Reply
Wed 18 Aug, 2004 09:43 am
They may not be to enamoured with Americans. But they love the American buck. Bye, Bye.
In any event it is a move that is long overdue. The cold has been over for 15 years. Making the presense of American troops in Germany for the most part superflous. At least in that great a number.
Union fears loss of 80,000 local jobs
BERLIN Rudolf Stieber, who has driven a taxi for 25 years in the Bavarian town of Würzburg, said a tough business just got tougher with news that one of the town's big employers, the U.S. Army's 1st Infantry division, may be leaving town..
"Business hasn't been good anyway for a couple years, so this is just another piece of bad news," said Stieber, 46. "I'll be affected like other drivers, probably in a small way. But still it's not what you want to hear.".
Karsten Voigt, the German Foreign Ministry's top official for relations with Washington, said the announcement this week that the United States would move 60,000 to 70,000 troops out of Europe and Asia should underscore the need to keep strong German-American ties..
"The withdrawal of soldiers is a loss, naturally - we regret it and American soldiers are welcome here," Voigt told Deutschlandfunk radio. The waning U.S. military presence in Germany underscores that "we must constantly renew the trans-Atlantic alliance," he said, according to The Associated Press..
About 70,000 U.S. soldiers are based in Germany, the bulk of the American military presence in Europe..
While German officials said they had been consulted on the planned pullout, the news came as a surprise to many local leaders in affected communities like Würzburg and Wiesbaden, west of Frankfurt. Most said they were scrambling to quantify the possible effect of the U.S. action on local businesses..
In Wiesbaden, the base for the U.S. Army's 1st Armored Division, Ulrike Grimm, a member of the city council's business subcommittee, said local officials would probably meet after the summer break to study the possible consequences..
"Certainly, there will be an effect on us here, when you consider the empty housing and facilities and the demand on city services," Grimm said..
The plan, outlined Monday by President George W. Bush, foresees the two U.S. divisions in Germany returning to the United States as part of a military realignment meant to confront post-Cold War threats like Islamic terrorism..
Though the withdrawal will be spread over years, areas of southern and western Germany will likely feel a sharp economic impact, including the likely loss of tens of thousands of local jobs..
On Monday, the German services union Verdi, which represents 2.6 million German workers, said the troop pullout from Germany could cause the loss of 80,000 local jobs. "The jobs of almost 700 people here are now at risk," Pia Beckmann, the mayor of Würzburg, told the N-25 television news channel, Agence France-Press reported..
Peter Bofinger, a professor of business at the University of Würzburg, said it was difficult to estimate the ultimate impact of a pullout. "There will certainly be an impact, but we will have to spend time to find out how severe it will be.".
Business owners in Würzburg and Wiesbaden played down the effect of the pullout, noting that the U.S. government had been gradually reducing troop levels in their communities for much of the past decade. Some saw the possibility of a complete departure as a result of the current state of German-American political relations, already strained over the Iraq War..
"Let's face it, the relationship has been pretty tense of late," said Grimm, a project manager at a Wiesbaden chemical company. "And this probably makes sense from a U.S. strategic sense, considering the new priorities with terrorism in the world.".
A German government source suggested the news of a major pullout had not been welcome, according to Agence France Press. "Berlin continues to signal its interest in an American military presence in Germany and has emphasized that it can offer ideal conditions for bases," the source told AFP on condition of anonymity..
At the City Bistro in Würzburg, a small café located across from the train station, owner Ingrid Rizzo said she did not think her coffee, wine and ice cream shop would be seriously affected..
"There have been fewer and fewer Americans here over the last 10 years anyway, so it's not like I get a lot any more," said Rizzo, who has run her coffeeshop for 16 years. "I think we'll probably take this in stride. But, of course, people are upset.".
International Herald Tribune
In The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, Paul Kennedy states that in the period 1955 to 1980, the United States devoted about 25% of it's GDP to "defense," whereas in the same period, Germany spent less than 5%, and Japan less than 2.5%. Personally, i say its high time the Europeans arranged for and paid for their collective security.
Bush is not a coalition builder nor a treaty maker.
plainoldme wrote:Bush is not a coalition builder nor a treaty maker.
this hit the nail on the head.
But maybe Kerry ? He wants a little bit more ask the international community...
Setanta wrote:In The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, Paul Kennedy states that in the period 1955 to 1980, the United States devoted about 25% of it's GDP to "defense," whereas in the same period, Germany spent less than 5%, and Japan less than 2.5%. Personally, i say its high time the Europeans arranged for and paid for their collective security.
I actually gasped out loud when I read
and agreed with this.
Had this site not been born in the cauldron of partisan hysteria (insofar as concerns political threads), i would have billed myself as a Libertarian, and likely no one would have laughed. I gave up using the term to describe myself, however, when Lyndon La Rouche appeared in the political mosh pit.
