We should reduce our forces in Italy rather than Syria
There are more American troops in Italy than Afghanistan
Containing Iran is more important than containing Germany
You’re probably right on RIFing Italy forces, et al.
My thought is to tell each party in the Syria theater what we regard as civilized behavior, and what we regard as unwelcome, tyrannical behavior (this would include massing forces to intimidate or inflict inordinate casualties); kudos to those who do the former, woe to those who do the latter.
Array our naval vessels in the Black, Med, Red, and Arabian Seas in such a way as to convince all parties that tyrannical behavior would trigger swift and devastating response.
Encourage all parties in the area to back off and get busy with normal life and commerce. It may be too much to ask of muslims, if past is prologue.
2,000 troops in Syria are going to “contain” Iran? LOL. Is that their mission? What about the 15,000 in Kuwait and 5,000 in Iraq. Or the thousands more in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia?
France and Saudi Arabia have said they will replace the US presence in Syria. Another tempest in a teapot. The sky is not falling.
Totally agree...but...but...the brass love the easygoing Italian lifestyle...beautiful available dames, great food, great vino. No wonder the Pampered Princes of the Pentagon hate to leave this Paradiso!
Containing Iran is more important than containing Germany
///////////////////
Interesting. I think the “containing Iran” ship sailed when Jimmy Carter hung the shah out to dry in 1979. I agree on Italy and Germany but I don’t think it’s and either/or. You reduce all. Bring them home and put them on the southern border. Just musing here not a hill I’m willing to die on. Kinda above my pay grade.
Bases in Italy support our operations in the Middle East, right?
And if the Italians don't object it makes sense putting support troops there, rather than in countries where they would be much likelier targets for terrorists.
Plus, are we really ready to give up on NATO?