Poll: Send Your Troops Home, America

[thiosk]

I'd really like to see what would happen if America closed its bases in all foreign countries and brough ALL troops home-- it has been estimated that closing only foreign bases (and not cutting the size of the US military) would save us americans between 1\2 to 1 trillion dollars per year by simply not having to operate with a grid of military installations spread around the planet.

According to the Defense Department's annual "Base Structure Report" for fiscal year 2003, which itemizes foreign and domestic U.S. military real estate, the Pentagon currently owns or rents 702 overseas bases in about 130 countries...

Many of the countries do not have functional standing armies. In many cases, the mere presence of the united states military could be establishing and maintaining peace and stability in that region-- the bases were often established originally to make the area safe for american investment and commerce-- but arguably peace and stability is a good thing no matter where you are.

But we're broke, and we're Renting. We are paying foreign countries or have paid foreign countries for the privilege of maintaining their peace and security overseas.

Chances are, if you are posting on this website and are not american, there are american troops stationed in your country. Do you want them to leave? Do you know they are there? Do you think they are keeping a lid on things in your country, or preventing (or have prevented) something worse from establishing itself in your back yard? Finally, if you want them in your country, would you be willing to let your government pay the rent to keep the base open and staffed?

Americans, please click the "i am american" option on the poll.

 

[Valate_v1legacy]

No you wouldn't, nuclear blasts cause blindness anyways.

 

[HassEsser]

There aren't enough options. If there was one saying "9/11 was planned by America, and they should get the fuck out of The Middle East, and I am American. Also, America's populace sucks" I would check that in a second.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, I agree that we should, for the most part, leave any places that we have no business in.

 

[Berethond]

Most of them can be closed, yes.
(Iamadirtyamericaninfidel)

 

[oliveira8]

I'm sure that it's not only America that has bases all over the world.....

 

[thiosk]

]
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I agree that we should, for the most part, leave any places that we have no business in.

But what determines "business in."

Its my position that if a country wants to keep us there to maintain stability, they can pay our rent, at the very least.

 

[HassEsser]

]
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I agree that we should, for the most part, leave any places that we have no business in.

But what determines "business in."

Its my position that if a country wants to keep us there to maintain stability, they can pay our rent, at the very least.

That was a good one And, yea, I see what you mean

 

[Pimppeter2]

Then we wouldn't have influence. What superpower would want to do that.

Be realistic.

 

[Nickolai77]

Hmm i'm gona break this down.
American bases which are there for security: Should be there if their presence is the only thing keeping the country stable. The American's should not have to pay the host country to protect them.

Bases used for training: Provided the US can pay the rent, then bases that are used for training personal are fine.

Bases held for strategic purposes: Again, provided that the US can pay the rent, then holding bases for logistical and strategic purposes is fine.

If the American's want to close these bases or open up more is there business.

On a side note, in 1940 the US acquired a 100 year lease on a number of British island's in the Caribbean, so by 2040 this lease runs out. The question is will the Americans want to renew the contract or will the British government want these island's back?

(Personally i think it should be left for the locals to decide, however in international politics, the wishes of the locals are often over-looked)

 

[ljd184]

wheres the i don't care what America dose with its bases option
because as long as they are paying for the land they are using i don't relay care

 

[rainman2203]

What, may I ask, are all these soldiers to do if not occupying foreign countries? Its not like we have a surplus of jobs back here at home...

 

[thiosk]

Anyway, if it's costing that much, why the hell are we keeping troops all over the place?

It's not like it's making anyone hate us less.
So withdraw all of our troops - if things get worse, maybe people will see that they were doing some good.

For all the spite and vitriol that gets spewed in the direction of my home country, I just got to thinking about all the services we do provide for the world as a whole, from quick-response disaster relief to quelling insurrection by our mere presence. And I think the world would hate us more if we left.

I seem to think that if push came to shove, many foreign governments would be willing to pay us to keep troops there. Its good if we are there, and they can sabre-rattle about the evil americans to deflect attention from their own regime, while benefiting economically and politically from our presence.

What, may I ask, are all these soldiers to do if not occupying foreign countries? Its not like we have a surplus of jobs back here at home...

Continue drawing their paycheck, just spending it in america rather than uzbekistan.

 

[Cody211282]

Also, America's populace sucks"

Uh, maybe you suck, but I sure as hell don't.
Keep me out of your weird self-hatred thing.

Anyway, if it's costing that much, why the hell are we keeping troops all over the place?

It's not like it's making anyone hate us less.
So withdraw all of our troops - if things get worse, maybe people will see that they were doing some good.
If things get better, people will continue to hate America, but at least we'll be in marginally less massive debt.

I like that idea, I would take a bit farther and say that if they ask for help say no for a few years first untill we are sure they really want it, every time we are asked to go in somewere within a year or so they start complaining, so make them really want it first

 

[Durahan2]

If we stay with a few bases in their country, which we pay for the land we use, we're hated. If we should pack up and leave, we'll most likely be hated.

There is no pleasing the world... I blame each country's own version of Faux News. You know every single one of you has one.

 

[thiosk]

There is no pleasing the world... I blame each country's own version of Faux News. You know every single one of you has one.

Please include MSNBC if you are talking about fakey news organizations.

 

[electric discordian]

Most of the bases in Britain could go, you made us your floating nuclear carrier throughout the Eighties making us have a massive target painted from orbit. If the cold war had turned hot we probably would have been invaded. But thanks to your insertion of strategic nuclear weapons around our sceptered Isle we became an important target one worthy of being reduced to nuclear ash.

You have a listening station which helps monitor all UK telecommunications.

And I have it on good authority from someone I know in Korea that they cannot wait for the US to leave so that they can start diplomatic relations with their neighbours.

I think the US should keep themselves to themselves. Although this may change with your new president he seems to know what he's doing which is more than can be said for Brown and his bunch of incompetent and corrupt morons

 

[gmer412]

I'm not sure why we have so many troops stationed in other countries in the first place. I get the middle east thing, but why others? Bases for training and stuff make sense, but why have them so far away?

So, call me ambivalent. I don't see the reason we're there, but there has to be something, right? Right?

@9/11 conspiracy theorists: No.

Please include MSNBC if you are talking about fakey news organizations.

I love watching Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann hate each other.