approximately 11,900 US troops, a mix of Army and Air Force units, will be removed from Germany to meet Trump's mandated cap of 25,000 US forces in Germany, according to a senior US defense official, a number higher than the figure of 9,500 that was used when the reduction was first announced.

The formal announcement was made Wednesday during a briefing at the Pentagon by Defense Secretary Mark Esper.

"The current EUCOM plan will reposition approximately 11,900 military personnel from Germany, from roughly 36,000 down to 24,000, in a manner that will strengthen NATO, enhance the deterrence of Russia, and meet the other principles I set forth," he told reporters, referring to US European Command which oversees US military forces on the continent.

Esper in crisis management mode amid turmoil of Trump's reelection campaign
Esper in crisis management mode amid turmoil of Trump's reelection campaign
Officials said the discrepancy was due to the fact that following a review it was found that there were slightly more US troops permanently assigned to Germany, about 36,000, than originally planned for.


Of the troops leaving Germany some 5,400 will be "staying in Europe," the official said. The remaining 6,400 forces and their families will be returned to the US and will in time redeploy to Europe.

Defense officials said this will cost billions of dollars as new military construction will likely be required both in Europe and the US to house the additional troops.

Key command centers being moved
Key US command centers will also be repositioned as part of the move, Esper and top military leaders confirmed Wednesday.


Gen. Tod Wolters, the commander of US European Command and NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said the US would be moving EUCOM headquarters from Germany to Belgium as part of an effort to co-locate the command with the NATO military command headquarters that is based there, and that Africa Command headquarters may be moving to a location to be determined as well.

"We also intend to reposition three brigade-size headquarters, an air defense artillery battalion, and an engineering battalion to Belgium from Germany, and two smaller support and contracting organizations to Italy," Wolters told reporters at the Pentagon.

Wolters further specified that a F-16 fighter squadron would be moved from Germany to Italy, and that they anticipated moving two battalions from Germany to Italy as well.

The defense official confirmed that the repositioning will take "months to plan and years to execute," a timeline first revealed earlier this month by the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sen. Jim Inhofe who had been briefed on the plan.

The timeline suggests that the plan could be reversed should Trump lose the election in November.

Defense officials say that the German Defense Minister, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, and Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, had been briefed on the planned drawdown as well as key members of Congress.

Defense officials said that Secretary of Defense Mark Esper had directed that the repositioning seek to enhance deterrence against Russia, strengthen NATO, and support families of US service members.

Trump said he directed the move because he believes Germany doesn't spend enough on defense
However Trump, who directed the move, said he did so because of Berlin's failure to meet the NATO target of spending 2% of GDP on defense, spending only about 1.38%.


"One of the only countries that hasn't agreed to pay what they're supposed to pay (on NATO) is Germany. So, I said until they pay, we're removing our soldiers, a number of our soldiers, by about half. Then when we get down to about 25,000, we'll see where we're going," Trump said last month.

Germany troop withdrawal highlights rising fortunes of two White House allies amid Esper's isolation
Defense officials however said Wednesday that the decision as to where to house the US troops leaving Germany was not influenced by whether the new host country was meeting the two percent target.


In fact Belgium and Italy, the two countries that will be receiving US troops from Germany, spend an even a smaller percentage on defense than Berlin does.

Italy spends about 1.22% of its GDP on defense spending while Belgium spends about 0.93% of its GDP on defense, ranking near the bottom among NATO members.

While Germany's national leadership has been largely silent on the troop cuts, local leaders representing the states where US troops are housed recently wrote to members of the US Congress asking them to help reverse the decision.

''We plead for this profound partnership to continue and for US forces to remain at their locations in Europe and Germany," the leaders of the German states of Baden-Wuerttemberg, Rhineland-Palatinate, Hesse and Bavaria wrote.

"We therefore ask you to support us as we strive not to sever the bond of friendship but to strengthen it, and to secure the U.S. presence in Germany and Europe in the future," the letter added.

