- #1
Adam
- 65
- 1
Do you know how many soldiers the USA currently has on foreign soil?
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=17475
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=17475
GENIERE said:Not as many as China has in Tibet.
Adam said:Since this report there have been a further 150,000 to 200,000 troops deployed on foreign soil.
I guess, since you are going there already...Adam said:Read: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/index.html#index
motai said:Rather interesting that the U.S. still has many stationed troops in Europe even though the threat of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact is gone. I guess they are doing their allies a favor so they don't have to pay for their own defense.
Discussed by Rumsfeld? It must make sense. Germany is where US casualties in Iraq usually end up. It's a no-go for reporters now days. I like this part though:phatmonky said:This has been discussed bu Rumsfeld, and while everyone seems to think it's so bad that our troops are in Germany, the Germans aren't ready for us to move out (economic collapse of two cities during a recession). It's a politically sensitive situation, but I'm happy to have them move on to where they are more needed
What's wrong with summarizing US troop deployments worldwide? So we can face the truth about how weakened our military has become because of un-planned overextention in Iraq. Not budgeted either. This is an extremely reckless act that has resulted in high casualties for Iraqis and US soldiers as well as mercenaries. Mercenaries are hired to hide the true cost in American human lives.mix in Iraq and AFghanistan in a post that is blatently aimed towards you complaining of New world order, US imperialism, or PNAC. No difference between people deployed in Germany and those that are being rotated through Iraq
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.htmlphatmonky said:I guess, since you are going there already...
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Internet-troll
Right, so when are you going to prove me a wrong and put a point to this thread, outside of your standard "imperialism" fare?Adam said:http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html
Pathetic.
Hey, I didn't notice that before. Musta just come in after the software upgrade. That emoticon has been sorely needed around here.phatmonky said:
Actually, it goes far beyond even that. We aren't closing the bases in Germany for the same reason we have so much trouble closing bases here: it'll destroy the local economy.Rather interesting that the U.S. still has many stationed troops in Europe even though the threat of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact is gone. I guess they are doing their allies a favor so they don't have to pay for their own defense.
Mercenaries?Mercenaries
Mercenaries. (No such word as 'mercinaries' - at least that my dictionary says)russ_watters said:Mercinaries?
Why do you assume I am distressed?Michael D. Sewell said:What seems to be the nature of your distress?
Historical precedent.Adam said:Why do you assume I am distressed?
I'm pretty sure we've had this discussion before (if not here, I've had it other places). The purpose of the stats is shock value and the natural next question (from the person shocked) is: 'why do we need so many troops in so many places?' The answer is far more mundane than the initial poster would prefer.schwarzchildradius said:What's wrong with summarizing US troop deployments worldwide?
russ_watters said:I should have answered this one before: I'm pretty sure we've had this discussion before (if not here, I've had it other places). The purpose of the stats is shock value and the natural next question (from the person shocked) is: 'why do we need so many troops in so many places?' The answer is far more mundane than the initial poster would prefer.
Interesting idea. Can you support this assertion?russ_watters said:Historical precedent.
phatmonky said:Adam has taken to ignoring all those that dare try to expose the intent of this thread, or wish to debate it. We're on page 2, and yet there is no real point made, and thus I fully agree with your synopsis of the situation :)
Probably enough to fill approximately 5 (out of 32) U.S football stadiums (each with a seating capacity of about 65,000).Adam said:Do you know how many soldiers the USA currently has on foreign soil?
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=17475
Well, then - again, what's the point of this thread??Adam said:Not particularly. Are you?
Adam said:1) Thus far, neither you nor anyone else has mentioned my actual intent in starting this thread.
phatmonky said:Right, so when are you going to prove me a wrong and put a point to this thread, outside of your standard "imperialism" fare?
Tsunami said:Well, then - again, what's the point of this thread??
jimmy p said:OK, let's add a swing to this thread. What are the REASONS for such large amounts of US troops in these numerous countries. ESPECIALLY the ones that don't need them there. Actually there is a US base about 5 minutes down my road by the sea. I don't know why it is there, cos there is a British Military port only 10 minutes drive away. Unless the US troops are posted there for training purposes, i don't see the use of them there. Just a waste of money and people IMHO.
Michael D. Sewell said:I can't blame Adam for this thread, we were the ones who were foolish enough to waste our time. Best wishes to all.
God Bless America,
Mike
Tell me why you think that. And I don't mean "Repeat some government policy for me". What do you believe makes such a deployment necessary?You've got S Korea, that is obvious.
Again, why Korea? Why China?You've got japan and the phillipines (training, and a quick strike force in response to Korea (and some would argue China))
phatmonky said:Alas, you are right. Who is stupider? The man who makes a worthless statement, or the man who then is naive enough to debate it
Lol, Adam. If you didn't have an opinion, you wouldn't have posted the poll.Adam said:As should be obvious from the opening post of this thread and its attached poll, the point is to discuss the numbers of US troops on foreign soil.