Posted on 08/19/2004 11:26:15 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
President Bush's plan to bring home up to 70,000 troops from Europe and Asia in the next decade is significant both strategically and historically. It is also long overdue.
"For decades, America's armed forces abroad have essentially remained where the wars of the last century ended, in Europe and Asia," Bush said, in announcing the Global Defense Posture Review. He said the nation must have "a more agile and more flexible" force that can respond rapidly to threats that can develop quickly anywhere in the world.
The United States stations about 106,000 military personnel in Europe and 100,000 in Asia, vestiges of wars fought long ago. Their mission was less to repel a Soviet or North Korean invasion than it was to serve as human tripwires — in one cynic's phrase "they are there to die." They guaranteed that the United States would enter any conflict that developed in either theater.
In Europe, the threat ended and the mission was accomplished. Thanks to four decades of determined resistance by the United States and its allies, the Soviet Union finally imploded in the late '80s. Plans to scale back the massive U.S. presence in Germany — two of the Army's 10 armored divisions are stationed there — have been on the table ever since.
The partial withdrawal from Germany is scheduled to begin in 2006 with the withdrawal of the 1st Armored Division and the 1st Infantry Division. The Pentagon plans to rely on large transport hubs such as Ramstein Air Force Base to ferry troops and equipment from the United States to trouble spots. Smaller "forward operating locations" in southern and eastern Europe will be stocked with equipment for flown-in troops to pick up as they respond to crises that break out from the Middle East to Africa.
"The metric of the future is not so much are the forces there and do they live there," Gen. James Jones, commander of U.S. forces in Europe, recently told a congressional committee. "It is where they come from and can they get there quickly in time to make a difference."
In Korea, the time has also come for a partial withdrawal. The war there began in June 1950 and turned into stalemate within a year. Truce talks started in July 1951, but the armistice was not signed until July 1953.
Bush's plans call for the withdrawal of 12,500 of the 37,000 troops in Korea to be pulled out by 2005. Indeed, the withdrawal has begun already. Earlier this month elements of the 2nd Infantry Division were sent from Osan, south of Seoul, to Iraq.
With a belligerent North Korea, armed to the teeth and possessing nuclear weapons and an enormous standing army, it might not seem a propitious time to be withdrawing. But a substantial force will remain in Korea, and help will be close by as our military transforms itself into a more flexible and quick-moving organization.
Predictably, Sen. John Kerry has come out against the withdrawal from Korea, which is odd considering what he said Aug. 1 on ABC's This Week: "If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just (in Iraq), but elsewhere in the world. In the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps."
On Wednesday, he said something quite different to the Veterans of Foreign Wars: "And this hastily announced plan raises more doubts about ... our commitment than it provides real answers. For example, why are we withdrawing unilaterally 12,000 troops from the Korean Peninsula at the very time that we are negotiating with North Korea, a country that really has nuclear weapons?"
First, those 37,000 troops aren't going to stop a nuclear attack from the north. Second, the decision is neither hasty nor unilateral. The government of South Korea says it has been in discussions with the United States for years about a troop reduction and that it welcomes the change. President Roh Moo-hyun has said the partial withdrawal will not weaken the alliance and that South Korea must take it upon itself to decide its own fate. The South Korean army has, in fact, made huge strides in recent years and, though smaller than the north's, is far more modernized.
These redeployment proposals are not new. They were under study by the Clinton administration, and have been pressed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who is trying to transform the military into a force that can respond to today's problems, not those of the Cold War. The Bush administration should be given credit for broaching the subject now. It is precisely the kind of issue that should be discussed before the election.
The nature of war has changed. And the threat Americans face today has changed. No one knows where the next strike will come from. The only way to counter it is to be prepared to strike back quickly. We can't do that by remaining in fortresses created a half-century ago.
Kerry Supported pulling Troops out of Korea and Germany on Aug. 2nd
Kerry Supported pulling Troops out of Korea and Germany on Aug. 2nd
I guess Kerry just couldn't stand up at the VFW and say,
"Me too."
or
"What he said."
No, wait, that would be the Soviets....
No wait, that would be the French...
No, its the Democrats...
LOL
Bump!!
Thanks to Ronald Reagan.
And now President Bush is beginning the deployment of anti-ballistic missile defense.
41 years ago (gees time flys) I was stationed in Bamberg, Germany with the 1st Batallion, 75th Artillery (8 inch howitzer unit) amd we were guarding the Czech border. I think the times have changed now that we are all buddies and we SHOULD bring our troops home. We pump so much $$$ into the German economy with our presence there plus manuever damage whenever we go out to the field (they charge by the meter for each rut and its always raining). With Germany's refusal to help us in Iraq, you are on your own fellas just don't raise another Hitler or we will be back.
Our overseas troops are a real target for a suicide crazy attack.
Bump!
Our troops in Korea are like sitting ducks waiting for Jung-Il to fly off the handle and push the button.
Of course, I'm not sure that Jung-Il is any crazier than Kerry.
Good observation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.