![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
The USA's strong presence in Europe used to have a good purpose. That purpose isn't really there anymore, but we remain committed to NATO and our other alliances. A token presence may be required to show our commitment, but heavy deployment is pointless for the time being. As far as I know, it is also nonexistent already.
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
I believe the way to go is by reducing the amount of US personell in Europe but maintaining bases and storage facilities in case of changed politics in the east.
USA as the strongest NATO member should be commited to Europe as long as the NATO organization is alive. However, on the other hand, if the political climate and the European Union planned battle groups can fill the gap of US soldiers then I do not see any reason for the US to be deployed. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
why are they there? do troops stationed in europe recieve training they would not have otherwise have gotten back in the USA?
they are probably there in case a situation invovling americans occurs anywhere. by having thier troops stationed globally, it decreases the ammount of time taken for them to reach the incident scene. this is probably a good thing, although i know a lot of people object to troops beings stationed on foreign soil as they see them as an unwanted/unneccessary pressence |
![]() |