Davidu Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 Well they're staging bases for the middle-east I suppose. I don't know but I fear our gvt invited them in. Bloody morons! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exatreide Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 I don't belive their causing any harm.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davidu Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 How would you like to have romanian bases in america?It is not logical that in time of peace we request some other country to send their military and build BASES on our teritory. This way we'll become their puppets, and the terrorsits will have one many more reasns to bomb us! And I don't want that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ps501 Posted December 23, 2005 Author Share Posted December 23, 2005 As far as I know the USA is the only power that has Military Bases in other countries. And yes, Your not alone in wondering why. in the past 10 years, in the middle east as well as in eastern europe the USA has been on a base building spree. (Did you even know that the USA even has nuclear weapons store in Missle silo's in some of these bases?... )There are several "why's" that are easy to answer.Moving a military force around the world is expensive and time consuming. So having a force close by to potential conflict acts as both a deterrent as well as a fast response force. So having those bases is good for those countries, because only an idiot would attack a country that was 'protected' by the USA. Defeat would be guaranteed. (Did you know that one of the best tanks in the world the M1 was 1st used in combat in the 1991 gulf war, but was nearly 11 years old by that time. That tank is very heavy and hard to move across the world in a quick fashion. The USA deployed some 1,800 M1's in the 1991 war, and only lost 18 of them. Granted the USA is now designing faster lighter tanks, but it will be several years before those are in production - Of particular interest - is that after the 1991 gulf war, Saudia Arabia has purchased 315 of these, Kuwait 218, and Egypt has 777 of them)Second, having those bases in other countries gives anti-usa extremests something other than the actual USA to target. Its easier to attack a US interest 1000 miles away than it is to one that's 10,000 miles away.You also have to remember prior to the world war, the USA really didn't have a standing armed force, per say. If in a time of peace then no large force is required, wait until a time of war to ramp up. Recall the history of the Pentagon. The USA built the structure as a war headquarters, and planned to "Store files in it" after the war was over. (Obviously this didn't happen) So the concept of building a military force as required isn't practial any more. Smaller countries that have no significant standing army really couldn't build a meaningful army in any length of time that is relavent any more. So you must either choose to have one, or don't.Though I don't feel a country that allows a USA base on its territory will become a puppet of the USA. That hosting country can always ask the USA to leave, and world pressure would cause it to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exatreide Posted December 23, 2005 Share Posted December 23, 2005 I'm pretty sure the RAF operates a air force base out of texas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarossa Posted December 23, 2005 Share Posted December 23, 2005 No, the RAF and USAF have mutual Training bases and such I beleive. (I cannot remember the exact name for it.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ps501 Posted December 23, 2005 Author Share Posted December 23, 2005 http://www.raf.mod.uk/stations/os_base.htmlNone listed as USA based. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted December 23, 2005 Share Posted December 23, 2005 That would be something I'd like to know as well. I don't think I've actually ever heard a reasonable explanation come from my gov't.I think you would find the book "The Sorrows of Empire" by Chalmers Johnson very interesting. It deals with these bases and what they are really for. Plus the budget for them - your taxes.Here is an interesting excerp:(After a speech by Bush) Even if Bush didn't mention the names of the countries he apparently had a list with 60 possible targets, an increase compared to Dick Cheney's speech in November 2001 about "40" to "50" targets we [uSA] possibly could intervene in after we've dealt with al-Qaida in Afghanistan.And with the current system of things here, not even the "Liberals" that come into office, will remove them- From fear of losing votes.The way I see it - the US has become a two-party corporate state. What is the difference between the democrats and the republicans anyway? Well they're staging bases for the middle-east I suppose.Yes, even in undemocratic countries. I've said it hundreds of times, but why is the US, a supposed democracy that is trying to spread democracy to Iraq (isn't that the reason they're there?) allied with countries like Saudiarabia, Kazakstan and Uzbekistan?As far as I know the USA is the only power that has Military Bases in other countries. And yes, Your not alone in wondering why.You would also be interested in the book I mentioned above. There you'll also find out where all your tax goes. I think the book mentioned that the US wanted to protect their transportation of fuel from the Middle East territories. It is also stated that they will keep a base in Afghanistan, even though fighting there is almost over. The book also mentions new plans to hinder communications that go through space - sattelites and such. And not only the enemy's, but allied nations as well, in order for those nations to depend on the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarossa Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 I think you would find the book "The Sorrows of Empire" by Chalmers Johnson very interesting. It deals with these bases and what they are really for. Plus the budget for them - your taxes.Here is an interesting excerp:(After a speech by Bush) Even if Bush didn't mention the names of the countries he apparently had a list with 60 possible targets, an increase compared to Dick Cheney's speech in November 2001 about "40" to "50" targets we [uSA] possibly could intervene in after we've dealt with al-Qaida in Afghanistan.Thanks Otherman. I am already aqquainted with Chalmers Johnson. I have a rather Dog-eared copy of "Blowback" Already. I will check out some bookstores for TSoE.The way I see it - the US has become a two-party corporate state. What is the difference between the democrats and the republicans anyway? There really is not any. Look at Kerry, He was nearly identical to Bush- He only carried a differant Party Membership Card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude_Doc Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 Indeed. I must agree with what Edric O said in another thread:I've always known that American democracy had problems, but, after spending three months here and seeing things from a closer perspective, I'm getting the distinct impression that American democracy might well be already dead.Most political decisions are not made through discussion and negotiation between parties; they are made within one party or another. In fact, over large areas of the US, local and state governments have been solidly in the hands of the same party (either the Democrats or the Republicans) for decades. The act of voting seems to serve a mostly ceremonial function, because people hold inflexible party loyalties that seem unlikely to change no matter what policy their party supports. Most Republican voters will keep voting Republican regardless of what the Republicans actually do, and most Democratic voters will keep voting Democrat regardless of what the Democrats actually do. As for the moderate swing voters, there are few local and state elections whose outcome they can affect - and in any case, they never think outside the Republican vs. Democrat paradigm. With the two main parties using different rhetoric but supporting largely the same policies, the people are given the illusion of power when in fact they are kept powerless.A simple fact is that no leader (or oligarchy) could survive for a month in charge of the US if they were seen by the people as being undemocratic and dictatorial. Therefore, if you want to set up a dictatorship in America, deception is crucial. You'd have to make sure the system keeps looking like a democracy to the majority of people. I keep thinking again and again of Octavian Augustus. For a long time after the de facto birth of the Roman Empire, most people still believed the Republic was intact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davidu Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 @ps501You said that bases in a country can detter attacks on that country. That is right but who the HELL is gonna attack us? Come on? Ukraine? We'd settle this on our own if it comes to that.There are historical aspects that must be settled by the people involved in them.And you said it right: american bases abroad would attcract terrorists, and move them away from USA. But I don't want any crazy long-bearded moron doing a bombing run across my country. We had great relations with the arab states and Israel for as far we can remember. There were even secret meeting before '89 between the israelis and Arrafat in Bucharest. Of course at that time only the Security would know. ;DWhat I am trying to say is that a foreign military base in my country detters our soverengity. I mean what, can't we defend ourselves? And believe me... once some country has bases in another country... that country is politically influenced. You can't just ignore a country that has military presence within your borders.And well... how well did the international opinion worked in the case of IraK? USA still invaded it, so forcing USA to retreat bases by international pressure wouldn't work... I mean as long as the politicians agree, the population can protest all they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shiroko Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 I'd have to point that abroad military bases is simply an empire/superpower thing.The USA is lonely on this since it's the only superpower around now.But the Soviet Union did it as well. And empires throughout history.The bases obviously use USA to keep it's military in shape for any scenario and keep intellegence flowing.-Shiroko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ps501 Posted December 26, 2005 Author Share Posted December 26, 2005 What I am trying to say is that a foreign military base in my country detters our soverengity. I mean what, can't we defend ourselves? And believe me... once some country has bases in another country... that country is politically influenced. You can't just ignore a country that has military presence within your borders.Well I'd argue that more than 50% of the world is politically influenced by the USA. Being the #1 loan shark of the world; providing the most aid, etc. Many countries couldn't do the things they do without USA aid. Now I'm not saying that Romaina would fall apart without US aid or bases, but still an extra 100million in economic gain to have a US base is a tempting prospect.I don't think (but I'll leave it to a German or Italian to reply) that German or Italians feel their soverenity threatened by a US base being there. But I do see your point. I'd not want a [insert country here] base in my back yard either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davidu Posted December 26, 2005 Share Posted December 26, 2005 We had Soviet bases until the '50s. They didn't stay long... but we had them too. Not like the Eastern-Germany, or other countries under communist rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exatreide Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 Well Romania wasn't really on the front boarders of the soviet influence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davidu Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 That's right, but we were right next to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.