Posted on 03/10/2019 7:52:14 AM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
In private discussions with his aides, President Trump has devised an eye-popping formula to address one of his long-standing complaints: that allies hosting U.S. forces don’t pay Washington enough money.
Under the formula, countries would pay the full cost of stationing American troops on their territory, plus 50 percent more, said U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the idea, which could have allies contributing five times what they provide.
Trump calls the formula “cost plus 50,” and it has struck fear in the hearts of U.S. allies who view it as extortionate.
Rumors that the formula could become a global standard have especially rattled Germany, Japan and South Korea, which host thousands of forces, and U.S. officials have mentioned the demand to at least one country in a formal negotiation setting, said people familiar with the matter.
National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis said the Trump administration “is committed to getting the best deal for the American people” but would not comment “on any ongoing deliberations regarding specific ideas.” Trump has long complained that U.S. and NATO allies freeload on U.S. military protection, but the cost-plus-50 formula has only gained traction in recent months, said current and former U.S. officials, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations.
*SNIP*
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
I like it!
Sounds like a great idea but I was clueless it is in place. I thought US pay host nations for base rights.
Remember....our troops contribute to the economy of these countries. too.
The only two countries that might go for this....South Korea and Poland. Beyond that, it’d the blunt end to NATO, in just 12 months if he pushed it.
Trump calls the formula “cost plus 50,” and it has struck fear in the hearts of U.S. allies who view it as extortionate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Then buy some planes and tanks and stuff and defend your own country.
Germany doesn’t even have enough rifles for all their troops. They requested that the US send troops to Africa to help protect their Embassy’s. They had no one to send. The Russians would roll over them in 24 hours if the Poles weren’t in the way.
The “plus 50” sounds like a classic opening negotiation position, meant to be negotiated away to get to a stronger-than-otherwise negotiated position.
FReepers who wish to avoid msn, always a good idea, can read this article straight from the AmazonBezosPost here.
The USA does need bases in Europe. One for planes and one for ships. Otherwise the USA should get the heck out.
Most NATO countries are freeloaders. I would add Japan to your duo, however. They have always paid the full cost of the U.S. bases. Yokota, Kadena, Yokuska, Misawa, Yokohama, three or more bases on Okinawa whose names I don’t remember....that’s a lot of bases to be paying for.
“...said current and former U.S. officials, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations.”
Although this idea has some merit, I will treat it as fake news until I hear differently.
Sounds like a great idea. He’ll start with that, and probably settle for 50-50. Even that would be a huge improvement.
Yeah from US manufacturers.
I think this would be the big win along with bringing ALL of our troops home.
US Troops should be on the southern US border.
Screw Germany.
Screw Japan.
Screw Korea.
I think this would be the big win along with bringing ALL of our troops home.
1. I can see a scenario where certain European countries....Poland, the Balts, etc pay the freight for US troops just to have the trip wire here vs the Ruskies.
2. It would compel the Germans and French to up their defense spending if we pulled out to have a plausible defense vs the Russ....a good thing.
3. Smaller countries like Holland,Norway, Italy, etc could well pay the freight to act as a deterrent to a newly aggressive and conspiratorial Germany and France.
4. The final bill will more closely approximate cost...the plus 50% is just negotiating margin.
5. AND we should off set out Naval cost by assessing a maritime protection fee to keep the sea lanes open and safe.....”That’s a nice ship you have there. Be a shame if something bad happened to it.”
T the great winning again
Good advice
I am not sure that we need huge military bases in other lands. We have an air force that can rapidly move troops and supplies in huge amounts any where necessary, .So , why not keep our troops home,, to spend at home and be safer at home?
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.