Germany: Update on Base Closure

BERLIN - Every U.S. military base in Germany except one supporting operations in Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Iraq (news - web sites) could be closed in a potential reorganization of American forces, the top U.S. commander in Europe said in an interview published Saturday.

The bulk of about 115,000 U.S. military personnel stationed in Europe are in Germany, prompting analysts to forecast that thousands will leave once Pentagon (news - web sites) planners decide how to adapt structures left over from the Cold War to new tasks such as fighting terrorism.

In an interview with a German newspaper, U.S. Gen. James Jones, NATO (news - web sites)'s Supreme Allied Commander, said that while "a row of concrete proposals" on reorganizing U.S. forces across Europe already have been made, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has yet to make any decisions.

"Only the Ramstein base is not up for discussion — it's too important," Jones was quoted as saying in the Sueddeutsche Zeitung daily. "We would like to operate Ramstein for as long as we're welcome in Germany. I don't want to talk about the others.

Ramstein Air Base, home of the U.S. Air Forces in Europe and the 86th Airlift Wing, has been a key post for ferrying supplies to U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. It also is used by planes carrying U.S. casualties from those conflicts as it is near Landstuhl military hospital.

The United States already has announced its military withdrawal from Saudi Arabia and is expected to reduce the number of air and ground forces kept on large permanent bases hosted by allies such as Germany and South Korea (news - web sites).

Other American units based in Germany include the Army's V Corps based in Heidelberg, the 1st Armored Division in Wiesbaden and the 52nd Fighter Wing at Spangdahlem Air Base.

Jones also said in the interview he has been ordered to begin planning for possible American military intervention in Liberia, an African nation founded by freed U.S. slaves that is engulfed by civil war.

The United Nations (news - web sites) and European leaders have sought U.S. troops to enforce a repeatedly violated June 17 cease-fire between forces loyal to Liberian President Charles Taylor, an indicted war criminal, and rebels surrounding his capital, Monrovia.

Under the deal, Taylor promised to step down, clearing the way for a transitional government that would oversee fresh elections.

Jones also predicted a long engagement in Afghanistan for NATO, which takes command from Germany and the Netherlands of an international peacekeeping force next month.

He suggested the alliance remained open to calls from the United Nations and Afghanistan's shaky interim government to expand the mission beyond the Afghan capital, Kabul.

The general was very careful in what he said. While he admitted all the bases except Ramstein were on the table...he didn't say that they were all going to be closed. My guess is Rumsfeld is thinking of the total cost.

If you bring the Army back to the states, then you have to plan on 3 or 4 installations absorbing 70,000 personnel. You would have to have major construction projects cleared through congress, with price tags attached. My bet is that Rummy is already waking up and realizing that congress won't foot such a huge bill. They might be willing to talk about 10 to 15k troops coming back.

The additional problem is the remote 6-12 month tours that Rummy has been talking about...Poland, Bulgaria, etc. Both Air Force and Army personnel have already been commenting negatively about this. The reality is that 100k personnel are going to be deployed to Iraq for long-term. If you are sitting at a base in the states, and have to rotate every 18 months for a year somewhere...you aren't going to be a happy camper. Contingencies and war are different...you simply accept that...but just a plain tour for months at a time, to be repeated every 18 months...its a hard sell for todays military member.

My bet is that over half of the bases in Germany remain where they are. Nobody in congress is going to be willing to cough up $20 billion to build additional structures or facilities for the military in the US...on top of the regular budget.

GOD BLESS OUR MILITARY
THANK A VET!
MAKE A DONATION TODAY

Keep Our Republic Free

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER
It' s in the Breaking News Sidebar

Nobody in congress is going to be willing to cough up $20 billion to build additional structures or facilities for the military in the US...on top of the regular budget.

Huh?! You must think this is 1999 or something... There's not a single spending proposal Bush has proposed that the Congress has opposed, and I can't imagine why they'd oppose this one. If Bush sends the bill up, the only debate will involve which districts get the most pork...

Incremential moves, into new regions awakening into democratic societies, in order that stability will lead to investments and evolving societies. As strength through peace expands, lawless nations and areas will be encroached upon by expansion of the West. Keeping the troops closer to the boarders of democracies and our enemies is the only reason to move troops. All western nations have a series of laws which make the internal civilian police responsible for society's laws.

