Trump Orders some US Troops Out of Germany.

[Ralph]

It'll be interesting to see where exactly the cuts are made and if they'll end up affecting the training centres at Graf and Hohenfels that the Army uses constantly, vice the HQs.

https://www.dw.com/en/us-military-in-germany-what-you-need-to-know/a-49998340

 

[tomahawk6]

There is more of a need to have troops in eastern Europe than in Germany. However to move troops from the US to Europe we will need facilities in Germany if we are to reinforce NATO.

 

[FJAG]

There is more of a need to have troops in eastern Europe than in Germany. However to move troops from the US to Europe we will need facilities in Germany if we are to reinforce NATO.

The point of the article is that these troops are not really "front-line" troops anyway but are "support" personnel there to create and run a base that supports US operations throughout the region including Europe but especially the Middle East. These cuts are more harmful to US operations than to European security.

Just as importantly, the decision was made politically and without input from DoD. A little pre-election posturing rather than concern US national interests.

:cheers:

 

[Edward Campbell]

The point of the article is that these troops are not really "front-line" troops anyway but are "support" personnel there to create and run a base that supports US operations throughout the region including Europe but especially the Middle East. These cuts are more harmful to US operations than to European security.

Just as importantly, the decision was made politically and without input from DoD. A little pre-election posturing rather than concern US national interests.

:cheers:

It is always the same, isn't it? Amateurs, like Trump, want to cut the boring but damned hard to rebuild infrastructure and support base while hanging on to the bright, shiny toys.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The point of the article is that these troops are not really "front-line" troops anyway but are "support" personnel there to create and run a base that supports US operations throughout the region including Europe but especially the Middle East. These cuts are more harmful to US operations than to European security.

Just as importantly, the decision was made politically and without input from DoD. A little pre-election posturing rather than concern US national interests.

:cheers:

Anyone within 72 hours of the Russian LD should be considered 'frontline' I would say.

Depending on circumstance, of course, that could mean everyone up to the English Channel a.k.a. 'The World's Largest Tank Trap'

 

[dimsum]

The point of the article is that these troops are not really "front-line" troops anyway but are "support" personnel there to create and run a base that supports US operations throughout the region including Europe but especially the Middle East. These cuts are more harmful to US operations than to European security.

Just as importantly, the decision was made politically and without input from DoD. A little pre-election posturing rather than concern US national interests.

:cheers:

I'm sure that behind the scenes, there are several high-ranking GOFOs saying "how the F are we going to sustain operations" to the WH administration.  I believe there's a quote about logistics people like to use here 

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'm sure that behind the scenes, there are several high-ranking GOFOs saying "how the F are we going to sustain operations" to the WH administration.  I believe there's a quote about logistics people like to use here 

Something like: 'We can issue you leather belts because you'll need to eat those at some point.'

 

[tomahawk6]

Statement by DoD on troop cuts in Germany..

The Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff briefed the President yesterday on plans to redeploy 9,500 troops from Germany. The proposal that was approved not only meets the President’s directive, it will also enhance Russian deterrence, strengthen NATO, reassure Allies, improve U.S. strategic flexibility and U.S. European Command’s operational flexibility, and take care of our service members and their families. Pentagon leaders look forward to briefing this plan to the congressional defense committees in the coming weeks, followed by consultations with NATO allies on the way forward. We will be providing timely updates to potentially affected personnel, their families and communities as planning progresses.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Statement by DoD on troop cuts in germeny.

The Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff briefed the President yesterday on plans to redeploy 9,500 troops from Germany. The proposal that was approved not only meets the President’s directive, it will also enhance Russian deterrence, strengthen NATO, reassure Allies, improve U.S. strategic flexibility and U.S. European Command’s operational flexibility, and take care of our service members and their families. Pentagon leaders look forward to briefing this plan to the congressional defense committees in the coming weeks, followed by consultations with NATO allies on the way forward. We will be providing timely updates to potentially affected personnel, their families and communities as planning progresses.

Typically dishonest, politically directed bafflegab that could have been written just as easily in London or Ottawa.

 

[stellarpanther]

I know this isn't the site for conspiracy theories but I'm not convinced he isn't a Russian asset who made it to the highest office the country.  I watch a clip yesterday from an interview in which he said, "why is it always Russia, Russia, Russia and never about China" or words to that effect.  He really seems to defend Russia.

 

[QV]

I know this isn't the site for conspiracy theories but I'm not convinced he isn't a Russian asset who made it to the highest office the country.  I watch a clip yesterday from an interview in which he said, "why is it always Russia, Russia, Russia and never about China" or words to that effect.  He really seems to defend Russia.

Omg.

 

[Good2Golf]

I know this isn't the site for conspiracy theories but I'm not convinced he isn't a Russian asset who made it to the highest office the country.  I watch a clip yesterday from an interview in which he said, "why is it always Russia, Russia, Russia and never about China" or words to that effect.  He really seems to defend Russia.

Perhaps add Russia and Mafia together and you could imagine a relationship that goes back 30 years...and where Trump is a Confidential Informant for the FBI to control the Russian mob in the United States?

Hmmmm....

 

[CBH99]

I know this isn't the site for conspiracy theories but I'm not convinced he isn't a Russian asset who made it to the highest office the country.  I watch a clip yesterday from an interview in which he said, "why is it always Russia, Russia, Russia and never about China" or words to that effect.  He really seems to defend Russia.

