U. S. Bases often cause officials to urge American intervention wherever conflict might break out. But this risks entangling us in foreign wars that are none of our business. If conflict breaks out over maritime or territorial disputes in the East and South China Sea, The U. S. May be obligated to intervene against China to fulfill its security guarantee to Taiwan, Japan, Or the Philippines. Getting into a war with China over some uninhabited rocks of no strategic importance to us is not in our interests.
U. S. Leaders often argue that bases are the centerpiece of a liberal, Rules-based world order. They claim that bases in Europe protect European allies from Russia, Bases in the Middle East ensure the free flow of oil and contain Iranian influence, And bases in Asia defend our Asian allies from a rising China and an unstable North Korea. But stationing 80, 000 troops at 350 installations in Europe is not directly related to securing Americans’ physical safety. The same goes for the more than 154, 000 active-duty personnel based throughout Asia. And the argument that maintaining a forward-deployed military posture in the Middle East protects the free flow of oil is supported by pitifully sparse empirical evidence.
Some argue that bases allow rapid military response. That’s certainly true to some extent. But modern military technology has significantly reduced the problems of travel times over long distances. According to a recent RAND Corporation report, “lighter ground forces can deploy by air from the United States almost as quickly as they can from within a region. ” Long-range bombers can fly missions up to 9, 000 miles, And after that they can be refueled in the air, Reducing the need to have in-place forces abroad.
Man kind will be wiped out in this amount of time because of military bases because of the toxic gasses left to rot. FOR EXAMPLE OPERATION ICEWORM IS TRAPED UNDER CAPS OF ICE WITH TONS OF FUEL KILLING THEM WHICH IS BAD For CLIMATE BecAUSE It KILL so no more!
The current U. S. Model of global policing is an old Cold War blunder. In the past, The U. S. Interventionist policy was made in opposition to the Soviet design's popularity across the world.
These developing nations that wanted to adopt socialism were to have primarily command economies and conduct trade primarily with other socialist countries. Bear in mind that in Marxist thought, The invasion of another country to facilitate economic growth is taboo. The funding of liberation movements are not. Likewise, The liberation of other nations for moralistic purposes (such as the case with China and Tibet- although China did defy those taboos with the invasion of Vietnam. Much how Stalin broke the rules with the invasion of Yugoslavia) was otherwise justified.
The U. S. Did not find socialism acceptable for whatever reason (they do regularly say live and let live, But don't seem to allow resource wealthy nations to have that freedom). The result was a mass occupation in key areas of the world to ensure neoliberal values globally.
The idea is that if we don't stay around the world we will get attacked. What people don't think about are numerous.
1. Technological superiority: The U. S. Has a huge military. Like, Unimaginable to most. The devices used are also decades ahead of most of the world (DPRK for example) and many of them are defense purposed.
2. Geographical advantage: to the South of the U. S. , No military exists with comparative strength to be of any threat. Brazil arguably is, But is not actively engaged or interested in war. To the North is the allied Canada. To the East and West are large, Open oceans that are easily barricaded to ensure safety. There is ZERO way that any attack, Be it by mechanical devices like ICBMs or by attempted landing, Could ever come to fruition. U. S. Security protocols definitely need updated, However.
3. Civilian engagement: let's assume some country gets mechanized infantry, Artillery or the like set up and enters on-soil warfare. Citizens are armed to the teeth. Most are well versed in how to use those rifles.
4. Terrorism as a rouse: this one. In the 80's Bin Laden worked for us as a member of the Taliban. When the U. S. Dropped Pakistan cold turkey, Al Qaeda emerged and became a prime driver for an invasion in the region. From Al Qaeda, Another split occurred with the invasion of Iraq. From this, It became a Levantian crisis. One that oddly never truly caused the U. S. Issues.
