You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Fifth Column
Democrats move to block Trump’s troop cut plan in Germany
2020-06-22
[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.
Related:
Eliot Engel: 2020-06-03 ‘China is demonstrating once again that it is willing to bully its neighbors’
Eliot Engel: 2019-10-17 US House backs resolution condemning Trump’s withdrawal from Syria
Eliot Engel: 2019-10-16 House to vote on resolution condemning Trump's Syria pullback
Related:
Bob Menendez: 2020-03-12 U.S. lawmakers seek to tighten ban on forced-labor goods from China's Xinjiang
Bob Menendez: 2020-02-07 An Al Qaeda Ldr Came to USA as a Refugee, And Applied for Disability for Bullet Wounds
Bob Menendez: 2019-11-14 Lindsey Graham stops Armenian genocide resolution after meeting with Trump, Turkish dictator
Related:
Vladimir Putin: 2020-06-18 ‘Completely Crazy': Lighthizer Denies Bolton's Claim That Trump Asked China For Election Help
Vladimir Putin: 2020-06-15 Beware the Hijacking of U.S. Protests Into a ‘Color Revolution'
Vladimir Putin: 2020-06-07 Mattis and Israel – Not a Love Story
Posted by:3dc

#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  

#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  

#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  

#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  

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

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

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

#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  

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

#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  

#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  

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

#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  

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

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

#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  

#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  

#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  

#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  

#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  

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

00:00