President Donald Trump plans to pull about 20,000 U.S. troops from Europe, according to a leading Italian news agency.
A European diplomatic source told ANSA that Trump, who entered office on Monday for a second term, wants to reduce the American contingent in Europe by about 20 percent and plans to ask for a “financial contribution” for the maintenance of the remaining troops.
Good riddance, we tried to get them out of Germany for decades. American soldiers off base are the worst. Drunk driving their oversized trucks, starting fights in village pubs, and generally being aggressive and obnoxious. And whenever something actually happens, they are picked up by on-base military police, get a slap on the wrist, and keep at it. Due to some bs agreement they are untouchable by German police, and only really end up in court if someone died.
Due to some bs agreement they are untouchable by German police, and only really end up in court of someone died.
Anna Sacoolas killed a kid with their car leaving a US airbase in the UK - she fucked off back to the US claiming diplomatic immunity so she couldn’t face charges. So they don’t even always end up in court.
Yep, it’s the only instance where they might, but even then it’s no guarantee. Closing the bases would be awesome for anyone but landlords in the areas who are charging extortionate rates to base personal rather than offering affordable housing to locals.
rather than offering affordable housing to locals
Let’s be honest, this wouldnt happen. Ideally the base would close and basically have an entirely new village built on it, flooding the local market with available properties that helps reduce the cost of housing - an abundance of supply over demand.
That said, the locals might have mixed feelings as US airmen will likely contribute to the local economy in some way.
That’s exactly what will happen, since we have laws in Germany against leaving homes unoccupied (with severe fines), so if the landlord can’t find a tenant willing to pay the extortionate rate, they have to lower the rate closer to market or risk paying triple of what they might be missing out on otherwise.
This is why we don’t allow foreign bases in France. Also, alliances are frail and cannot be depended on
and only really end up in court of someone died.
That this is a known thing that happens is really tragic.
MMW: He’ll soon need every single fighter at home.
As an American, I could get on board for lower military spending, fewer people deployed, and Europe building up their own defense to make up the difference.
But I don’t trust for one second that Trump is doing this for anything good. Maybe Putin thinks Europe will pay less attention to him if they have to make up for lost American defenses.
Well, right now Putin is the only one Europe needs to be defended from, so they will still devote full attention. More, probably, since Europe will be forced to hasten the military policy renewal
Well that could be tough for Europe to quickly adapt to … but ok.
Will they pull out of Greenland?
Removed by mod
The US uses their military bases to extend their sphere of influence: which makes me think that maybe they should pay the host countries not viceversa. If they invade Greenland the number of their bases in the EU will go to zero.
can this happen in asia too please
Asia has a Chinese Taiwan threat. It’s a very different situation to Europe.
What do you want to happen or change in Asia? Removing troops from where and to what degree?
i want jennifer laude to be alive
It’s a source of friction with locals in Japan for sure, particularly in Okinawa.
Removed by mod
I hate to be the “ra ra america” guy here, but you know that any country we have a base in can throw us out, right? Our base leases can all be terminated by the host country pretty much whenever they want, and we’ll leave (with oh, just one or two historical exceptions, but what’s a little bribery of corrupt puppet regimes between allies?). This even happens sometimes, too - it’s partially why we withdrew from Afghanistan.
and we’ll leave
Lol
I know it goes against the narrative, but like, yeah, we do. There’s plenty of examples of this, even in the modern era, and you can find them pretty easily when you look into this topic. Honestly the thing that’s weird even for me, an american: we use withdrawing one of our bases from a country as a threat when we’re negotiating. A really really effective one, too. It turns out that, while having a concentration of spunky 18 year old boys with lil’ matching outfits is very obnoxious for those living near them, governments the world over see way more to gain from having us there than from asking us to leave.
It seems fair to admit this is, you know, partially because when this happens we go to their neighbors who they’ve hated for the last five-hundred-or-so-years and then ask if they would be willing to host a US base (usually in deal that’s suspiciously favorable to them, too…). Mostly though, it’s because we pay fucking stupid amounts of money in leases (and bribes, obvs) to let us stay there.
