Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Soul of the South
Tell our “allies” — Europe, Japan, Korea they have 5 years to get their defenses in shape because we are pulling our troops scattered around the planet home.

You are aware, aren't you, that unless you are bringing those troops home to discharge then and deactivate the units they are assigned to then this will result in no cost savings?

63 posted on 02/10/2020 7:21:19 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: DoodleDawg

“You are aware, aren’t you, that unless you are bringing those troops home to discharge then and deactivate the units they are assigned to then this will result in no cost savings?”

There will be cost savings. No transportation of men and materials to foreign bases. No maintenance and upkeep on facilities in foreign countries, many of which have higher costs than in the US. For example maintaining bases a base in Iraq or Afghanistan is certainly more expensive than maintaining a facility in the US. Costs in many European countries are also higher than the US. There is the cost of transporting dependents to European and Asian bases as well as the cost of maintaining schools for dependents.

Many overseas bases hire local civilians for various jobs on bases. The money spent on those salaries, as well as supplies and food purchased locally, goes into the foreign nation’s economy. Those same dollars spent for civilian workers and supplies in the local economy surrounding a US base supports US citizens and results in tax revenue which does not flow to the US government when money is spent in local economies overseas.

Certainly the withdrawal of troops from overseas will and should result in assessment as to manpower requirements and there will almost certainly be reductions in the number of troops. Bringing them home today and discharging them into a full employment economy, where they can easily find jobs, should be a net plus for the economy.

Even if there was minimal reduction in force, expanding existing bases to accommodate soldiers returning from overseas would cost less than renting land and maintaining hundreds of individual installations in foreign countries.

Any other nation in the world would deploy the military to defend its borders if foreigners were crossing the border with impunity and settling in the homeland. The purpose of the military is defending the population of the homeland. It has never made sense to me for us to have troops deployed around the world to defend other nations when millions of invaders cross our southern border every year.


72 posted on 02/10/2020 8:14:25 PM PST by Soul of the South (The past is gone and cannot be changed. Tomorrow can be a better day if we work on i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

To: DoodleDawg

“You are aware, aren’t you, that unless you are bringing those troops home to discharge then and deactivate the units they are assigned to then this will result in no cost savings?”

There will be cost savings. No transportation of men and materials to foreign bases. No maintenance and upkeep on facilities in foreign countries, many of which have higher costs than in the US. For example maintaining bases a base in Iraq or Afghanistan is certainly more expensive than maintaining a facility in the US. Costs in many European countries are also higher than the US. There is the cost of transporting dependents to European and Asian bases as well as the cost of maintaining schools for dependents.

Many overseas bases hire local civilians for various jobs on bases. The money spent on those salaries, as well as supplies and food purchased locally, goes into the foreign nation’s economy. Those same dollars spent for civilian workers and supplies in the local economy surrounding a US base supports US citizens and results in tax revenue which does not flow to the US government when money is spent in local economies overseas.

Certainly the withdrawal of troops from overseas will and should result in assessment as to manpower requirements and there will almost certainly be reductions in the number of troops. Bringing them home today and discharging them into a full employment economy, where they can easily find jobs, should be a net plus for the economy.

Even if there was minimal reduction in force, expanding existing bases to accommodate soldiers returning from overseas would cost less than renting land and maintaining hundreds of individual installations in foreign countries.

Any other nation in the world would deploy the military to defend its borders if foreigners were crossing the border with impunity and settling in the homeland. The purpose of the military is defending the population of the homeland. It has never made sense to me for us to have troops deployed around the world to defend other nations when millions of invaders cross our southern border every year.


73 posted on 02/10/2020 8:18:23 PM PST by Soul of the South (The past is gone and cannot be changed. Tomorrow can be a better day if we work on i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson