NationStates Jolt Archive

Germany is host to the biggest US overseas contingent outside Iraq.

Five sites in Kitzingen in Bavaria will be handed back to German authorities, while three bases in Wuerzburg near Frankfurt in central Germany will be shut, said a statement by the US European command.

The other bases are in Giebelstadt, a small town near Wuerzburg.

The base closures will affect around 6,100 soldiers, 11,000 family members and around 2,000 civilian staff during the fiscal year 2006.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4729941.stm

Two heavy army divisions will be withdrawn from Germany, which is host to the biggest US overseas contingent outside Iraq.

Some of the troops will be moved to posts in Eastern Europe while others will be based in the US, available for deployments overseas.

WDYT?

I'm thinking that it's a good thing that the US is redeploying it's troops to more useful places, but it's going to hurt (at least a bit) the already weak German economy... and this isn't the end of it.

I bet some of those Germany-deployed troops will be visiting sunny Iraq and Afghanistan pretty soon.

WDYT?
*Turns down the Party Music*
What did you say?

I'm thinking that it's a good thing that the US is redeploying it's troops to more useful places, but it's going to hurt (at least a bit) the already weak German economy... and this isn't the end of it.
Believe it or not, but the German economy as a whole couldn't give much of a flying fart. Hamburg alone transfers 400 million tons of exports every year.
Those soldiers can impossibly buy that much stuff.
Those little towns though, they might suffer. But that's the price you pay...

*Turns down the Party Music*
What did you say?


Believe it or not, but the German economy as a whole couldn't give much of a flying fart. Hamburg alone transfers 400 million tons of exports every year.
Those soldiers can impossibly buy that much stuff.
Those little towns though, they might suffer. But that's the price you pay...

I was also thinking of the nearly $12 billion a year the US spends in Germany. That's going to go down, too...

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the U.S. would save about $1 billion a year closing German bases, but would have to spend about $7 billion to make the transition.

Kitzingen: Many local businesses that cater specifically to Americans would have to shut down entirely if the bases close. Americans spend more than $36 million in the region every year.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june05/bases_3-24.html

I bet some of those Germany-deployed troops will be visiting sunny Iraq and Afghanistan pretty soon.

It depends. I don't think that the US is going to move the heavy-armor divisions there, since they're not needed there. As for others like medics, supply, and support, maybe...

It depends. I don't think that the US is going to move the heavy-armor divisions there, since they're not needed there. As for others like medics, supply, and support, maybe...

Given the desperate measures to recruit, I'm sure the US army will be using it's European-based troops as much as possible. As for Iraq, you might need more heavy armour out there the way things are progressing.

Germany met in the Big Ten conference, meaning they are one of the 10 most powerful nations. Now I'm not sure if powerful means military strength or enconomicly sound. But where ever those troops are going will probly be even weaker economicly, and if that is the case then perhaps they will boost that countries economy the same as they did with Germany.

I'm thinking that it's a good thing that the US is redeploying it's troops to more useful places, but it's going to hurt (at least a bit) the already weak German economy... and this isn't the end of it.

Base closures in the US is going to hurt local and state economies too but the purpose of the US military is not to keep local economies going. :eek:

I'm glad the German bases are closing. Now if only the others would close...

Yay! It's about time.

I think its time for the Army to realize that Russia and Europe arnt the problem anymore. To have bases and troops stationed in places that are not needed and just getting money spent on to sit there is a waist. European bases should be removed completly IMO, it allows more troops to be sent to Iraq and would also slow down the draft situation, not that the draft is needed yet but the number of troops in Europe is probably alot, i would imagin more than a million. To have those troops moved to spots that acutally need US troops would make things much easier on the Army and would have troops less spread out. Europe bases from WWII wont be needed now that most/all European areas are democratic.

Believe it or not, but the German economy as a whole couldn't give much of a flying fart. Hamburg alone transfers 400 million tons of exports every year.
Those soldiers can impossibly buy that much stuff.
Those little towns though, they might suffer. But that's the price you pay...It will hurt the German economy insofar as it will let the general population complain more and thus get them to buy less ==> weaker economy. It's just more bad news.

I think its time for the Army to realize that Russia and Europe arnt the problem anymore. To have bases and troops stationed in places that are not needed and just getting money spent on to sit there is a waist. European bases should be removed completly IMO, it allows more troops to be sent to Iraq and would also slow down the draft situation, not that the draft is needed yet but the number of troops in Europe is probably alot, i would imagin more than a million. To have those troops moved to spots that acutally need US troops would make things much easier on the Army and would have troops less spread out. Europe bases from WWII wont be needed now that most/all European areas are democratic.
Germany is still a junction point for military flights. You can't just stop by on a civilian airport with a military plane. Logistics depend on European bases. And let's not forget that the US is still involved in NATO. Plus, there's naval bases in the Mediterranean. The Navy used to sail all the way from Norfolk, Va every time they were needed there.

I heard in the past few weeks that some of them are going to be deployed in Czech Republic and Poland and one of the "Stans". Can't remember which one, but it's not Afghanistan. This is really pissing off Russia because they view the Stans as their sphere of influence.
Anyway, alot of it is moving further East and South because the host countries don't want to be under the Russian Sphere anymore. They are literally begging for the US to move there so they won't be ever again.
I also remember reading about Ukraine asking for a base or 2 there for the same reason.

Why should we have bases in Germany anymore? The cold war is over, and they didn't support us in Iraq.

Why should we have bases in Germany anymore? The cold war is over, and they didn't support us in Iraq.The bases are certainly supporting Iraq. Where do you think most of the soldiers pass through?
Besides, it's not like Germany wasn't helping in places that were real threats like Afghanistan or the Horn of Africa.

The bases are certainly supporting Iraq. Where do you think most of the soldiers pass through?
Besides, it's not like Germany wasn't helping in places that were real threats like Afghanistan or the Horn of Africa.

I was talking more like troop support from Germany and moral support. Germany opposed the war.

And I don't think Germany deserves these bases. They can flip their own defense bill.

I was talking more like troop support from Germany and moral support. Germany opposed the war.

And I don't think Germany deserves these bases. They can flip their own defense bill.Moral support? You call the German naval operations off the Horn of Africa and the German LEADERSHIP of ISAF MORAL support?
As for opposing the war, Germany had good reasons:
1) The inspectors hadn't finished their work in looking for WMDs
2) A war would have caused a serious destabilization in the area
3) Schröder got reelected because he promised to keep the Germans out of Iraq

Moral support? You call the German naval operations off the Horn of Africa and the German LEADERSHIP of ISAF MORAL support?

I was talking about Iraq.

As for opposing the war, Germany had good reasons:
1) The inspectors hadn't finished their work in looking for WMDs
2) A war would have caused a serious destabilization in the area
3) Schröder got reelected because he promised to keep the Germans out of Iraq

Not good enough!

Not good enough!Points one and two were in my eyes, specially since A) there were no WMDs and B) the middle east has become majorly unstable. The fact that the Shrub didn't go for N. Korea when he went for Iraq makes the US decision even worse.
In retrospect, I'm quite glad Germany didn't give the terrorists another reason to go for the World Cup next year.

Why should we have bases in Germany anymore? The cold war is over, and they didn't support us in Iraq.

We use bases in Europe and other places to store equipment, as staging areas, and refueling bases for our aircraft. By having some equipment stored in a Forward Operating Location (FOL), we can deploy more quickly to areas where the troops are needed.

For example, it takes less time to move tanks and trucks from Europe to the Middle East than it would take if we had to move the equipment from the US.

I was talking more like troop support from Germany and moral support. Germany opposed the war.

And I don't think Germany deserves these bases. They can flip their own defense bill.



See, I knew you weren't entirely wrong on everything :D

Points one and two were in my eyes, specially since A) there were no WMDs and B) the middle east has become majorly unstable. The fact that the Shrub didn't go for N. Korea when he went for Iraq makes the US decision even worse.
In retrospect, I'm quite glad Germany didn't give the terrorists another reason to go for the World Cup next year.


The middle east is unstable because of Iraq? don't think so. It has been politically unstable for decades, buddy. It didn't get worse, in fact it got better.

And neo, I'm not the one who is always wrong.

When will they finally leave Britain?

When will they finally leave Britain?

When Brittain becomes the 51st State. :D

Here's to a stronger Germany on its' own. And a restoration to the monarchy to further unification! Glad to see the US pulling out.

Here's to a stronger Germany on its' own. And a restoration to the monarchy to further unification! Glad to see the US pulling out.

are you Bavarian by any chance? :)

The Americans should stay in America. Its about time they left everyone else alone. Their just a pile of bullies, just because they have all the big guns. Im glad their leaving Germany, and innocent country. Just wish they'd left Iraq and everywhere else they've decimated alone in the first place. Why do they need to do all this in the name of 'Global Security'. The world's been a s**tload less secure since they started invading countries that didnt send them a christmas card!!

The Americans should stay in America. Its about time they left everyone else alone. Their just a pile of bullies, just because they have all the big guns. Im glad their leaving Germany, and innocent country. Just wish they'd left Iraq and everywhere else they've decimated alone in the first place. Why do they need to do all this in the name of 'Global Security'. The world's been a s**tload less secure since they started invading countries that didnt send them a christmas card!!



The sad thing is, a lot of people in the world believe statements like this :(

The sad thing is, a lot of people in the world believe statements like this :(
Why shouldnt we believe statements like this? Do you find something incorrect?

The Americans should stay in America. Its about time they left everyone else alone. Their just a pile of bullies, just because they have all the big guns. Im glad their leaving Germany, and innocent country. Just wish they'd left Iraq and everywhere else they've decimated alone in the first place. Why do they need to do all this in the name of 'Global Security'. The world's been a s**tload less secure since they started invading countries that didnt send them a christmas card!!
US citizen here who agrees with you, but for different reasons. I don’t see why the blood of our soldiers should be spilled on account of Iraqis, Afghanis or any other foreign nation.

US citizen here who agrees with you, but for different reasons. I don’t see why the blood of our soldiers should be spilled on account of Iraqis, Afghanis or any other foreign nation.
Thanks, and of course I dont mean any disrespect to anyone dying out there. We (Ireland) have people dying out there too. I just believe the world would be a better place if we all stayed where we belonged!

I must admit, I have been a tad disappointed in the United States military as of lately. They happen to be threatening a similar thing here in Perth, Western Australia - and to be frank I think its a load of bullshit. I dont believe that they are relocating to a *better* area, since they *are* in prime positioning for the the arab states for future conflicts. In the meantime, even if they were relocating just a few, I dont imagine that US Officials (who are legitamite) would support them removing all bases from Germany.

As for the Perth, Western Australia situation. Since god-knows when they have been docking Marines and US Naval ships in our Fremantle port, which does help boost the local economy mind you. And now, because we have some state law which requires nuclear aircraft carriers to stay offshore a distance of two kilometres (almost a mile), they think that they have the right to try to bully the Western Australia to repeal to law, "... or else we will just stop using Western Australian docks."

Quite frankly, Im appauled at their tact in this whole issue, and to threaten boycotting our ports is simply way out of line. Afterall, its obviously also a tactical error on their own half, since Perth makes prime portage for Iraq, Iran, et cetera et cetera. And given Australian - American Relations being rather close in my opinion... I believe it calls for a little more respect on their own behalf.

When will they finally leave Britain?When Brittain becomes the 51st State. :D
translation ..US soldiers will never leave Britain.

Here here!

The middle east is unstable because of Iraq? don't think so. It has been politically unstable for decades, buddy. It didn't get worse, in fact it got better.

And neo, I'm not the one who is always wrong.You call Iraq stable? The Middle East didn't get "better". There have been terror attacks in Saudi Arabia directly targeting the oil industry. The balance is being upset and it could have drastic effects on MY lifestyle even though I don't live anywhere near Iraq.

But I agree on your opinion of Neo R :D

Here here!Es heißt "Hear, hear!" (Auf Deutsch: Hört, hört!)

Es heißt "Hear, hear!" (Auf Deutsch: Hört, hört!)
Danke Schön mein deutscher Freund!

Given the desperate measures to recruit, I'm sure the US army will be using it's European-based troops as much as possible. As for Iraq, you might need more heavy armour out there the way things are progressing.

:confused: How would sending a tank divsion to Iraq help against terrorists bombing Iraqis?

Sure, the medics, logistics, etc, and Infantry (esp: military police!) might go. But a good chunk of the troops being moved out of Germany aren't of the right type.

BTW: I'm not sure if you've noticed, but Iraq has actually gotten better over the last year. Thank goodness.

BTW: I'm not sure if you've noticed, but Iraq has actually gotten better over the last year.
pink sunglasses?

The Americans should stay in America. Its about time they left everyone else alone. Their just a pile of bullies, just because they have all the big guns. Im glad their leaving Germany, and innocent country. Just wish they'd left Iraq and everywhere else they've decimated alone in the first place. Why do they need to do all this in the name of 'Global Security'. The world's been a s**tload less secure since they started invading countries that didnt send them a christmas card!!

Er... please explain to me how Libya giving up arms and renouncing terrorism made the world a worse place. Or that North Korea is actually negotiating again (Kim was in hiding for 2 MONTHS after the invasion of Iraq becuase he was SURE he was next). Or the Syrians finally getting out of Lebanon. Or, for that matter, that Saddam (who DID fund Palestinian terrorists) is in jail?
How about Egypt democratizing (albeit slowly)?

Never mind that the recent terrorist attacks in Spain and England, while bad, haven't been say... suitcase nukes or whatnot. Tragic? Yes. But not NEARLY as bad as it could have been had the US not done anything after September 11th.

The war has not gone perfectly. But it's gone better than I'd expected.

pink sunglasses?

Defeatism at any cost?

BTW: I'm not sure if you've noticed, but Iraq has actually gotten better over the last year.Pink colored glasses?
Defeatism at all cost?just facts baby...just facts.

________________________________________________________________
Benchmarks: Hard to find good news in Iraq
WASHINGTON --July 29, 2005
A roadside bomb killed four U.S. soldiers from the Georgia National Guard; 16 Iraqi government workers were killed when their buses traveling together were machine-gunned by insurgents and two Algerian diplomats kidnapped by al-Qaida in Iraq were killed.

It was another very bad week indeed in Iraq

In addition, a U.S. Government Accountability Office report issued Thursday documented the impact of the insurgency in seriously derailing reconstruction efforts. And a psychiatric survey concluded that Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, a serious mental illness, was 10 times more prevalent in American combat veterans from Iraq than had been previously thought.

The GAO report documented how the costs of fighting the insurgency had dealt crippling blows to reconstruction plans. It said $1.8 billion intended for major electrical utilities and water projects during Fiscal Year 2004 had been diverted to pay for security forces instead.

In all, $4.7 billion, or about one quarter of the total $18.4 billion that Congress had approved in emergency funding since July 2004 to rebuild Iraq has had to be switched to other unanticipated needs, the GAO said.

It also noted that far from having Iraq's oil industry up and running within a few weeks or months of toppling Saddam Hussein, as Department of Defense policymakers had optimistically expected at the time, crude oil production and total electrical power generation in Iraq has still not even reached the modest levels they were at before military operations to topple Saddam began in March 2003.

Also on Thursday, Army Surgeon-General Lt. Gen. Kevin Kiley told reporters that a survey of 1,000 U.S. troops who had returned from Iraq showed that 30 percent of them developed stress-related mental health problems three to four months after coming home.

That was a 10 times higher percentage than the 3 to 5 percent previously diagnosed with significant mental health problems immediately after they left the Iraq combat theater.

The survey, therefore, suggested that the long-term psychiatric problems afflicting U.S. veterans of the Iraq war will be far more numerous and severe than anyone had previously anticipated.