There’s plenty of examples of this
No, there really isn’t. More examples of you not leaving when asked.
People don’t easily accept things that challenge their preconceptions, and they especially don’t seek those things out, boy do I know (gestures at the american political landscape, myself and all of human history). With that in mind, could you provide a source (or example)? I’m extremely interested in being proved wrong on this topic, especially by a user from an instance with a reputation for holding well supported views counter to the prevailing ideas in the US.
Donald Trump is going to kill millions, maybe billions of people in the long run from the collective effort of all his combined actions, and it sounds like the majority of people will be applauding the entire time right up to the very moment it’s their head on the block. Tankies, conservatives, and centrists cheer as Earth burns.
That would be nice. Let’s see if it actually happens.
I wonder. Maybe Putin and Trump had a backroom deal that if US pulls out of Europe, then Putin will go on the negotiating table to end the war in Ukraine, and Trump is using the argument of “free riding Europeans” as convenient pretext. Trump is showing to Putin that the West is de-escalating by withdrawing American troops. After all, the Russian president is complaining of NATO encroachment. American troop withdrawal is indeed evidence for de-escalation.
Then at the same time, Trump wants to pivot against China. The US troops in Europe could be redeployed to Asia.
This is simply my speculation and there could be more to this than we would know publicly.
also a good reason to make such a fuss about greenland:
well if they won’t let us protect them, perhaps we should just leave NATO…
smoke mirrors and bullshit, it’s all they have
Trump is not as dumb as people make him out to be (he would not remain a billionaire if he’s that dumb), I reckon he’s got some sort of plan (or rather a concept of a plan). His wildcard, unpredictable foreign policy harkens back to Gaullism, when Charles De Gaulle pulled France out of NATO, because he is simply annoyed by the Anglos, and France is being France who loves being maverick pursuing its own independent interest. In the end, France pulling out of NATO was a nothingburger, because France has still been a nominal military ally of the West throughout and France eventually returned to NATO. That being said, Trump could be doing something similar and maybe he doesn’t even realise it. Trump’s current wildcard foreign policy is still driven by nationalist self-interests, which is follows oddly similar pattern to De Gaulle’s.
I don’t think supposedly remaining a billionaire necessarily correlates with intelligence.
With enough money or influence, you get money. No need to be clever or sound.
There are plenty of rich people who lost their wealth-- mostly due to stupidity because they became decadent and resting on their laurels, believing their luck will last forever, like Charlie Sheen. Trump could have done the same and he has had plenty of lawsuits. And yet he’s still here. Edit: going on tangent, that being said, I would argue it’s far easier to lose money than to keep them.
As someone mentioned, Trump’s antics are all smoke and mirrors for distraction. But didn’t realise that someone totally dumb would not be doing that all. The greatest trick that the devil pulled is make everyone believe he is stupid and harmless.
And Trump lost a lot of money at times, if you think back 2 or so years, it was unclear whether the descriptor “billionaire” was still accurate
A multi-millionaire can lose their money, a billionaire gets more than they can spend just by having it
maybe he doesn’t even realise it.
sure buddy. 4d chess. from a man who suggested bright lights and bleach for covid.
doubt.
I don’t want to give too much credit to Trump, but there is realpolitik reason for him wanting to take Greenland and retaking the Panama Canal. For him, it is securing perceived gap in American national security, but he’s doing it in old school imperialist way as if there’s no international law (think of Putin’s reason for invading Ukraine because he thinks the latter is the soft underbelly from which to attack Russia, even though before the invasion everyone thought it would be stupid of Putin to invade a country that historically hated Kremlin).
Anyhow, as Sun Tzu said: never underestimate the opponent. There’s a reason Trump is a billionaire and the leader of the most powerful country in the world, while both of us are not any of those. People can be dumb, but not that dumb. People have also thought the same of Hitler, and he caused massive chaos before going down stupidly.
People have also thought the same of Hitler, and he caused massive chaos before going down stupidly.
Why the Hitler comparison? The idea that people thought Hitler was stupid in particular seems like something that would need backup.
Modern day Germans themselves say Hitler’s style is very comical. The Mein Kampf is basically incoherent ramblings. So it’s very likely that 1930-40s Germans also thought the same of Hitler. Nonetheless, he still managed to be influential and capture the imagination and attention of the world (I will get to that later).
It’s a misleading to think of intelligence as being broadly both knowledgeable and rational. Many psychologists are now rethinking what intelligence means. For many, intelligence means excelling more at specific cognitive ability. It’s well known that autistic folks are extremely skillful at certain things, even if they lack skills or knowledge in others. That being said, an AskHistorians post discussed about that many people did think Hitler was stupid. But if he is that dumb, he would not be able to rile up the emotion of masses and gain power now, would he not? Would a conventionally stupid person be able to pull that and attain power? Politicians and authoritarians are able to exploit gaps to take power for themselves. That still takes certain skills and cognitive ability that most of us don’t have. Ancient Greek philosophers have already observed how demagogues manages to convince the average people to vote certain way. Trump have done the same.
Cope all we want and call someone dumb all we want, but we’re not the ones in charge. We have said the same to other dictators like Gaddafi, Amin, Mussolini and Hitler. Even if they got themselves killed at the end and lacking foresight to realise never get too drunk in power, but they’re the ones who got grabbed the reins of power and lasted for as long as they could. That again take certain skills (even if they are lacking in other areas).
Maybe the we’re the ones who are dumb for not seeing it. The ones in the White House, in the fiftieth floor of GM or Facebook headquarters, or presidential palace; those with power are thinking those in prisons, receptionists working for bare minimum wage, kids working to mine lithium for Tesla’s electric battery for its vehicle, and a mother of two working two jobs to make ends meet are still the dumb ones electing and worshipping them rich. And those who think of themselves as “smart” are probably the ones who are actually dumb for underestimating a supposed dumb person who are in power.
but there is realpolitik reason for him wanting to take Greenland and retaking the Panama Canal.
and it makes sense if you’re a twelve year old, or, if you want to destroy NATO and our country’s other alliances.
He’s wrecking the fucking place, you dolt.
Cancelling NIH funding, leaving the WHO, jerking around our allies with bullshit… open your damned eyes.
Look, learn the basics of realpolitik, then come back. I’m not defending Trump, I’m explaining why he does what he does. A lot of people don’t understand what dry analysis is especially in realpolitik. I linked an article from an esteemed site explaining Trump’s motivation so that’s a start.
Is what Trump doing stupid? Sure. But for him it’s not with respect to his nativist, nationalistic agenda. He’s going back to old school imperialism and unilateralism of a more powerful imperialistic nation state. People said the same of Hitler as being stupid, but no one can’t doubt he had been influential. In spite of losing the attempted coup, Hitler had been able to use the political system to gain power after all, and enact his own vision of ultra nationalism and shape the world to his liking. Still sounds dumb, does it? It’s the same with Trump. And again, Trump is the one in charge, not you nor I, so he’s not dumb in his own right.
Keep underestimating the opponent, and you’re the one who will actually lose. A lot of people underestimated Hitler and his partner Mussolini and look what happened. You can imagine what Trump must be saying to us now that he’s back again in power.
Dude Realpolitik is not about ignoring effects getting rid of all your allies has, making yourself a pariah. That’s not dry analysis it is, as you correctly point out, stupidity.
If you had invoked geopolitical “realism” (as they call it) you would have a point: Because that stuff is inherently stupid. But it’s also not Realpolitik, which does not actually eschew ethics, it just has its own particular branch (Verantwortungsethik), prioritising ethical means over ethical ends.
Good and please clear out your airbases over here too. And take your shit cars with you.
The US doesn’t have troops in Europe to benefit Europe though. They have troops in Europe to benefit the US.
Europe should be totally fine with them leaving. Get off their territory, give up all that power projection and hamstring yourself.
What a weird thing to threaten.
Trump is as dumb as a bucket o shit. That’s why he’s threatening to shoot himself in the foot.
He’d cut off his own hand if you could convince him that it voted for Biden.
That will depend on whether Trump knows Putin has something planned for Europe now that his lapdog is in the White House
What could Putin have that could threaten Europe when he has been unable to make inroads in Ukraine for years?
It’s depressing, but the US is the largest supporter of the Ukraine war effort. Europe has been able to rely on a US-backed NATO for a long time, and boy oh boy is trump making it clear what a bad idea that was. If the US stops supporting Ukraine, even just materially (i.e. we keep supplying intelligence and similar), the war will turn depressingly quickly. Hopefully they’ve been able to inflict enough damage on the russian economy that they’ll agree to a cease fire, but no european nations are equipped to fight the war of attrition Ukraine has turned into. Even with the US + Europe together, we’re barely able keep up with the ammunition demanded by the war.
If NATO and the US are no longer as much if a factor? He can project westward with less fear.
Well i argue that it’s more complicated than that … Europe really did profit tremendously from the relationship with the USA after WW2, but now … not so much anymore, i guess. If one looks at recent developments.
Honestly? Sure. The NATO shield will still exist so it doesn’t affect the security of European countries much, and it only reduces American military influence abroad by reducing their capabilities to respond to events in the region, so what do we care? We should be investing more in defense regardles of whether the Americans pull out or not.
As a European, I say fine and sure.
But then we also withdraw from the Plaza accords.
Ever since China has winded down their US debt holdings, we have picked up the tab and the EU countries are now the largest foreign holder of treasuries.
Time to start selling.
And also, we only buy from European defense firms, no more spending on American defense.
If there are no buyers for treasuries it’ll tank the dollar value and go a long way to remove it’s status as a reserve currency. Trump insist on rocking the boat that has been working for the US.
what people don’t understand is that europe must say goodbye to america, things are turning.
we (europe) should start considering being more independent (from the USA) and maybe, just maybe, actually talking to our eastern neighbours.
our eastern neighbours
… you mean Ukraine, no?
No he means Putin and Lukashenko, the real vicitms of the war in Ukraine. Everyone knows that Zelensky is no angel.
Adding /s might have saved your comment from the downvotes.
Haha yeah I realized it. 🤷
Removed by mod
The Vietnam war was 50 years ago. I think there was quite a bit of criticism of the Iraqi invasion which while already a bit dated is a more recent comparison, no?
Removed by mod
True but it’s not direct military action so I was trying to find a more direct comparison.
Removed by mod
yes i was referring to the vietnam one because otherwise people say “muh duh it’s because 9/11 and they had to defend themselves”.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Anyone who says that is trying to revise history. Bush lied about Saddam having a WMD program to send us to Iraq. It’s the perfect example.
Well Vietnam is harder for most people to compare because most of us weren’t alive back then. So I don’t have a point of reference for how the media treated that conflict.
There’s always some kind of flimsy justification for war but we all know that Iraq and 9/11 were in no way related outside of the propaganda. Did people really take those things seriously in your community?
I’m in the US but even here many people rejected this reasoning, although you are right that the media and our political leadership were complicit. This was one thing that led to Obama’s election because he was one of only a few people in congress who opposed the war.
The US didn’t start the Vietnam War, maybe that’s why. They certainly exacerbated it and prevented it from being resolved, but it was just a civil war (kind of, Vietnam had just been divided into two countries, so I don’t know if it technically counts as a civil war still) at the beginning.
Nice suggestion. Let’s abandon our strongest ally who are in an identity chrisis for literal terrorists. Thanks, Lemmy.
Your “strongest ally” just removed 20% of its troops and wants to extort you for the other 80% in its obligations to said alliance
Wow!
Now do russia!
Removed by mod
But then we also withdraw from the Plaza accords.
The Plaza Accord ended in 1987. It was replaced with the Louvre Accord.
You are right. But I still see most people refer to the Plaza accords. I guess those are just more well known.
I would appreciate if we could maybe not spit in the face of our allies at every available opportunity.
Nazis do that, and they’ve hijacked America for the time being.
😂 we elected the wrong party for that.