Bush and Rummy are moving the troops as soon as opportunites present themselves. The nations gaining these troops will be and in most cases have already made great concessions on cost sharing; coupled with lower costs in less developed areas, US forces meet all the security requirements for stability and closenss to potential combat areas. By moving into the former WARSAW Pack nations, US troops can reach any potential hot spot in the world within a half day.

The day of the VOLARs pasted in the late 80s; today, the armed forces have more dependents supported than troops which is a potential risk multiplier overseas and stateside; a learner force means less dependents to secure when deploying and less social structure. The military socieity evolved since the mid-70s is cutting back. The Army and Air Force Exchange System (AAFES and NATEX) is the world's 7th largest retailer. The Defense Commissary (Grocery Store) must be nearly as high on the retail list. My point on "stores" is that troops can get what they need from the dining facility and quartermaster....

Rumsfield has shaken up the DoD and made changes in a little as 2-years when previously 5-years was the minimum planning cycle. Whenever there is a war time funding for the military, they restructure under the guise of combat expenses - Congress already authorized the money in part:)

I think you could spread the troops over more than 3 or 4 CONUS installations, but you are right - the Army woould still need a LOT of construction in order to make that happen. Frankly, I support that; bring the troops home.

The Army is moiving more toward the FOB approach in southeast and southwest Asia and in northern and Africa (Liberia fits right in). The smart kids in the DOS and DOD see that those regions will require our attentions and we will have to be able to respond swiftly.

As I said, I think we should bring them all home.

...today, the armed forces have more dependents supported than troops which is a potential risk multiplier overseas and stateside; a learner force means less dependents to secure when deploying and less social structure. The military socieity evolved since the mid-70s is cutting back. The Army and Air Force Exchange System (AAFES and NATEX) is the world's 7th largest retailer. The Defense Commissary (Grocery Store) must be nearly as high on the retail list. My point on "stores" is that troops can get what they need from the dining facility and quartermaster....

Actually the net effect has been quite the opposite. More and more soldiers are getting married and having children younger and younger (I was sitting in the Fort Polk Burger King and saw an E2, couldn't have been more that 20, with a wife and three kids).

The Army has put a big emphasis the last 20 years on quality of life issues in order to recruit and retain more troops. This means providing child care center, youth activities, etc., and alternatives to dining than the unit mess halls and club system. They also are paying the soldiers more, and allowing them to live off-post with their families. And of course they all have cars.

As a result, soldiers spend less and less of their off-duty hours (and money) on post, and more on the local economy. The use of unit dining facilities is diminishing because soldiers either already live off-post or get in their cars and drive to the BK. The Club system is dead, because there is nothing compelling the soldiers to stay on post. It's true that AAFES and the Commissary do a terrific business, because the soldiers don't pay sales taxes there, but many would still rather go to Wal-Mart, where it may be cheaper even with the tax break.

Of course, this is in CONUS, and to a lesser extent, Germany. Remote locations such as Liberia, the middle east, etc., will require other faciltiies and services.

Living in the BENELUX (Belgium, Netherlands & Luxembough) area, I can only tell you that the Generals great experiment with the VOLARs was to entrap a volunteer force incapable of breaking away from the decent wages, medical care and housing in the 1970s which carried over into the professional force of today. The troops in the mid 70's were encouraged to marry young, and by the time you made E5 you could not afford to get out and live the same lifestyle. The troops today have subsidized commissary shopping, PX, and darn near free dental and medical for family. Plus they draw a ration allowance for not eating in the chow halls. The dependents outnumber the active duty force and in the overseas areas this means that Uncle Sam pays the housing costs (vs. in CONUS where the troops pick up what Sam doesn't pay). The problem is that providing security for families on extended deployments (Iraq?) could become a problem is the Islanazis decided to off dependents which would further burden retension and morale while away:)

Rumsfield's new army envisions "Lilly Pads" where troops hop around and deploy overseas on 6-month sints without family members who live on the US economy.... This means less securty problems in the overseas footprints and less money pumped out of the US economy into overseas areas (tourism?)>

Very simple solution. Poland and other Central European have some very large and currently mostly unused bases. I'm sure those countries would have no problem in picking up most of the costs associated with renovating those bases to meet our needs. We are able to keep vital forward bases in Europe (where we can keep an eye on the Germans and French) while helping out our true European allies.

This would also act to intice U.S. interests to help these nations develope their own post-Soviet economies; building a strong Central Europe that could rival or surpass the stagnent EU.

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.