According to the Iraq Index Project of the Brookings Institution, 22 U.S. soldiers were killed in the seven days from July 20 to July 27. That was more than twice the number of the previous week and almost four times the number -- six -- killed the week before that.

This brought the total number of U.S. fatalities in Iraq from all causes since the start of military operations to topple Saddam to 1,790, of whom 1,380 were killed in hostile incidents. Some 17 of the 22 U.S. fatalities in the past week from July 20 to July 27 were killed in such incidents, the IIP said.

The number of U.S. troops wounded in action from the beginning of hostilities on March 19, 2003 through Wednesday, July 27 was 13,657, an increase of 98 compared with the previous week. This was a little worse than the 76 killed during the week of July 13-20, but still less than half the 293 U.S. soldiers wounded from July 6 to July 13, according to the IIP figures.

Nevertheless, well over 100 U.S. troops are now being wounded per week, many of them grievously, losing limbs or suffering permanent brain damage. That amounts to well over 5,000 per year.

In all, 52 Iraqi police and troops were killed by the insurgents from July 20 to July 27, including the 16 killed in the attack on the buses. That brought the total number of Iraq military and police killed from June 1, 2003 to Wednesday of this week 2,717. Through the month of July up to July 27, 240 Iraqi police and soldiers were killed by the insurgents, the IIP said.

The total toll of Iraqi police killed during the month of July, therefore, looks likely to still be a little less than the 296 killed in June and the 270 killed in May. But that is really cold comfort because it is still far higher than any other month in the insurgency so far.

The total number of Iraqi police and military killed per month never came near to 200 per month until March this year, and has never been below it since. As Jeffrey White, the respected military analyst of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told UPI this week, the overall trend of casualties inflicted by the insurgents continues to inch relentlessly upwards.

© 2005 News World Communications Inc.

You call Iraq stable? The Middle East didn't get "better". There have been terror attacks in Saudi Arabia directly targeting the oil industry. The balance is being upset and it could have drastic effects on MY lifestyle even though I don't live anywhere near Iraq.

But I agree on your opinion of Neo R :D

Uh huh.

It is your fault that your country is more reliant on middle east oil. Believe it or not, the US isn't that dependent. They still produce 40% of their own oil.

This move is probably the reaction to the low turn outs in US army recruitment this year. As far as stationing American troops in eastern regions of Europe, this will certainly get Russia's attention (not good). There are already US troops stationing between China and Russia in Asia, US troops in Iraq, and more US troops stationing on the outskirts of Russia from European side. Add the hostility with these new waves of Democratic revolutions taken place on Russia's immediate neighbours (former Soviet allies).

Pink colored glasses?
just facts baby...just facts.

<snip for brevity>

So... the fact that they have a functioning governement is a bad thing?

Sunnis end boycott over Iraq talks
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/26/wirq26.xml

That they had a stable election?
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2005/01/international-monitors-praise-iraq.php

It's bad that Iraq is rebuilding it's own army?
queue to join the Iraqi army
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/25/wirq25.xml

It's bad that al-Qaeda is being seen for what it is?
US delight as Iraqi rebels turn their guns on al-Qa'eda
Following al-Qa'eda's seizure of the main buildings a number of residents fled. Arkan Salim, 56, who left with his wife and four children, said: "We thought they were patriotic. Now we discovered that they are sick and crazy.
"They interfered in everything, even how we raise our children. They turned the city into hell, and we cannot live in it anymore."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/04/wirq04.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/07/04/ixworld.html

...now, I'm not saying that Iraq will be on my vacation itinerary anytime soon. But the country IS rebuilding, as is MUCH better off than it was this time last year.

This move is probably the reaction to the low turn outs in US army recruitment this year. As far as stationing American troops in eastern regions of Europe, this will certainly get Russia's attention (not good). There are already US troops stationing between China and Russia in Asia, US troops in Iraq, and more US troops stationing on the outskirts of Russia from European side. Add the hostility with these new waves of Democratic revolutions taken place on Russia's immediate neighbours (former Soviet allies).

