[Peace-discuss] Fwd: Just What Is America Doing all Over the World?

[David Green]

"It certainly isn't in America's interest. With a $13 trillion national debt and 
a $1. 6 trillion deficit the U. S. can't afford to police the world. Moreover, 
forever meddling everywhere guarantees endless conflict and war, with tens of 
thousands of Americans dead, maimed, and wounded."
 
But it is in the interest of those who decide these things. Conservatives, even 
genuine conservatives in the tradition of Taft, have trouble making these 
distinctions. Moreover, a better and more convincing argument can be made on the 
basis of principle rather than interest, no pun intended. Would all the killing 
be "worth it" if it was in our "interest?"
 
DG



________________________________
From: John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com>
To: Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
Sent: Wed, July 21, 2010 1:50:41 AM
Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Just What Is America Doing all Over the World?




THE WISDOM FUND
TWF.org


July 15, 2020
Campaign for Liberty

Just What Is America Doing all Over the World?
By Doug Bandow

Doug Bandow is the Robert A. Taft Fellow at the American Conservative Defense 
Alliance (www.acdalliance.org) and a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute. A 
former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author of Foreign 
Follies: America's New Global Empire (Xulon Press, 2006).


In one of the most celebrated debate exchanges of the 2008 presidential 
campaign, GOP contender Rep. Ron Paul pointed out that Americans were hated 
because they were "over there" in Islamic lands. In fact, there is virtually no 
country on earth where American forces are not located.

Luckily, most people in most of those nations are not trying to kill Americans. 
In fact, many foreigners enjoy being protected at U. S. expense. Alas, 
Washington's desire to garrison most of the earth's surface helps explain why 
Uncle Sam is effectively bankrupt.

In fact, it's hard to keep track of America's many overseas military 
installations. By one Pentagon count there are 865 foreign facilities. But that 
doesn't count bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, which probably pushes the total 
past 1000.

There are 268 in Germany, 124 in Japan, and 87 in South Korea. Many of these are 
small, but the numbers are still incredible. Moreover, writes David Vine of 
American University:"Others are scattered around the globe in places like Aruba 
and Australia, Bulgaria and Bahrain, Colombia and Greece, Djibouti, Egypt, 
Kuwait, Qatar, Romania, Singapore, and, of course, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba -- just 
to name a few. "

The expense of these facilities is just not the buildings, gates, fences, and 
other physical plant. There are the many people services -- hospitals, 
commissaries, chow halls, and more. Finally, costs include paying and training 
personnel, more than 1.4 million active duty worldwide. Plus caring for millions 
of family members.

There are nonfinancial costs too. Argues Vine:"Military families suffer painful 
dislocations as troops stationed overseas separate from loved ones or uproot 
their families through frequent moves around the world. While some foreign 
governments like U. S. bases for their perceived economic benefits, many locals 
living near the bases suffer environmental and health damage from military 
toxins and pollution, disrupted economic, social, and cultural systems, military 
accidents, and increased prostitution and crime. "

Bases also often are seen as an endorsement of ugly authoritarian regimes, such 
as those in Central Asia. In fact, the price of maintaining such installations 
frequently is formal political and economic support for the host governments.

Advocates of an imperial presence abroad like to argue that it is cheaper to 
station forces overseas than at home since some countries pay "host nation 
support. "But that ignores the fact that it is America's foreign commitments, 
backed by bases all over the world, which generate the need for such a large 
military.

Many policymakers act as if the number of U. S. soldiers, marines, airmen, and 
sailors is set by the stars, the position of the sun, or the phase of the moon. 
With no discretion in the number of military personnel, the only question for 
Washington is where to put them. So dump them in countries which help pay to 
maintain them.

But U. S. troop levels are not a matter of geography, fixed for all time. They 
are a matter of choice. The choice to act like the world's policeman.

