Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Thu 05/29/2025 View Wed 05/28/2025 View Tue 05/27/2025 View Mon 05/26/2025 View Sun 05/25/2025 View Sat 05/24/2025 View Fri 05/23/2025
2020-06-22 Fifth Column
Democrats move to block Trump’s troop cut plan in Germany
[Stars and Stripes] Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation that would block President Donald Trump’s push to withdraw nearly 10,000 troops from Germany, warning that such a move would have catastrophic security consequences for the U.S. and benefit America’s adversaries.
President Trump’s superpower: to make Democrats and NeverTrumpers demand the exact opposite of their long-stated positions because they can’t stop hating him long enough to think.
“President Trump’s disastrous decision to withdraw thousands of troops from and reduce the total force cap in Germany endangers our national security,” the chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., said in a statement Thursday, when he and Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., proposed the legislation.
More posturing by House Democrats. Once again they’re puffing some thing that will be dead on arrival in the Senate, hoping to fool the rubes.
Menendez, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Russian President Vladimir Putin would benefit from the proposed drawdown.

“The current U.S. troop presence in Germany is in the U.S. national security interest. Full stop,” he said in a statement. “This drawdown weakens America and Europe. And Vladimir Putin understands and appreciates that better than anyone.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry last week welcomed the plan to withdraw more than a quarter of U.S. troops from Germany, saying it would help bolster security in Europe.

The legislation proposed by the Democrats would deny funding for force level reductions in Europe unless the cuts were requested by a host nation government. It would also require that 180 days’ notice be given for planned drawdowns in Europe, and that the secretaries of defense and state testify before Congress within 14 days of a proposed troop cut being announced.
Read that part again:"would deny funding for force level reductions in Europe unless the cuts were requested by a host nation government". So what these idiot anti-Trumpers are doing is giving a foreign government veto power over CiC moves to better deploy troops, punish "allies" who don't align policy or ops with us, don't meet their defense commitments, or actively court our enemies, by, say purchasing S-400 systems from the Russians. Unconstitutional infringement on Executive powers as CiC
On Monday, Trump confirmed that he wants to reduce the number of troops in Germany by 9,500, and tied the proposed cut to his dissatisfaction with Berlin over the amount of money it spends on defense.

Trump has repeatedly complained that Germany is falling short of its commitment to NATO to spend at least 2% of GDP on its military.

Both Republicans and Democrats have aired concerns over the proposed troop cuts in Germany. More than 20 Republican lawmakers urged President Donald Trump earlier this month to reject the plan, saying the move would weaken the NATO alliance and encourage Russian aggression.

Before Russia’s 2014 incursion into Ukraine and the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula, it was routine for both Democratic and Republican lawmakers to complain about the number of troops in Europe and call for forces to return to the United States.

But Russia’s move on Ukraine changed that, and in recent years, efforts to strengthen the U.S. military presence in Europe have enjoyed bipartisan support.

It isn’t clear when Trump intends to execute his directive or which military units would be affected. Proponents of current force levels argue that a large reduction would hinder operations beyond Germany, since troops based there support efforts in places like the Baltics, Middle East and Africa.

The Pentagon, which appears to have been blindsided by Trump’s decision, has been mum on the issue. U.S. European Command also has declined to comment, referring questions to the National Security Council in Washington.
Posted by 3dc 2020-06-22 00:35|| || Front Page|| [11136 views ]  Top

#1 The Socialists election platform: Occupy Germany!
Posted by Victor Emmanuel Grundy3291 2020-06-22 00:51||   2020-06-22 00:51|| Front Page Top

#2 Mandrake Trump gestures hypnotically, and suddenly the Dems are strong on defense and stationing troops in foreign lands.
Posted by SteveS 2020-06-22 00:53||   2020-06-22 00:53|| Front Page Top

#3 The legislation proposed by the Democrats would deny funding for force level reductions in Europe unless the cuts were requested by a host nation government.

No problem. When troops rotate out, neglect to rotate new troops in.
Posted by Victor Emmanuel Grundy3291 2020-06-22 00:53||   2020-06-22 00:53|| Front Page Top

#4 Yes, only bureaucrats in Washington can figure out how to make it cost more to take something away than to keep paying to leave it in place.
Posted by M. Murcek 2020-06-22 01:34||   2020-06-22 01:34|| Front Page Top

#5 At this point, I'd rather the Germans pay their own defense bills. We can train troops better and more cheaply here in the US. Just leave a versitale brigade sized force (Heavy Armored Cavalry regiment) in Germany at Grafenwhoer, an AFB with a couple remote fields, and POMCUS sites with small rotating garrisons. Thatsa all oyou need in Germany. Put the bulk of a Division with Corps elements in western Poland, rotate battalion combat teams regularly to joint exercises in the Baltics, Slovenia/Slovakia/Hungary/Romania/Western-Ukraine. Do a REFORE (E=Europe) off the POMCUS sitec every other year to mobilize and deploy into threatened areas. That should be enough to cost the Russians more time and money than its worth for them, as well as enough uncertainty to head off potential trouble. Maybe keep regular exercises in Norway with the small pre-positioned USMC depots there, and a small Garrison across the Dardanelles in Greece to keep Turkey's feet to the flames.

Thats all we should need there. Everything else comes home.
Posted by Marilyn Tojo7566 2020-06-22 01:51||   2020-06-22 01:51|| Front Page Top

#6 /\ Looks good! Flesh out a five year rotational schedule with cost estimates and get it into the POM.
Posted by Besoeker 2020-06-22 01:59||   2020-06-22 01:59|| Front Page Top

#7 Does being Commander-in-Chief not apply here?
Posted by Clem 2020-06-22 06:45||   2020-06-22 06:45|| Front Page Top

#8 ^ See my comments in green in the article
Posted by Frank G 2020-06-22 07:37||   2020-06-22 07:37|| Front Page Top

#9 Congress considers military spending in terms of spending. Pentagon lifers chafe at decisions made by mere elected officials.
Posted by M. Murcek 2020-06-22 07:45||   2020-06-22 07:45|| Front Page Top

#10 #5 Very well said, enough German welfare.
Posted by Cesare 2020-06-22 07:56||   2020-06-22 07:56|| Front Page Top

#11 With the Civil War on the horizon, why would you want more politically 'unreliable' military formations back in the old country? Geez, even the Romans figured it out that it was better to keep the legions on the frontier rather than nearby when regime change was in the offing.
Posted by Procopius2k 2020-06-22 07:59||   2020-06-22 07:59|| Front Page Top

#12 The people expecting the US military to behave like the Argentine or Pakistani military will probably be disappointed. Events move too fast for PowerPoint to keep up.
Posted by M. Murcek 2020-06-22 08:09||   2020-06-22 08:09|| Front Page Top

#13 These people can not get back in power.
Posted by DarthVader 2020-06-22 09:07||   2020-06-22 09:07|| Front Page Top

#14 The legislation proposed by the Democrats would deny funding for force level reductions in Europe unless the cuts were requested by a host nation government.
Ditto Frank G's (green) inline. No! No way, no how. This is HOR rewriting US treaties and that is not their job. It's also unconstitutional, but when has that ever slowed them down?
Posted by magpie 2020-06-22 10:56||   2020-06-22 10:56|| Front Page Top

#15 You'd almost think money was being made somewhere....
Posted by Mullah Richard 2020-06-22 11:21||   2020-06-22 11:21|| Front Page Top

#16 So the Dems demand that American taxpayer's subsidise foreigners on their own defence?!
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2020-06-22 11:39||   2020-06-22 11:39|| Front Page Top

#17 The bill won’t get through the Senate and Trump has a veto. FOAD.
Posted by Alaska Paul 2020-06-22 12:14||   2020-06-22 12:14|| Front Page Top

#18 eventually we'll be forced to leave, since Germany will shortly be part of Dar Al Islam.

can't have infidel feet on islamic soil.
Posted by Bob Grorong1136 2020-06-22 14:17||   2020-06-22 14:17|| Front Page Top

#19 eventually we'll be forced to leave, since Germany will shortly be part of Dar Al Islam.

Snark of the day?
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2020-06-22 14:32||   2020-06-22 14:32|| Front Page Top

#20 Germany will shortly be part of Dar Al Islam

A good reason to keep a few troops in Germany and many more in neighboring countries like Poland. The time may come when we need to smack Germany down again.
Posted by Abu Uluque 2020-06-22 14:53||   2020-06-22 14:53|| Front Page Top

#21 #11 With the Civil War on the horizon, why would you want more politically 'unreliable' military formations back in the old country? Geez, even the Romans figured it out that it was better to keep the legions on the frontier rather than nearby when regime change was in the offing.

Ding ding ding!
Posted by charger 2020-06-22 16:01||   2020-06-22 16:01|| Front Page Top

05:11 NN2N1
04:50 NN2N1
04:24 Grom the Affective
04:14 Grom the Affective
04:09 Grom the Affective
03:49 Grom the Affective
03:40 Grom the Affective
02:50 Pancho Poodle8452
02:30 Grom the Affective
01:28 Grom the Affective
01:28 Grom the Affective
01:23 Grom the Affective
01:22 Grom the Affective
01:05 Frank G
00:57 Frank G
00:25 DooDahMan
00:18 Bobby
00:16 Skidmark
00:13 Bobby
00:12 Skidmark
00:05 Frank G









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com