Er... you're aware that the base closings have been eyed since the fall of the Berlin Wall, right?

Good riddence.

Why should we have bases in Germany anymore? The cold war is over, and they didn't support us in Iraq.


This is the exact reason these basis should be closed. Cold war is done and the seemingly majority dont support US policy. I say good bye. But will post a sign saying we would be back if anyone does anything stupid again. :p

<snip for brevity>

So... the fact that they have a functioning governement is a bad thing?
.It is not the first time they have a functioning Gov.
That they had a stable election?

It's bad that Iraq is rebuilding it's own army?
Elections are meaningless if it you dont have a sovereign Gov...
Elections are meaningless If the President has no control over the Foreign Armies (de facto) ruling the country.
Democracy is useless If you are ruled by a Foreign Country.

It's bad that al-Qaeda is being seen for what it is?.what? did they take a Poll on AQ?
How would you know what the People of Iraq thinks about the insurgents?...or about AQ?

I'm surprised we've kept our presence in Germany as long as we have since the supposed end of the Cold War. We can deploy our troops from the US as easily as from Germany, maybe easier. I don't envision ever pulling out completely due to reasons of geography, but a significant reduction is possible and probably beneficial to all.

Bringing troops home may prevent closing some of the 33 major bases at home. The German economy may need to do without us.

It is your fault that your country is more reliant on middle east oil. Believe it or not, the US isn't that dependent. They still produce 40% of their own oil.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/germany.html
Actually we get most our oil from Russia, followed by Norway. Then OPEC (most of that from Lybia) and then the UK...

translation ..US soldiers will never leave Britain.

:D

I am not surprised. One the strategic value of bases in Germany has waned as stated in previous posts. Two the cost of running the bases is not decreasing. For example. Ramstein has a certain number of flights they are allowed to have landing. The United States for all pratical purposes is renting the land and pays through the nose for all the extra flights coming with wounded from Iraq. Ramstein/Landstuhl Regional Medical Center is the major transport hub of the wounded between Iraq and the United States. These extra flights are very costly. Let alone the Euro/dollar exchange rate. That is yet another reason.

-snip-
Although Ramstein is apparently not about to be closed at this time.

It is not the first time they have a functioning

No, but they haven't had one since the fall of Saddam. And it's not like his was exactly a good gov't, either. We made the mess with backing Saddam, now we've cleaned it up. But this thread was supposed to be about base closings in Germany.

Gov.Elections are meaningless if it you dont have a sovereign Gov...

:confused: Iraq has been sovereign for over a year.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040628-043329-1009r.htm

Elections are meaningless If the President has no control over the Foreign Armies (de facto) ruling the country.

You seem confused, here. The US, UK and Poland are certainly NOT ruling the country, now do they wish to. Surely, you've heard about the discussions to leave next year?
Poland: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4717527.stm
US/UK: http://fullcoverage.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050713/pl_afp/usiraqbritainitaly_050713004324
Iraq: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4720083.stm

Further, why WOULD the President of a country have control over foreign military bases in that country? Shroeder doesn't have any control over the US forces in Germany, nor does Koizumi over those in Japan.
Nor does BUSH over the German Air Force, training in the US.

Democracy is useless If you are ruled by a Foreign Country.

I agree, if that were the case. :rolleyes: I really can't wait until we're no longer fighting over there. But the place would become a bloody mess as bad or worse than Somalia under the warlords if we just picked up tomorrow and went.

what? did they take a Poll on AQ?
How would you know what the People of Iraq thinks about the insurgents?...or about AQ?

Did you read the article? Why do you think Iraqis are joining the police & military even though those are the ones being blown up the most?

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/germany.html
Actually we get most our oil from Russia, followed by Norway. Then OPEC (most of that from Lybia) and then the UK...

Correction noted, but the US still has much less of an impact because we still produce 40% of our own oil. That's good for us, of course. We can sustain higher prices. You guys can't.

Although Ramstein is apparently not about to be closed at this time.

