Read 1249 times

  • ah000
  • Adventurer

    • 59

    • May 26, 2010, 06:55:04 pm
    • korea
Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« on: February 25, 2013, 09:08:19 am »
I am an American, but I think our military presence in foreign countries is an overreach.  Why do we need sooooo many troops in Korea and other countries around the world?  I think it is giving America a bad reputation around the world.  For example America starting
the second Iraq war wound up unintentionally killing over 100,000 people see http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jan/03/iraq-body-count-report-data  .  There was also the war in Libya, in which Libya voluntarily gave up it Nukes, but was still attacked a few years later.  This attack is one factor making it less likely other countries like Iran and North Korea will give up their nukes.  Also many Libyan civilians were killed in this action.

I believe America has done some good things, but this overly aggressive foreign policy just seems misguided.

Is it just me or do think America should reduce it's overseas military presence, and become a smaller defensive military?


Re: Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2013, 09:33:37 am »
I used to think so as well...but not after living here.

I am only speaking about the Korean presence.  I can't believe how much these Asian countries all hate each other.  That is one of the most shocking aspects about living here, learning about all the venom still directed at Japan.

The military here has definitely helped with maintaining the "peace" here in Asia. The other stuff..well that is another problem all together.

But in Asia? Yes, this has helped.


Re: Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2013, 11:39:02 am »
I think the reality of a huge conflict really escapes this generation because none has ever happened in our lifetime. By huge conflict, I mean something along the line of WW2 and MAYBE the Korean War.

A country's defense and military is important. Knowing humans and how history repeats itself, there will be another major conflict and it's always good to be prepared.

The US won't be leaving Asia anytime soon as they wanna keep China in check. Right now, a lot of Southeast Asian countries are in territorial disputes with China, and these are also allies of the US.

I think a growing big problem is people are soooo afraid of the rest of the world hating us, that we will try to be toooo nice, and in the end will be taken advantage of.

I understand people want this utopia of a world where everyone talks out their problems and bad people can be coerced out of doing bad things, but human nature will always be there.

Sigh...I'm bored deskwarming...I don't even know if what I said makes any sense...just rambling on now.


Re: Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2013, 12:04:38 pm »
"smaller defensive military" ?!?!?  I had to chuckle at this a litle bit. 

Who is going to invade the mainland ?? The Mexican drug cartels ?? , The North Koreans ?? ( a la the new Red Dawn movie)

I'm no war hawk & I HATE Dick Cheney & George Bush for their BS war in Iraq, & other shenanigans, BUT

1. 'The Military Industrial Complex' that Eisenhower warned about in the 50's is too well entrenched.  Defense contractors get TONS of cash to build new toys for the military & Congressmen in their districts will keep it that way to make sure they provide jobs for their home constituents.

2. Speaking of jobs, WHAT jobs will bw available for GI's , if they suddenly get sent home ??  The GI Bill provides for a college education so that could stall the need for jobs for a few years , but I don't think the economy today could support them.

3. China - gotta keep China in check.  There was an article in the NY Times a week ago about a cyber-terrorist unit of the Chinese army operating from a building in Shanghai... spying on US infrastructure providers.(water, trains, electric, etc.. )
   
Nope, the US military isn't going anywhere, anytime soon.

What's that quote?  "The best defense is a strong offense."   I don't see that changing anytime soon.       


Re: Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2013, 01:30:15 pm »
The US needs to increase troop numbers by offering higher salaries and shorter deployments to combat zones. That said some bases in Europe may have too many troops, yet we need to maintain a presence in Europe. We surely need to increase troop levels in Asia and Naval presence in the Gulf states. The US is in charge of defense of Taiwan, Korea, Philippines (thats just in this region). Like it or not thats our duty and why we are here. If these countries in Asia (not talking mid east) dont want our prsence they would speak up. We are the only thing keeping N Korea from invading the south, China from invading Taiwan and the Philippines.


Re: Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2013, 01:49:49 pm »
China has already been caught spying on not only the US but other countries for economic gains...then ripping off their ideas as is common for pretty much anything there.

But really if China does take over, we can only blame ourselves when most of the stuff we buy is made there lol.


  • ah000
  • Adventurer

    • 59

    • May 26, 2010, 06:55:04 pm
    • korea
Re: Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2013, 08:36:42 am »
I hear a lot of people saying the US needs to be Asia and I can appreciate that (I am neither agreeing or disagreeing).  I know South Korea was invaded by North Korea during the Korean war (Russian records show how Kim il sung asked Stalin for permission to invade South Korea), and I know there is a need for defensive wars.

  However, I am not so sure about invading countries like Libya and Iraq, those where offensive wars.  In Iraq and Libya for example many people are worse off then before the invasion, terrorist were created, over 100,000 people where killed, more than 1 trillion taxpayer dollars were spent (http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/26/afghanistan-iraq-usa-cost-idUSN2611591520100126 ).   Also think about all of terrorist created by offensive wars.  Imagine a person in Libya or Iraq whose  house is blown up, and has a family member killed couldn't that make them more susceptible to al qaeda recruitment.  Then there is the human cost to religious minorities who are worse off now Here are quotes from an Iraqi Christian leader.

" Yes, during Saddam Hussein, we were living in peace - nobody attacked us. We had human rights, we had protection from the government but now nobody protects us."

He accused the US of not delivering on its promises of democracy and human rights.

"Since 2003, there has been no protection for Christians. We've lost many people and they've bombed our homes, our churches, monasteries," he said.

"Why are we living now in this country, after we had a promise from America to bring us freedom, democracy?" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11705032)

The same kind of thing is happening in Libya too (http://www.persecution.org/category/countries/africa/libya/)

I know growing up in America I was taught to be Patriotic and to always support what our government was doing overseas,  but now I ask myself is it Moral?  Is it moral to invade other countries in offensive wars?





Re: Should the US be reducing its overseas presence
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2013, 08:48:54 am »
I hear a lot of people saying the US needs to be Asia and I can appreciate that (I am neither agreeing or disagreeing).  I know South Korea was invaded by North Korea during the Korean war (Russian records show how Kim il sung asked Stalin for permission to invade South Korea), and I know there is a need for defensive wars.

  However, I am not so sure about invading countries like Libya and Iraq, those where offensive wars.  In Iraq and Libya for example many people are worse off then before the invasion, terrorist were created, over 100,000 people where killed, more than 1 trillion taxpayer dollars were spent (http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/26/afghanistan-iraq-usa-cost-idUSN2611591520100126 ).   Also think about all of terrorist created by offensive wars.  Imagine a person in Libya or Iraq whose  house is blown up, and has a family member killed couldn't that make them more susceptible to al qaeda recruitment.  Then there is the human cost to religious minorities who are worse off now Here are quotes from an Iraqi Christian leader.

" Yes, during Saddam Hussein, we were living in peace - nobody attacked us. We had human rights, we had protection from the government but now nobody protects us."

He accused the US of not delivering on its promises of democracy and human rights.

"Since 2003, there has been no protection for Christians. We've lost many people and they've bombed our homes, our churches, monasteries," he said.

"Why are we living now in this country, after we had a promise from America to bring us freedom, democracy?" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11705032)

The same kind of thing is happening in Libya too (http://www.persecution.org/category/countries/africa/libya/)

I know growing up in America I was taught to be Patriotic and to always support what our government was doing overseas,  but now I ask myself is it Moral?  Is it moral to invade other countries in offensive wars?





First these are people that have no real hhistory of being a Republic with voting rights. So democracy is not going to happen overnight. In America during the Revolutionary war we had no voting power in Britian...however WE did have a history of it since many of us and grandparents and such may have voted in local elections in Britian etc. But these countries dont.
And after war things dont magically revive. It also takes the locals to WANT to rebuild and make things better and not sabotage the US troops. After WW2 Europe rebuilt and it was done much faster than much of Iraq and Afghanastan has been.,...BUT the peopl;e in Europe wanted to. They cooperated.