 
  • Sad
Reactions: rct
"The current EUCOM plan will reposition approximately 11,900 military personnel from Germany, from roughly 36,000 down to 24,000, in a manner that will strengthen NATO, enhance the deterrence of Russia, and meet the other principles I set forth," he told reporters,
Seems like a 1/3 reduction in troops would weaken NATO and create LESS of a deterrence against Russia aggression, no?  That's a bit of a head scratcher, aside from the cynical justification that this is being done to appease Russia - perhaps as payback for its 2016 election interference. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems like a 1/3 reduction in troops would weaken NATO and create LESS of a deterrence against Russia aggression, no?  That's a bit of a head scratcher, aside from the cynical justification that this is being done to appease Russia - perhaps as payback for its 2016 election interference. 
It’s a pay-forward for their 2020 election interference.

 
Hysterical to think that, all to spite the current POTUS, that Democrats are now the hawks. 

Down with imperialism and colonialism, except NOT THERE!

:lmao:
In this case, it’s a long standing presence to keep the Russians from creeping into...well you know the reason. It’s not hawkish at all, like invading Iraq/Iran or something.

Though if we’re talking script flips, the Democrats have taken the fiscal conservative mantle from the GOP as well.

 
Oh my gosh so many clutch your pearl moments in here!

Is there anything Trump does that doesn't outrage you guys? I mean seriously, this is getting ridiculous.

just because you amp up the drama doesnt mean there's actually, you know, drama.  Most likely it's just you.

 
Oh my gosh so many clutch your pearl moments in here!

Is there anything Trump does that doesn't outrage you guys? I mean seriously, this is getting ridiculous.

just because you amp up the drama doesnt mean there's actually, you know, drama.  Most likely it's just you.
It's a pretty huge story. I mean, maybe you don't really care about politics, current events, that sort of thing. Some of my best friends are that way.

But it's kind of weird to willingly come to a politics forum to complain that people are talking about....politics.

 
@ren hoek for his thoughts
The NATO partnership is actually steering us toward conflict with Russia.  You wouldn't know it reading about Trump's "gift" to Putin, but we've postured aggressively against them for 15/20 years.  Trump has abandoned nuclear treaties with Russia, engaged in multiple proxy wars with Russia (Syria, Venezuela, Iran), gave lethal weaponry to Ukraine (which Obama refused to do), and set the stage for a nuclear arms race.  His administration is packed with anti-Russia hawks.  As if that weren't bad enough, he is also pushing war against China.  It's all incredibly dangerous.  

Trump isn't even bringing the troops home, he's just putting them somewhere else.  And they're still going to have 24,000 US troops.  And he's doing it because Germany isn't spending enough on military! 

Is the farmer in Kansas supposed to care about the US enforcing Article V on behalf of Montenegro?  Is the family getting evicted next month supposed to give a crap about 12 thousand troops being stationed in Germany?  I'm tired of being the world empire.  I'm tired of spending $740 billion dollars on war while this country burns.  I'm tired of well-off chickenhawks acting like US taxpayers are supposed to have a huge vested interest in supporting their ####### wars.  Now they care about military ventures that "cost billions"??  We already spend more on military than like the next 10 countries combined!  It's time to try diplomacy for a change.  

Germans want the US to withdraw from their country.  So we should respect their wishes and leave.  

 
Just another move from Trump that doesn't really make sense.  It's not really bringing international  American troops home as just about the whole number of troops will be moved somewhere else.  There also doesn't appear to be a reduction world wide in bringing troops home.  It's not rewarding countries that are meeting spending threshold as Italy and Belgium aren't spending for their own defense.....and it's going to cost the American taxpayer potentially billions.

It doesn't really satisfy any needs of any political demographic/nuance of the American citizen. Chicken Hawk, War Hawk, Pacifist, Globalist, Isolationist.......noone is getting anything out of it; only Trumps ego stands to benefit. 

