| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Pentagon Criticized for Overseas Base-Closing Plan |
| 2005-05-10 |
| (CNSNews.com) - The Pentagon on Monday rejected calls by a congressionally appointed commission to slow down the withdrawal of 70,000 American troops from Europe and Asia. The proposals entail the U.S. Army withdrawing from about half of its European bases, the Pentagon confirmed. The Overseas Basing Commission said the moves were being planned without sufficient coordination with affected countries or synchronization with other security activities and needs, but the Pentagon disputed that view. In a report officially released Monday, the commission also queried the Pentagon estimate that repatriating the troops and their families would cost around $10 billion. The commission said it would cost about twice that amount. It called for more congressional oversight of the process. Among the commission's specific recommendations was one saying that a Germany-based heavy combat brigade due to return to the U.S. should remain where it is. This would provide a hedge against unexpected future security threats in the European region, demonstrate commitment to NATO, and show U.S. resolve in the Balkans. "We further decrease our presence in NATO only at risk of lessening our influence in Europe." It also said plans to withdraw U.S. Marines from Okinawa should be scaled down, calling the southern Japanese island a "strategic linchpin." The Pentagon's review of force posture abroad is aimed at making the U.S. military a leaner, more focused force capable of handling post-Cold War threats and contingencies. President Bush announced the initiative last August, citing the need for "a more agile and flexible force." According to the commission report, the plan envisages returning approximately 30 percent of al U.S. sites abroad to host nations, mostly in Germany and South Korea. The plan to bring tens of thousands of personnel home is meant to dovetail with plans to close, realign or expand military bases on U.S. soil -- a process known as Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC). |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #8 French heavy combat brigade How many white flags does a heavy brigade have? |
| Posted by: Brett 2005-05-10 16:59 |
| #7 Index A B C: Coordination "The Overseas Basing Commission said the moves were being planned without sufficient coordination with affected countries or synchronization with other security activities and needs..." Cross reference: Operation Iraqi Freedom, Turkish denial of territorial use and our "allies" indifference to our coordination and security "needs". Also see "Americans Who Don't Give a F*** Anymore". |
| Posted by: jules 187 2005-05-10 16:13 |
| #6 They could have saved a lot of words if they'd just told us right up front whose ox is being gored. (or whose bribe is being cut) No need for all the rest of that mumbo-jumbo. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-05-10 12:31 |
| #5 The Overseas Basing Commission said the moves were being planned without sufficient coordination with affected countries.. What's there to coordinate? The places we don't need to be in, we should get out of. That is all. This would provide a hedge against unexpected future security threats in the European region, demonstrate commitment to NATO, and show U.S. resolve in the Balkans. "We further decrease our presence in NATO only at risk of lessening our influence in Europe." Are these guys kidding? Look, if the EU is going to be the heavy lifter that it wishes to be, then they need to take care of problems in their own backyard. That includes the Balkans and any "future security threat". As for NATO, the old Soviet Union is gone. If some sort of loose alliance can be kept, fine, but NATO's usefulness as it currently stands is subject to question. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-05-10 11:51 |
| #4 This would provide a hedge against unexpected future security threats in the European region, demonstrate commitment to NATO, and show U.S. resolve in the Balkans. Heavy combat brigades have to be transported. What if a nation that must be traversed declines or delays (as did Austria some time back)? |
| Posted by: Pappy 2005-05-10 11:29 |
| #3 I criticize the pentagon on their overseas base-closing plan. They ain't doin' it fast enough. Fook the damn EU and let them grow up and provide their own damn defence. I'm tired of holding hands and helping supposed allies and getting stabbed in the back during and afterwords, then getting bitched at for not helping sooner and/or enough. |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-05-10 10:16 |
| #2 If the Western Europeans won't finance their own defense after handholding by the US Treasury for 50 years, then we can work with who ever takes over as we dealt with the Soviets for the same amount of time. The Atlantic is still a better defensive position than the Elbe ever was. |
| Posted by: Jomolet Glaque2594 2005-05-10 09:59 |
| #1 "a Germany-based heavy combat brigade... would provide a hedge against unexpected future security threats in the European region" Germany is welcome to let the EU take over the base after we leave. I'm sure they'd welcome the protection of a French heavy combat brigade. Or maybe the Belgians could step in -- the French voters aren't so sure about this EU deal. |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-05-10 08:52 |