Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 544 Post(s)
Japan was just used as a handy example.
I think that we need forward bases and Asia is one of those places that it is needed. Beyond fiscal question of what percentage of expenses are covered by the host country I would not for the most part argue for or against a specific country. There are plenty of countries that we could leave or consolidate our bases.
Why not leave Germany or the UK or Italy?
Why do we need multiple bases in every country in the Union?
We should leave Germany, Italy and the U.K. We should bring the troops home and consolidate at least 90% of our military on American soil, which would strengthen our defense considerably. The main reason we maintain a strong military presence in these places is to support the U.S. military industrial complex. S. Korea is not going to house U.S. military bases, then hand defense contracts over to the Russians. Taxpayers are essentially financing an elaborate international operation in order to support and enrich arms manufacturers. It's not really quite that simple, but that is a big, big part of it.
"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon