OK, since nobody could actually answer this one, I'll tell you.
The reason we have bases in England, Italy, Germany, Japan, and Korea, is because we fought wars on the soil of those countries and occupied them or helped them. After WWII we occupied Germany and Japan to keep the peace and help with reconstruction. We also were the main party in NATO and were sworn to help other NATO nations against Communist/Soviet agression during the Cold War, so many European countries invited us to have bases in their countries. We were allies with Engalnd, and have had bases there for 65 years so we just continue to. We also have a defense alliance with South Korea since the end of the Korean War, although, that war is technically not over since there was never an actual peace treaty signed, just a cease fire agreement.
The simple reason no other countries have bases in the US, is because no ther country on the planet in modern times, has had to send armed forces to the US to save our asses from annihilation, but the US has had to save many other countries from that fate...in some cases, multiple times!
If France ever sends their military forces to the US to help us repel a Chinese invasion, then I'm sure they'll be rewarded with some bases here. Until then...we have our bases in those other countries. Does everyone understand now?
2006-07-28 16:55:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by machine_head_327 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no useful purpose for another country to pay the expense of maintaining a military base in the US, even if the US would permit it. The US does conduct training and joint exercises with military personnel from many countries at military bases in the US.
2006-07-28 03:40:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by bee 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are other countries bases here. I know that the Germans have thier tornado(German f-14) flight base at Holloman AFB NM. And other countries pilots go to Pilot training at American bases. Nothing is weirder than seeing 20 or 30 German troops standing respectfully when the National anthem plays in the New Mexican desert.
2006-07-28 04:32:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Kendra Q 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Timmm is right. And we don't have foreign bases in our country because we have enough of a military presence and aren't being "overviewed" by another country. Nor does anyone else have operations that are easiest to reach via another port.
The British do have bases/postings elsewhere. As well as Taiwan, whom our troops have trained quite a bit.
2006-07-28 03:45:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Joyce W 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are wrong.
The US had been one of the headquarters of the Italian Mafia. Oh!
Also everything started with the French,English and Spanish colonization, that started bringing their animals, seeds and habits. Unfortunately for the Africans, their first steps in the US was far from being the land of Freedom...
The massive migration of Irish - Irish mops too- Chinese - mops as well- German Jewish and non Jewish, Arabs, Russians - other mops- Mexicans- and more Jewish, Mormons, Protestants,etc - better to avoid labeling radical groups....-
Is there anybody that can be called authentically American excepting the people kept in reserves for the foreign that invaded them calling their habits and culture uncivilized?
US is made out of the world's immigrants from the countries that now they presume to occupy with their bases.
2006-07-28 03:50:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Expat Froggy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
One of the reasons the U.S. has bases in other countries is to bolster the defense of that country or to provide stability in the region. For example, U.S. bases in Europe were part of a larger NATO defense network to stop possible invasion from Warsaw Pact forces. American bases in Korea are part of an effort to defend the South from the North.
Since U.S. territory is already pretty secure and stable, Americans don't need assistance from other nations. We do, however, regularly host soldiers from other nations at many of our bases for cross-training or evaluation purposes.
2006-07-28 03:39:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by timm1776 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
the U. S. is pathetically obdurate. the element is, the U. S. thinks the chilly conflict remains occurring, and they choose political dominance. they're keen to strive against for it. Iran no longer merely has Libya, Syria, and terrorists (no longer somewhat terrorists...they have a reason; they're adversarial to Sunni radicals and are helping rebels) on their aspect; Russia, China, and Iran have a mutual safe practices compact, so if the U. S. invades Iran, Russia and China will take action. Iran is a miles better state-of-the-paintings and in contact united states of america than Afghanistan and Iraq were, so if the U. S. invades Iran, they could reason a international conflict. Muslim countries round Iran will preserve Iran for holy skill; i'm optimistic of it. NATO is not any longer lower than huge u . s . of america impact; the ecu Union ensured independence from US impact because it grew after the autumn of the Soviet Union, which left the U. S. to basically help dictators and monarchs global, for they do no longer have the numbers, endurance, impact, nor time to attempt to administration each and each and every parliamentary or senators in a democratic united states of america (easily, that is way better accessible to administration a dictator than a set of democratic homestead members). i somewhat do no longer imagine Europe receives inquisitive about a "conflict on terror" as Bush calls this impact race. nonetheless, the USA is the richest and maximum useful united states of america in the international (i'm speaking the authorities, easily no longer the folk). If the total international went to conflict with the USA, the USA ought to stay effective (even if with many losses). the international ought to for sure no longer be assimilated and ought to finally benefit freedom, yet no that is uncomplicated to counter the USA and its technologies and money. trust or no longer, that is a reality. in present day situations, the merely way you could administration and assimilate a united states of america is in case you substitute them on your worry-free beliefs (this frequently ought to artwork with faith, no longer politics). i'm afraid the days of conquering is over, and the U. S. does no longer do not forget that. i'm sorry I wrote a lot, yet i love politics! -la illaha illallah, Muhammadir Wa Rasulullah
2016-11-26 20:39:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the U.S. kicks major butt. There are other countries that have military envoys here, but the U.S. won't allow other countries to have a "military presence" within our borders.
2006-07-28 03:37:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by theGODwatcher_ 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There was no reason for it. We share no borders with major potential threats and as a superpower, it was a visible sign of who we were/are willing to sacrifice ourselves for. It also gives us the ability to extend power beyond our borders in regions less stable than North America.
2006-07-28 03:38:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Crusader1189 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because we do not need them - and neither do they.
For example: what benefit would either the US or Japan get from a Japanese base in the US?
2006-07-28 04:06:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by MikeGolf 7
·
0⤊
0⤋