I'm with you 95% of the time Stellar, but this time I have to humorously disagree.

I do agree with Trump (Probably the only time I'll ever say that)      that the American MSM does focus on Russia a lot more than China, when I think China is SUBSTANTIALLY more aggressive and more dangerous than Russia.


Does Russia mettle in America's internal affairs?  Sure.  Same way America does to Russia.

But China really is the FAR more dangerous threat to the west in every single way.  Weaponizing and monopolizing telecommunications, electrical companies, food production companies, medical goods, pharmaceuticals, internal influence at universities, cities, towns, regional governments, etc etc. 


I do agree with his sentiment, in this particular case, that the MSM does focus far too much on the wrong enemy.  :2c:

 

[Brad Sallows]

Russia is the enemy because Clinton lost what was supposed to be a sure thing, and blame had/has to be laid somewhere.  Remember that right up to the point of election day, the administration was aware of Russian interference and downplayed its importance.

 

[stellarpanther]

I'm with you 95% of the time Stellar, but this time I have to humorously disagree.

I do agree with Trump (Probably the only time I'll ever say that)      that the American MSM does focus on Russia a lot more than China, when I think China is SUBSTANTIALLY more aggressive and more dangerous than Russia.


Does Russia mettle in America's internal affairs?  Sure.  Same way America does to Russia.

But China really is the FAR more dangerous threat to the west in every single way.  Weaponizing and monopolizing telecommunications, electrical companies, food production companies, medical goods, pharmaceuticals, internal influence at universities, cities, towns, regional governments, etc etc. 


I do agree with his sentiment, in this particular case, that the MSM does focus far too much on the wrong enemy.  :2c:

I agree with you completely.  China by far is the bigger threat and does have ambitions to continue spreading their influence into areas they never used to get involved with.  In the past, they mostly stuck with Asian countries, now however they are spreading into areas such as Nicaragua, Venezuela, Ecuador and now even Cuba.  With Russia, I think Putin does wish the Soviet Union was recreated but whether Canada and others have troops in the Baltic States, I just don't see him going after any NATO country.  Even in the Ukraine, he stopped in Crimea.  He seems to only be interested in the Russian areas of the Ukraine that border Russia.  I doubt he'll go after the entire country and capture Kiev.

 

[CBH99]

I agree with you completely.  China by far is the bigger threat and does have ambitions to continue spreading their influence into areas they never used to get involved with.  In the past, they mostly stuck with Asian countries, now however they are spreading into areas such as Nicaragua, Venezuela, Ecuador and now even Cuba.  With Russia, I think Putin does wish the Soviet Union was recreated but whether Canada and others have troops in the Baltic States, I just don't see him going after any NATO country.  Even in the Ukraine, he stopped in Crimea.  He seems to only be interested in the Russian areas of the Ukraine that border Russia.  I doubt he'll go after the entire country and capture Kiev.

Agree with you.

While Putin may relish for the glory days of the Soviet Union from a global influence perspective, he's also incredibly smart, and knows that just isn't possible.  Especially not with the Russian economy on a tight leash via sanctions.

I believe you are right, and so does Michael Hayden (former CIA director).  I've watched quite a few of his interviews now that he's retired, and he speaks about other allied intelligence services, and the different general behaviors of 'non-allied' intelligence services such as the Russians and Chinese.


In one of his longer talks, he states that Russia really just wants to control it's neighbors and the events around it's borders.  Hnce, Crimea and a large Russian population in the area that genuinely did not want to be Ukrainian.  Or Georgia.  Or Chechnya.  And keeping a level of influence in the Bering Sea, the Med, Barents Sea, etc etc.

As I've mentioned on this forum before, Putin is probably the smartest politician in the world right now.  Or at least one of.  He isn't going to invade the only source of income he really has right now.  (Which is selling oil & gas to Europe)



China?  Much more dangerous, in far more sinister ways.  :2c:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

When you look at the planning and moves in Crimea that was planned to the minute. I feel though that Donbass was a gamble he took on a hunch based on Obama's weak response. In the end it was a bridge to far and to many variable and actors to control effectively. My guess is he focus on stabilizing the areas they hold and create a legal fiction to support them.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Russia has been the boogyman since September 2, 1945.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I would just repeat what I have been saying for a long time:

1. Russia is led by an opportunistic adventurer (or an adventurous opportunist, if you prefer) ~ he's willing to take calculated risks and he is a short-term thinker; but

2. China is led by strategists ~ and it still is a bit of a collective leadership, even though Xi Jinping is "paramount leader" for life.

China's aims are much more dangerous than Russia's because they are nothing short of making China the most powerful nation on earth ... like Spain was, like France was, like Britain was, like America is. But China is much less likely to start a war. The Chinese are afraid of a war because while they are a great land power they are weak at sea and global dominance requires a maritime strategy and strategic maritime forces. China has neither: the first is foreign to their thinking ... as it was to Napoleon's, for example; the second is beyond their grasp for at least another generation.

Russia is a decaying power and I fear the "use it or lose it" mentality which I suspect dominates Putin's thinking.

Trump is Trump ... he's a bloody fool, but he's convinced he is smart.  :facepalm:

 

[Lumber]

...strategic maritime forces. China has neither...

Have you seen the size of their navy!?!