5. 9/11: likely not needing the explanation, But returning to the absolute uselessness of the CIA. Before 9/11 we had many threats on the neoliberal symbol. Despite this, Somehow we allowed two men from outside the nation attend flight school to learn to fly a plane. Curiously, It was found they didnt have plans to take the time to learn to land. If that isnt a red flag. . .
I'm in the line of thought that much of this is engineered for economic goals.
I think the U.S. should end overseas Military operations. Many miss their families and would like to be home more. Maybe it should not be ended forever, but just so that soldiers are able to see their families more.... That's all I have to say. I know a lot of people disagree, but this is my opinion..
We have been in to many wars, I bet the soldiers just want a break from all the hard work they have done. They want to see their family's and friends form all different places. We have done a lot to save our country and other different states. We could save our family's think about that.
According to my research, 60% of illegal immigrants come into the United States by sea. We should strengthen our navy and stop illegal immigrants! If we strengthen our defenses, we could have better security of our country. Who doesn't want great security to protect this country. Please consider this opinion.
Hh h h hhhhhh hh h h h h hhh hh h hh h h h hh h h h h hh h h h h h h h h dbghhgb fdhbgb gjb gngbn ggb gnfbdfgnbkdfgbk fg b bgf nbgf kbg bjgfbnh nnnbn bn bn bnbnb b nbn bn bn n bnbnb
Gfgggdhfghfghgfh gfhgfhf fghh h h h hh h hh hh h hh hhhhhhh h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h hh hh h h hhhh h h h h hhh h h h h hh h h h h h
They are simopy iorhagklrhsg;ihkefnghoihtgoi;kwj estroke diszhgpqoirehgpio fkng fvf g fe hgr h sg h rywj g rsf jhdr j rj rtd j hfj dfj rfjh fgjtrdj dfg gfj df h beans beans the musical fruit the more you eat the more you toot the more you toot the beter you feeeeel
They should not beacause we have taken over 97 precent of their former owned tarritory,all we have to is keep this up for another month or 2 and we will be alright, also many syran lives including children will be at stake for the russia gov at their mercy but of course this is my opinion and i know they are typos cos im only 11
We are bigger we make more allie going overseas it is for the good of our country if we didn't go overseas the enime would come over here and take over the us that means more terrist attacks death count up and just chaos.We don't want war in the usa
If we end oversea operations then we would look like a world power. If we end oversea operations the we could potentially stop getting oil from other places. Then we would not have enough oil for our everyday items. If we help other with our military then we can get help when we need it. Our military is a strong military so if we end our oversea operations then we also look like we have a weak military because we can’t help anyone else.
I dont want her to be die. It would be so so so sad if she would be die. I would dead as well. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
If the military operations cease, then that would mean the government agencies such as the CIA and NSA would have to stop their operations as well. That would leave a major hole in our national defense. We would have no intelligence to lead us to a possible attack on american soil. It also gives other countries the opportunity to invade us without our knowledge and it would be so much easier to do so.
Since ISIS is going (trying) to take out the world, one tiny place at a time. The more we draw back the more they are going to take out, and they are killing many innocent people for no reason so, with us sending our troops we are stopping the people that are causing the most harm, so sending our troops is risking their lives but saving many more then just Americans. Yes we would get the credit, but at least many people didn't die for something they didn't do!
What about ISIS we need to go over sea's just to stop them, and of we do go over sea's and take them out we would be saving MANY more people that these people were gonna kill in the first place. So I think that they should keep going with the over sea operations.
The us military is is to help the citizens. The us military teaches young men to serve and protect the country. It teaches them respect. The go and protect us. Without them a lot of us would be dead. People say you can die. They are dying for us, for me,for you, and this nation! For Freedom!
I think that the U.S. should not end Military operations. We need our Navy and without it makes our country vulnerable.
In my research I found that if the U.S. ended military operations overseas, that 1,388,028 people would lose their jobs. I also found that if the U.S. would not be spending money by paying the troops that their would be another “Great Depression” because of the economy we have in the U.S.