Given all that has been invested in Ramstein over the years by both the US and Germany, I doubt it ever will.

A few things on base closures...

I read a study not too long ago (maybe 6 weeks ago?) which showed that after the first round of base closures in the US a few years back that nearly all of the jobs lost were replaced, and in many cases by better jobs. Particularly jobs lost when bases closed near major cities.

So German communities who suffer job losses probably won't have to worry too long.

The US is shifting because we need bases closer to the scene of likely action, and Germany is too far away, and there is no danger of Russian tanks invading Germany any time soon. There are however useful logistics and air bases that will certainly remain, along with the hospital at Rhine Main.

But most activities will shift to places where US troops can actually exercise with a better degree of freedom of action. Sitting around in garrison doesn't work, and driving around Germany has always been difficult, occasionally expensive and annoying to the Germans.

[QUOTE=OceanDrive2]It is not the first time they have a functioning [QUOTE]

Nazi Germany had a functioning government too, but I would hardly call that government desirable.

You are oversimplifying Oceandrive

The German economy is very weak right now, and losing more jobs is the last thing they need.


Nazi Germany had a functioning government too, but I would hardly call that government desirable.

You are oversimplifying Oceandrive

The Iraqi government is not comparable to Hitler's dictatorship.

Although Ramstein is apparently not about to be closed at this time.

Obviously, I was looking at the German base closure issue as a whole. The flight line issues is one of many issues that is leading to this outcome. What the military will do is keep a few of the larger bases overseas to keep our foot in the door so to speak. Than I imagine they will open some bases in southern and eastern Europe do to cost and strategic value. These bases however will be on a much smaller scale than the bases of the past. Also they will probably take bases that are in close proximity of each other, even though they are presently run by different branches of the military, and consolidate them under joint leadership. Not a new idea... just one I think is going to be more prevalent.

I wonder effect substantial troop withdrawals will have on German self-defense requirements? Had Germany faced Russia alone during the Cold War, the military cost would have been staggering. Times have changed, and we're talking about withdrawing 50,000 and not all troops, but to what degree (if any) will Germany need to increase spending for self-defense? Any thoughts?

The Iraqi government is not comparable to Hitler's dictatorship.

Really? Hussan wasn't guilty of waging a war of outright territorial aggression twice (Kuwait, Iran), or slaughtering massive numbers of people because they were not of his ethnicity (Kurds, Shiite Arabs)

Looks pretty comparable to me, just a matter of difference in scale

I wonder effect substantial troop withdrawals will have on German self-defense requirements? Had Germany faced Russia alone during the Cold War, the military cost would have been staggering. Times have changed, and we're talking about withdrawing 50,000 and not all troops, but to what degree (if any) will Germany need to increase spending for self-defense? Any thoughts?

probably not too much, most of the actual combat power of the 2 US divisions in Germany have been elsewhere much of the post Cold War... in the Balkans doing peacekeeping, or in Afghanistan, or in Iraq.

As it is, the Germans have substantially reduced the old Bundewehr, and mostly eliminated the old DDR army completely.

I was stationed in Germany in 1986 during a REFORGER (return of forces to europe) and I was never on the impression we were being used to keep an eye on Germany. I was in the 32nd transportation unit (trucking company) and I dont see how we hurt Germany being there. The main reason the Army is pulling them out is due to budget cuts pure and simple. They are closing bases in the states and overseas. Most of the soldiers stationed in Germany are noncombatants and it is a good strategic place. The people were very kind,open and curious at times and I enjoyed it there. The Army is not just going to stick these folks over in Iraq..the troops they are using are from the infantry and other related mos's (military occupational specialties) but as was said earlier perhaps some doctors and such. Germany's economy is way stronger now than when I was there the exchange rate was about 2.75 marks for one dollar ((yes I know they use the euro)) but the last time I heard of the dm it was at 1.90 or maybe even better....so I think they can survive without us.

