twodogs wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 08, 2018 3:57 pm
Why aren't the paying 100% plus 10%?
twodogs wrote: ↑
Sun Jul 08, 2018 6:26 pm
but there is no longer a need for boots on the ground unless the host nation is willing to pay the full cost of deployment plus 10%.
Why do it even if a host country is paying 100% plus 10%?
Also is your 100% just the daily operational cost of the base?
Or does your 100% include the initial costs of constructing the base & the logistical & transportation costs of maintaining that foreign land base from the USA?
Does your 100% include the RnD costs of the weapons on that base?
Does your 100% include the training costs of the American personel on that base?
Does your 100% include the training costs of any of the host countries on the base learning to use high tech American weapons and base?
Now even if your 100% includes all the above costs ie the true total cost what about the human cost?
For example there are thousands of American troops on the DMZ and if the North Koreans attack most of them will be killed in the first 24 hours or so of a North Korean invasion. So why should young Americans die to defend a rich prosperious country with a large population like South Korea?
Even if the South Koreans were paying a 100% of the true and total cost why should the Americans be on the DMZ at all?
Why shouldn't it be only young South Koreans on the DMZ and the young Americans stationed back in America where they belong?
Even if every country in the world that had American military personel stationed on an American overseas base paid your 100% + 10% and it was the total and complete costs rather than just daily operational cost American involvement in Vietnam & Iraq & Afghanistan etc cost far more than just money.
So after the US experience of Vietnam & Iraq & Afghanistan even if every country covered 100% + 10% total and compete costs how is getting involved in more Vietnams & Iraqs & Afghanistans in the interest of the USA and ultimately worth all costs human and monetary to the USA?
As much as Smoker likes your tax dollars going to my daily security on this side of the world why not trade all these US overseas military bases for Universal Healthcare for your citizens or better education for your children or better infrastructure for your citizens yada yada yada?
Smoker has free healthcare and an USN carrier group approximately a hundred or so kilometers from me in the Gulf.
Do you have universal healthcare in the USA?
If it is finally dawning on you that you don't have universal healthcare would you like universal healthcare verses a USN carrier group in the Gulf?
Same question regarding Germany or whoever; would you rather have universal healthcare verses 50 thousand or so American soldiers stationed in Germany year after year after year decades after the end of the cold war?
So finally what is the reason not to bring the troops home and leave the Vietnams & the Iraqs & the Afghanistans & whatever regional/tribal/religious conflicts to those on the other side of the world far from America to deal with however they see fit?
Warmest Regards, Smoker