http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/14/bush.troops.home.ap/index.html Bush to bring 70,000 troops home from Europe plus 100,000 of their family members and support personnel to 'help America respond to foreign threats'. Nice political move right before the election. I have a feeling if Bush gets back in, these people will be serving in Iraq after the election and maybe even Syria if the Bush administration decides to invade it. He did a similar thing about the 9/11 commission. Initially he was against it, then a month before the 2002 Congressional elections he changed his mind and was for it, then after the 2002 elections was against it again and assigned Kissinger to head the commission. Great flip flop.
Didn't he say that he wanted 30,000 MORE troops? Bet you anything the guys he sent back are going to be called back to Iraq in a few months. Bet you ANYTHING.
This move is long overdue. Many critics have (rightly) been complaining that we need more troops in Iraq. Moreover, the troops that are in Iraq now deserve a break. These active duty troops that are being recalled from Europe and elsewhere would be much more useful in Iraq. It's well past time that Europe get off the American military tit.
You got it backwards there Huck and bit overly jingoistic in your tone as well. Europe would have been pleased to get "off the tit", as you put it, some considerable while ago, but it is Washington which has sought to stand in the way (and to continue to do so) of any EU military force development. Much easier to hold the MIC's sword of damocles over Europe's head when forcing it to remain firmly tied to NATO (aka "The American Club). Perhaps you should have a remote inkling of the politics behind Europe's military enhancement efforts before making such arrogant remarks.
If the 70,000 troops do come ome, they probably will be sent back after the election, but i bet A LOT of those guys aren't going back... Peace and Love, Dan
Perhaps you could provide me with some evidence to support your claims that the US is somehow thwarting European efforts to upgrade their militaries. To my knowledge, they're hardly poised to do so: http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/national/will/story/10285888p-11206023c.html
Sitting all comfy in Oregon, as far from transatlantic MIC activities as one could be in the US, I am not surprised you have no inkling of such realities. Certainly the US domestic press isnt going to devote much space nor the media its air time to such matters best handled within the confines of EU and NATO meeting rooms (which i have had the privilege of sitting in on from time to time). I can provide you an inkling of the thinking at work here and the interests which Washington has long sought to protect but much of this is physical firsthand experience im afraid, like it or not, and not a matter on which I can provide you easy links to official documents. Here though, some articles for thought... http://www.iht.com/articles/114744.html http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=2071 http://english.people.com.cn/200310/22/eng20031022_126594.shtml http://www.pww.org/past-weeks-2000/European%20powers%20separates.htm
Lick, Very interesting articles, especially that last one. I'd like your thoughts on a couple of excerpts: "The Kosovo war (as it is called in Europe) was in effect a humiliating experience for EU states, pointing up their military weaknesses, their technological shortcomings, their lack of coordinating structure." Do you think European countries are prepared to overcome these obstacles? The closing paragraph of this article indicates a lack of political will to do so: "For the people of Europe a European army in any form is against their interests. Already there are top level calls for a reversal of the post-cold war cuts in arms spending and for increased arms budgets to meet the new military needs. A further slashing of the welfare state and its hard-won social benefits, is the inevitable consequence." Ironically, the author seems to share US concerns about the prospect of a European army, though for very different reasons. What about you?
Looks like the answer to how Bush (or Kerry) will avoid a draft in 2005 has been answered. Don't get too comfortable, boys.
Before Dubbie can withdrawal troupes from Europe, he has to negotiate the withdrawal with NATO and they don’t really like him much. This could take years. Our troups are there because of a NATO agreement. He just said it for the headlines.