I wonder effect substantial troop withdrawals will have on German self-defense requirements?
Well, the Russians are our Allies now.
The Bundeswehr was meant to take the bulk of the action and hold off the Soviets (and the others, namely the NVA) when there was cruchtime.
It was good enough for that, but times have changed.
So while the Bundeswehr has been modernising, there really hasn't been enough money spent on it. It's only something like 1.6% of GDP, and the modernisation isn't fully completed yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundeswehr

At any rate I find it absolutely inconceivable that we would have to defend ourselves in Germany itself. So no increases there.

Really? Hussan wasn't guilty of waging a war of outright territorial aggression twice (Kuwait, Iran), or slaughtering massive numbers of people because they were not of his ethnicity (Kurds, Shiite Arabs)

Looks pretty comparable to me, just a matter of difference in scale

OMG no. I completely misunderstood. I thought you were talking about the current Iraqi government.. not Saddam Hussein.

Believe it or not, but the German economy as a whole couldn't give much of a flying fart. Hamburg alone transfers 400 million tons of exports every year.
Those soldiers can impossibly buy that much stuff.
Those little towns though, they might suffer. But that's the price you pay...
You seriously underestimate the economic impact of the US army bases in Germany.

It's not only what the soldiers spend. It is the rent the US pays for the land on which the bases stands (and you have no idea how HUGE are the spaces they encompass). It is the tons upon tons upon tons of fuel- bought from the local German market, naturally- that the army vehicles burn during both the routine and the war games. It is employment of the German building contractors, paid usage of sea ports and maintenance services, consumption of electricity and water, machinery lubricants, employment of lots of German workers. Local economies of many German cities- Hanau, for instance- have gone near bankrupt when US army presence in them was merely scaled down (there is a large neighborhood in Hanau that used to host Americans, now it stands empty, nobody pays rent and the city is unable to sell it to anyone because nobody is buying- and maintenance and repair still consume money from city budget). My sister, who studies economy, says that Germany will sure as hell feel the effect of US troops leaving, and with their economy at its weakest, they might not be able to afford such loss.

You seriously underestimate the economic impact of the US army bases in Germany.
Germany GDP:
purchasing power parity - $2.362 trillion (2004 est.)

Total US Military expenditures - dollar figure:
$370.7 billion (FY04 est.) (March 2003)

These figures are from the CIA Factbook.

Your sister may be studying Economics (say hi from me - I do too), but I find it difficult to believe that the world's thrid largest economy can be hurt as a whole by this. If she has done some econometric analysis, then I would like to see it.
The only valid point made in that direction was made about consumer confidence if these small towns suffer (which I don't deny).
I think you all seriously underestimate the German economy. Even if it is "at their weakest" (meaning it grows not as fast as it should), it is still huge, meaning $600 billion bigger than both the UK and France.

As long as the British don't close bases in Germany so they don't cancel Red Cap.

EDIT: Never mind. There won't be a third series apparently.

Germany GDP:
purchasing power parity - $2.362 trillion (2004 est.)

Total US Military expenditures - dollar figure:
$370.7 billion (FY04 est.) (March 2003)

These figures are from the CIA Factbook.

Your sister may be studying Economics (say hi from me - I do too), but I find it difficult to believe that the world's thrid largest economy can be hurt as a whole by this. If she has done some econometric analysis, then I would like to see it.
The only valid point made in that direction was made about consumer confidence if these small towns suffer (which I don't deny).
I think you all seriously underestimate the German economy. Even if it is "at their weakest" (meaning it grows not as fast as it should), it is still huge, meaning $600 billion bigger than both the UK and France.
Ever heard of that little straw that broke the camel's back?

I don't think Germany will be completely devastated, of course, but hurt they will be without doubt.

Ever heard of that little straw that broke the camel's back?
You are almost as good as being pessimistic as the Germans themselves. :p
Anyways, Germany is the world's largest exporter, and Investment Ratings are going up all the time. It would have to be a big straw.

I don't think Germany will be completely devastated, of course, but hurt they will be without doubt.
I think it's mainly the local communities. Fair enough, but they'll make it somehow. Didn't someone above talk about a study done into the economic effects of a base closure and jobs?
I wish that person would provide a link!