The Bible tells us that God worries about even a sparrow falling to earth. So 
does Uncle Sam, who insists on being consulted about virtually every other 
nation's economic policies, political systems, human rights records, military 
forces, international objectives, and more.

According to the Defense Department, there are 140,000 U. S. personnel in Iraq. 
There we are trying to create a Western-style democracy along the Euphrates. The 
objective has gone from turning the entire Middle East into an idyllic replica 
of Switzerland to just avoiding a collapse like in Lebanon three decades ago.

Another 90,000 Americans are in Afghanistan. With al-Qaeda virtually absent from 
that nation (and Osama bin-Laden long gone to Pakistan), the U. S. now is 
pursuing a different mission. Alas, it's not exactly clear what. Apparently the 
administration hopes to turn the corrupt, illegitimate Karzai regime into a 
respected, competent, and effective central government. A wonderful ideal, but 
neither realistic nor a strategic interest worth war for the U. S.

About 52,000 American troops are in Germany. Obviously the most populous and 
prosperous country at the center of Europe doesn't need defending. The 
likelihood of Russian troops marching on Berlin and clambering up the Bundestag 
building is somewhat akin to that of the Martians landing and conducting a 
modern War of the Worlds.

The only other reason to have forces in Germany is because that country is 
closer to other places where Washington wants to send U. S. personnel -- but 
shouldn't. German bases once devoted to preventing a Red Army conquest are now 
handling casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan. However, if the U. S. wasn't 
promiscuously warring on other nations, it wouldn't need a German way-station in 
Europe.

There are 36,000 troops in Japan. World War II ended 65 years ago, but 
Washington apparently hasn't noticed. With the second largest economy on earth, 
Japan could do whatever is necessary to defend itself. Instead, Tokyo expects 
America to sacrifice Los Angeles if necessary to protect Tokyo.

Roughly 29,000 American military personnel are in South Korea. U. S. forces have 
been stationed there for 60 years, the first three in a very hot war. The South 
has the world's 13th largest economy, with about 40 times the GDP of North 
Korea. The Republic of Korea's population is twice that of the North. Surely 
Seoul could defend itself without American assistance.

Smaller numbers of Americans are spread throughout the world. About 11,000 
afloat in the Pacific. Roughly 10,000 in Italy. Some 9,000 in the United 
Kingdom. More than a thousand each in Belgium, Spain, Turkey, Bahrain, and 
Djibouti. Hundreds of people in Greece, Greenland, Netherlands, Portugal, 
Australia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Canada, Diego Garcia, Egypt, Qatar, 
Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Cuba (Guantanamo Bay), Honduras. Smaller 
numbers are sprinkled elsewhere.

Advocates of this imperial military presence -- how better to characterize a 
thousand military installations around the world? -- denounce anyone suggesting 
retrenchment as an "isolationist. "But why is bombing, invading, and occupying 
other nations considered to be a positive form of "engagement"?

It certainly isn't in America's interest. With a $13 trillion national debt and 
a $1. 6 trillion deficit the U. S. can't afford to police the world. Moreover, 
forever meddling everywhere guarantees endless conflict and war, with tens of 
thousands of Americans dead, maimed, and wounded.

Finally, promiscuous intervention inevitably makes the U. S. a target of 
terrorism. As Rep. Paul pointed out, being "over there" -- bombing, invading, 
and occupying Muslim lands -- creates enemies. And some of those enemies have 
proved they are both willing and able, to strike the American homeland. That 
doesn't make it right. But it does provide another reason to bring U. S. troops 
home.

To coin a phrase, it is time for a change. Washington policymakers traded in the 
American republic for a global empire decades ago. It's time for the American 
people to trade back.


MORE on America's Empire of Bases 


---
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed 
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information for research and educational purposes.

FREEE-Books: 
THE WAR ON ISLAMand 9/11 UNVEILED

SUBSCRIBEto TWF mailing list.


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20100721/45a9f5ea/attachment-0001.html>