Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
Actually, according to former Ambassador Richard Holbrook, Germany and France pay for a fair amount of the cost of our troops stationed in their countries and this will probably actually cost us more to maintain these formations back here at home.
I can't understand the logic of pulling troops out of South Korea when there is a nation with proven weapons of mass destruction in the antagonistic state just next door.
It was also mentioned that this is a long planned move, that the first troop movement wouldn't happen until 2006 and simple math would indicate that 70,000 troops over a ten year period amounts to an average of 7,000 troops per year -- a minute number really.
So, why the big announcement now?
|
As well regarded as Richard Holbrooke is, he has been trashing the Bush administration none stop for the last four years. He's also a leading consultant for the Kerry campaign.
Unless you show me a spreadsheet, its just hot air. Is he factoring in the economic stimulus that Europe now enjoys at the expense of economic stimulus that is not occuring in the US? I doubt it. Is he factoring in the cost of the Armed Forces current poor retention rate, and how stationing those troops in the US will help alleviate this problem? Probably not.
I really hope that we pull these troops out of Europe.
As far as South Korea goes, I agree that its not a good idea. My guess is that this is just posturing to get South Korea, and/or the other nations that are actively involved addressing the North Korean issue, to move on some point of negotiations of which none of us are aware.
As far as the announcement coming now, it has to happen sometime. I'm sure that politics factored into the language of the announcement, but I doubt that this idea is simple election year posturing.