 
I'm not convinced that this is a huge deal. I'm open to being convinced by someone smarter than me.

But we are still going to have 24k troops in Germany. Isn't that still a pretty big deterrent to Russia? I could see if he drew it down to 0. But its still a significant presence. 

 
What are the benefits of this move?
I assume it will save money. But maybe that's not true. 5400 of the 12k will remain in Europe. And I assume the 6600 will remain in the military. Is it cheaper to station them at home than in Germany? I don't know the answer to that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not convinced that this is a huge deal. I'm open to being convinced by someone smarter than me.

But we are still going to have 24k troops in Germany. Isn't that still a pretty big deterrent to Russia? I could see if he drew it down to 0. But its still a significant presence. 
This is where I would land here.  I'm not a total military retreat from the world guy and would be ok with placing them somewhere else where there was meaningful benefit, 12k less in Germany doesn't mean anything to me (and I doubt its changed Putins German war planning).

 
I assume it will save money. But maybe that's not true. 5400 of the 12k will remain in Europe. And I assume the 6600 will remain in the military. Is it cheaper to station them at home than in Germany? I don't know the answer to that.
Per the article: 

"President Donald Trump's decision to pull thousands of troops will take years to execute and will potentially cost billions of dollars to bring about, according to US defense officials."

 
Skoo said:
It's a pretty huge story. I mean, maybe you don't really care about politics, current events, that sort of thing. Some of my best friends are that way.

But it's kind of weird to willingly come to a politics forum to complain that people are talking about....politics.
Holy mackerel! You just made a bunch of assumptions about me that arent even true, then argued against that.

If there's only something we could call that.

 
djmich said:
This is where I would land here.  I'm not a total military retreat from the world guy and would be ok with placing them somewhere else where there was meaningful benefit, 12k less in Germany doesn't mean anything to me (and I doubt its changed Putins German war planning).
But let's not think about this. Let's just clutch our pearls instead!

 
GROOT said:
Everyone: Omg America needs to stop policing the world and get the military out

Trump: gets the military out
Gets them out of what?  He is shifting  them to other places in Europe.

Also when talking about policing...not sure anyone talkies about our guys in Germany .  HTH

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek said:
 Trump has abandoned nuclear treaties with Russia, engaged in multiple proxy wars with Russia (Syria, Venezuela, Iran), gave lethal weaponry to Ukraine (which Obama refused to do), and set the stage for a nuclear arms race.  
Let's be a bit accurate here.  Russia has been breaking those treaties for years.  Trump just acted on it instead of whistling at the graveyard.

As far as proxy wars, particularly Venezuela, they waged one with us, not the other way around.

 
urbanhack said:
I have no problem continuing to reduce our military footprint around the world.
I agree. I doubt Russia is going to say..Hey they don`t have 37K troops in Germany now..they only have 25K..warm up the tanks.

There will still be 25K US troops still there.   Hopefully they are never needed but any amount can be deployed again.

 
Seems like Trump is following Obamas lead.

The US is to withdraw some 7,000 combat troops from Europe, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has announced, as part of measures to reduce military spending.

The troops, make up two combat brigades. Some 80,000 US military personnel are currently based in Europe.

The move comes a week after President Barack Obama said the US military needs to become "leaner" over the next 10 years.

The new strategy is designed to accommodate at least $450bn (£290bn) in Pentagon cuts over the next decade.

Rotating troops in and out of Europe, rather than having them stationed there, would mean they did not have to be accompanied by their families - a considerable reduction in cost.

In his announcement last week, President Obama said  that the US must now focus on renewing its economic power.

Obama is seeking to end "long-term nation building with large military footprints", he said, and instead allow the Pentagon to pursue a national security strategy based on "smaller conventional ground forces".

In the future, the US "will no longer need to be sized to support the large-scale, long-term stability operations that dominated military priorities and force-generation over the past decade".

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top