Since we are for quite some time an independent countries, I think, it's only okay that the occupying troops leave by now.
Of course, it's certainly not easy for those, who erned their money from these troops.
But the conservative states, where the US-troops will leave now, should perhaps look at what the 'red' governments of those states did [and the regions, counties, cities and towns there] , when the British, Canadian, Belgian, Dutch and Danish troops left these parts of Germany a couple of years ago. [My town, e.g. got some hundred new houses, new places for the distant university, the adult education center, the music school, the art school etc etc, when 2,000 British soldiers left this place 10 years ago. - The county capital even got a complete new suburb, with three new big schools and a hospital, when the Canadians, British and Belgians left: 3,500 military altogether.]
I suspect that this may have a lot to do with Germany's liberalisation of their 'sex-in-uniform' codes. Wouldn't want all those butch Marines to discover they're flaming queers and ask for political asylum, now would we?? Ohhh, be quiet!!!!
Setanta wrote:In The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, Paul Kennedy states that in the period 1955 to 1980, the United States devoted about 25% of it's GDP to "defense," whereas in the same period, Germany spent less than 5%, and Japan less than 2.5%. Personally, i say its high time the Europeans arranged for and paid for their collective security.
Not fair Set!! The Germans and Japanese blew their 'defense' budgets in the financial years 1936/37 to 1944/45. They needed some sort of economic restraint to cover the shortfall!!
Setanta - you ARE joking?!? I can't imagine that either of those nations COULD have spent anything on re-armanent and overt military build-up whilst still being occupied by a power such as the USA.
Mr. Pondquility, i don't deny at all that the two nations in question were obliged to adopt the military postures they had by circumstance. I was simply pointing out the discrepancy, to underline my subsequent statement that it is high time they took over such matters themselves. Fifty years of an "American shield" (and in Germany, of course, the occupying armies of other nations) has been long enough.
Re: American troops to be pulled out of Grermany
au1929 wrote: The cold has been over for 15 years. Making the presense of American troops in Germany for the most part superflous. At least in that great a number.
I can't believe it: I agree with you!
Setanta wrote: In The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, Paul Kennedy states that in the period 1955 to 1980, the United States devoted about 25% of it's GDP to "defense," whereas in the same period, Germany spent less than 5%, and Japan less than 2.5%. Personally, i say its high time the Europeans arranged for and paid for their collective security.
I don't know where Mr. Kennedy got his numbers, but the numbers from the Census Bureau are much lower than Mr. Kennedy claims. I am too lazy to enter the tables from my "Historical Statistics of the USA" and my "Statistical Abstract of the USA", but here is a plot compiled by
some hard-working blogger. I agree with your conclusion though.
Setanta wrote:Had this site not been born in the cauldron of partisan hysteria (insofar as concerns political threads), i would have billed myself as a Libertarian, and likely no one would have laughed. I gave up using the term to describe myself, however, when Lyndon La Rouche appeared in the political mosh pit.
This is the second time I see you associate Lyndon La Rouche with libertarians on this forum. Why are you doing this? As far as I am informed, La Rouche is a Democrat. He is also a fascist idiot, so almost all Democrats except himself are embarrassed about this and want nothing to do with him. Can you point me to any credible source which states that LaRouche self-identifies as a libertarian, or that libertarians endorse LaRouche? I would be surprised if either of this was the case, but one never knows ...
Thomas, my thanks go to Craven for the Libertarian FAQ, because it was commonly thought that LaRouche was billing himself as a Libertarian. Mr. LaRouche's political history is all over the road. He was once a member of the Socialist Worker's Party, and the the Students for a Democratic Society. When he broke with the SDS, he formed the National Caucus of Labor Organizations. When i had heard (and as CdK now shows, erroneously) that he was associated with "the Libertarian Party," i lost all interest in that organization.
As i have stated, those calling themselves the Libertarian Party do not nearly represent even a significant portion of those who identify themselves as Libertarians. If you wished to associate yourself with the Libertarian Party, you would at least know the agenda of the impotent political organization of your choice.
As for Mr. Kennedy's figures, i simply stated an approximation of what he had written from my memory of what i had read. I am not personally concerned with the actual figues--i am concerned that we have continued to pay for military bases in Europe which have been unnecessary for at least 12 years.
Not so fast wunderkind! Closing bases and bringing troops home will actually raise the cost of Defense. Sheltering troops in the good ol' USA is way more expensive. Besides, having troops throughout the world makes it easier to cycle forces quickly to hot spots, not to speak of a deterrence to terrorism. And it costs less to move them. Besides tearing up old alliances is not a smart move in the realpolitik world. I say this is a bad move.
Anybody want to straighten me out here?
Naw . . . yer too twisted . . .
Didn't seem possible in this forum...grins.
I believe (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you guys have left some missiles lying around here in Britain - can we send them back as well?
We also left thousands of yanks in your cemetaries. May they rest in peace.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace