• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are US soldiers mercenaries now?

Germany can deploy it's own offensive and defensive missiles.

jepp - and for 100 % cost, not 150% - plus our own military industry would benefit - jobs and such stuff - plus: we decide ourselves what the tasks of the military are ;o)
 
The American Left like to point to some European countries and examples of "Successful Socialism." None of them are, they have mostly have free market economies with extremely large social benefits. They can have these social benefits because the US provides almost all their Military Security. Without our military they will rapidly go the way of Venezuela.

So by all means lets bring the troops home.

No, that's not correct. We spend 200 billion annually on defence, and this is more than enough to be secure. Sadly our defence is poorly organized due to NATO and there is much duplication across Europe, and thus low overall efficiency. So yes, please leave, then we can get alot more for our 200 billion annual defence spending. Streamlining.

And no, defence has nothing to do with socialism in Europe. Defence costs have no influence on that at all.
 
Anyone who thinks a European country would pay for the privilege of allowing the US to maintain military bases on it's territory is deluded.

Well. It's more complicated than that.

I think Trump gave Europe a legitimate "out" option here, and I hope he sticks with the 150% thing and force Europe to make a choice. Sadly, European countries are run by cowards and traitors, and it's not unthinkable they would actually pay instead of sending US troops home. So, one would hope that Europeans would take the hint from Trump that we can now finally get rid of the US forces in Europe, and no longer have to support their global war, and thus can end US global wars, but it's not without risk.

He could have said 250%, but I think it would have made it too obvious. 150% was a good balance in trying to make sure they would say no and send US troops home. But as I said, these people who control Europe, you never know, they could actually say yes. Our politicians here are nothing less than grotesque.
 
He is not a dictator, he is a NATO puppet.

Poroshenko is both! His political enemies have either disappearad or have been killed. Torture is rampant in Ukraine, and yet people in this forum love him just because he opposes Putin. Make no mistake, they are birds of the same feather.
 
I agree with Trump. If Europeans want protection then they ought to pay for it. Even better if all US troops pull out of Europe since the EU ought to take steps to protect themselves.

I haven't backed Trump much, but I agree with this.
 
Well, national defence is important, and the US has made an obligation to those servicemen. You can't just leave them out in the cold. Let's say they don't have to twiddle their thumbs in the US, perhaps they can be stationed on the border instead? Or build the wall?

Or convert them to national guards.

Sorry, but when your job is no longer required, your tend to lose it. We would not need those 165k that are stationed elsewhere once we bring them all home.
 
Sorry, but when your job is no longer required, your tend to lose it. We would not need those 165k that are stationed elsewhere once we bring them all home.

Why not? Europe does not go to war everywhere around the world (or, well, perhaps nowadays more..), but we also have about 1.5 million active servicemen for the purpose of defence. That's roughly the same as the US.

It's not a normal job either, those people are hired by the state, with a special contract, and the state cannot just toss those obligations out of the windows just because those people are in the US instead of in country XYZ.

Besides, the big savings on defence is not from manpower.
 
Why not? Europe does not go to war everywhere around the world (or, well, perhaps nowadays more..), but we also have about 1.5 million active servicemen for the purpose of defence. That's roughly the same as the US.

It's not a normal job either, those people are hired by the state, with a special contract, and the state cannot just toss those obligations out of the windows just because those people are in the US instead of in country XYZ.

Besides, the big savings on defence is not from manpower.

If we already have all the people we need here, then the extra people from other countries will not be needed. Additionally, it does not matter if manpower is a bigger expense, it is still an expense. We need to reduce expenses if we are ever to address the debt.
 
Well. It's more complicated than that.

I think Trump gave Europe a legitimate "out" option here, and I hope he sticks with the 150% thing and force Europe to make a choice. Sadly, European countries are run by cowards and traitors, and it's not unthinkable they would actually pay instead of sending US troops home. So, one would hope that Europeans would take the hint from Trump that we can now finally get rid of the US forces in Europe, and no longer have to support their global war, and thus can end US global wars, but it's not without risk.

He could have said 250%, but I think it would have made it too obvious. 150% was a good balance in trying to make sure they would say no and send US troops home. But as I said, these people who control Europe, you never know, they could actually say yes. Our politicians here are nothing less than grotesque.

Which EDuropean leader is a coward and traitor?
 
