Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/03/2026 8:07:14 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was planning to head to Brussels last month to deliver what would be a bombshell announcement in a meeting with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s top military chiefs.
The U.S., he planned to say, was preparing additional cuts to its forces in Europe that would go beyond the canceled deployment of an armored brigade to Poland and the earlier withdrawal of an infantry brigade from Romania, people familiar with the matter said. But Hegseth’s proposal was nixed after it was shared with Marco Rubio—President Trump’s national-security adviser—and other senior officials, the people said.
Instead, Hegseth said the U.S. would conduct a review of its force posture in Europe that could last as long as six months.
The incident suggests the administration isn’t yet settled on the pace and scope of potential cuts in U.S. troop levels in Europe. While Trump has talked of punishing NATO countries that he thinks don’t spend enough on their own defense or that didn’t support the U.S. war with Iran, Hegseth’s proposals and fiery speeches have rattled allies and lawmakers—including some leading Republicans—who worry he will cause lasting damage to the alliance and embolden Russia.
The White House referred questions to the Defense Department. Sean Parnell, chief Pentagon spokesman, said, “Secretary Hegseth ensured his message was aligned with the president’s objectives and agenda, and he did not want to impede upon the president’s decision space.”
U.S. troop levels and allied military spending are expected to be a focus when Trump meets with NATO leaders in Ankara, Turkey, next week.
NATO officials hope the Ankara summit will showcase unity with the U.S. and support for Ukraine in its war against Russia but say they fear tensions with Trump could overshadow the summit.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
BS by the WSJ.
But the freakout is telling. :-)
How many European troops defend US borders?
In my view, this story was planned from inception to exit from the news cycle.
In other words, the suggestion to remove euro-based US troops, and then to retract it, is all one complete ‘atomic’ story.
Why? Could be just a message to EU, message to the US public, message to Euroweenies, etc.
Notice how no one outside the administration accepts any name changes made by the administration? It’s another in the string of passive-aggressive actions meant to sabotage Trump and ensure, in their minds, his complete disappearance from American history the minute he leaves office.
Well, there was that time by LaFayette, but since then? Hmmmm....
Friday holiday story dump. So I suspect some elements are indeed true if only to ensure there is already a history of discussion.
I also think its a good idea and that I understand that Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth discussing this beforehand is a good thing.
Story basically tells me they’re planning...
That’s what they’re paid to do.
Plans are made, they are circulated, and they are often modifed.
There could be many legitimate reasons for delays on pulling the troops.
Thwt they’re talking and planning for it is a big sign.
Actual American troops would have only a limited role in a hypothetical invasion. I think their presence is more psychological than utilitarian. They aren’t generally close enough to any invasion route to effectively stop it by themselves. Their presence in Europe is like leaving the bedroom light on so the two-year-old doesn’t panic in the dark.
They might need more time to determine WHERE to move the troops given the Iran situation.
Having four “authors” is a tell. You know what follows will be a crock of sh*t.
Article says Defense Department? What is that?
Imagine reading a history book in the year 2060 where it will have been recorded that the grand experiment that came to be known as the U.S. was ultimately defeated not by an armed invasion but by an armada of pregnant third-world mothers giving birth inside its borders.
I’d give anything to know what George Washington would have had to say about that.
$36 BILLION PER YEAR the U.S. taxpayers squander on our military presence in Europe. ENOUGH!
A lot of our military presence in Europe is to have the infrastructure and logistics structure to absorb a sudden influx of American forces and also to maintain and protect our weapons stores there, and to maintain our base real estate while rotating units through to familiarize themselves with the European battlefield and conditions while learning to operate and interact with their European counterparts and complimentary units.
It was a ‘shot across the bow’ to the EU, man up or we’re outta here!..........
“Marco Rubio—President Trump’s national-security adviser”
Hello ChatGPT. Please write a bullcrap story to make Hegseth look bad. Don’t worry about lies and falsehoods. Include, “sources say”
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.