If we already have all the people we need here, then the extra people from other countries will not be needed. Additionally, it does not matter if manpower is a bigger expense, it is still an expense. We need to reduce expenses if we are ever to address the debt.

Well, they are not people from other countries, they are US citizens and servicemen. They have rights, and so do their families.
 
Well, they are not people from other countries, they are US citizens and servicemen. They have rights, and so do their families.

When I say "other countries" I am referring to those who serve abroad. The only rights they have is to be able to serve out whatever enlistment period they are under. Once that is up, they should only be allowed to re-enlist if there is a true need for their service. If not, then the contract is up.
 
The only thing dishonest.......... is you calling the US Military mercenaries.

Now, if you want a honest discussion, try using a more honest title and subject.

So, out of curiosity, what would you call an army that makes a profit for a country that is not their own? And don't get personal with GH, I think a lot of people would view this the same way, myself included... And a 50% profit margin no less.

The only other word that comes to mind, if not mercenary, is whore.

Absolutely disgraceful position for Trump to put America's proud military in...
 
So, out of curiosity, what would you call an army that makes a profit for a country that is not their own? And don't get personal with GH, I think a lot of people would view this the same way, myself included... And a 50% profit margin no less.

The only other word that comes to mind, if not mercenary, is whore.

Absolutely disgraceful position for Trump to put America's proud military in...

When the countries of NATO pay their agreed % then you have a argument.
 
Laughable.

How is saving billions a losing situation for the US?

Germany can deploy it's own offensive and defensive missiles.

Leaving the issue of war and peace to Germany vs Russia would be the error of the age. I don't trust these two countries head to head in anything much less arms buildups. A Germany-Russia arms race is what would necessarily ensue from the US out of Nato. The consequences are dire.




jepp - and for 100 % cost, not 150% - plus our own military industry would benefit - jobs and such stuff - plus: we decide ourselves what the tasks of the military are ;o)

The record of Europe and Russia in things military is abysmal. Germany and Russia have been at the root of the wars of the 20th century over there. Isolationists in USA have always been wrong. Completely wrong. No one anywhere can reasonably trust American isolationists on the issue of war and peace.




When the countries of NATO pay their agreed % then you have a argument.

I don't ask the rent collector to make strategic decisions for me. Trump is the rent collector of Nato. And Trump has his own league of little rent collectors.
 
Laughable.

How is saving billions a losing situation for the US?

Germany can deploy it's own offensive and defensive missiles.

Do you not understand the definition of risk? First, I have already answered your question. Secondly, I am not making any bold predictions about anything specific happening, because making specific predictions is dependent upon specific factors. Nonetheless, it's very apparent and obvious that you don't understand calculating the risk of the decision, because you simply think it will just save money. Closing down a large sector is going to involve costs and benefits.
 
I agree with Trump. If Europeans want protection then they ought to pay for it. Even better if all US troops pull out of Europe since the EU ought to take steps to protect themselves.



When did Putin tell Trump to push for this ?
 
When did Putin tell Trump to push for this ?

Wow, inventing new conspiracy theories every day? Bad Russia, bad Putin, it's all them.

There can't seriously be people in the US who do not want delusional madman politics and to save the country from raging lunatics, could there? Nope, must be Russia and Putin.

Go and watch my video:
 
Wow, inventing new conspiracy theories every day? Bad Russia, bad Putin, it's all them.

There can't seriously be people in the US who do not want delusional madman politics and to save the country from raging lunatics, could there? Nope, must be Russia and Putin.

Go and watch my video:


Murderous dictators who steal their countries money and then go looking for more will never be trusted in America. Once we rid ourselves of our Manchurian Candidate we will sanction Russia until it is broke. Then maybe someone sane will take over but I'm not holding my breath. Russia is a sad, broken 3rd world country with delusions of grandeur.
 
Murderous dictators who steal their countries money and then go looking for more will never be trusted in America. Once we rid ourselves of our Manchurian Candidate we will sanction Russia until it is broke. Then maybe someone sane will take over but I'm not holding my breath. Russia is a sad, broken 3rd world country with delusions of grandeur.

Ahh, so your country only support murderous "presidents" who want to be global tyrants and steal other countries money. The kind looking for world domination.

I see. No wonder Donald Trump is so unpopular, he hasn't started a single war, and he makes peace negotiations.
 
Back
Top Bottom