English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

13 answers

There are TONS of AFB in Europe so I believe there are plenty to get us where we need to go. Just to name a few big ones:

RAF Lakenheath, England
RAF Mildenhall, England
Aviano AB, Italy
Ramstein AB, Germany
Incirlink AB, Turkey
Spangalem AB, Germany

There are also bases in Australia, Hungary, Greenland, and Greece. Not to mention there are more [then previously listed] in Germany, Italy, Turkey, and England. I think we have our bases covered. Many have shut down but we also have plenty left! I hope this answers your question!

2007-01-22 14:35:00 · answer #1 · answered by .vato. 6 · 2 0

No, we (the USA) doesn't need to.

First off, we don't have enough military to use all those bases like we used to use. Our air force is alot smaller than it was in, say, 1980. Same for the Army. We don't need as many bases now that our military is half the size it was in the early 80s.

Secondly, we have the ability to deploy from the USA to existing but underused bases in Europe. So we can keep stuff at home, and move it where we need it when we need it.

2007-01-22 14:11:26 · answer #2 · answered by Charles D 5 · 2 0

I'm not sure what we would put there. The US Air Force is much smaller than it used to be. Also, most, if not all, of those bases now have civilian activities on them. An offset to that is that we'd likely have use of military air fields in former eastern bloc countries and wouldn't need those German bases.

2007-01-22 14:12:49 · answer #3 · answered by k3s793 4 · 0 0

IMO NO!

If there is another international/world war it will be fought on a very different front. Long range Nuclear and Biological weapons will come into play, and it will all be over withing a matter of days.

2007-01-22 14:11:45 · answer #4 · answered by Jim E 2 · 1 0

No.Aircraft can be kept on navy ships until they are needed.There are probably enough land air bases in the UK,Germany,etc to cope with the first stages of any emergency!

2007-01-22 18:51:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Military build-ups can only INCREASE the chances of more conflict. (see the lead up to WW1 which in turn led to WW2 and is still festering in Korea and a few other places) We need to have the confidence to look violence in the eye and choose another method.

2007-01-22 14:17:26 · answer #6 · answered by megalomaniac 7 · 1 0

Gone were the good old days.
In the new millenium.
We crack coconuts in planet of apes.
We see if there is any juice or an empty shell in planet of apes.

2007-01-22 18:41:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Assume "we" means the US. So, that doesn't include me, then. Do you think we Europeans would allow it ? Ever wondered why people accuse you lot of arrogance and disdain for the rest of the world ?

2007-01-22 14:41:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Things are more advanced than that now , That's old war

2007-01-22 14:10:46 · answer #9 · answered by ralphtheartist 3 · 0 0

"grow to be Hillary Clinton's vote to authorize Bush's lie-based Iraq conflict a case of sturdy judgment?" on the time and with the suggestions to hand, particular it grow to be sturdy judgment. "so which you have self assurance that being gullible to settle for those lies is an indication of sturdy judgment and sturdy management?" particular, i've got self assurance our elected officers could desire to be greater trusting of OUR very own suggestions gathering companies over those of a team who would not have the terrific activity of united statesa. at coronary heart. "have been the human beings who antagonistic the Iraq conflict from the initiating (like Obama, like me) merely fortunate, or did they place self assurance in greater solid suggestions (for example, the UN inspectors who have been truly on the floor traveling truthfully defense force installations, or the guiding principle-led CIA who mentioned that Iraq grow to be possibly years removed from a achievable application?)" No, people who antagonistic the Iraq conflict from the initiating weren't fortunate. I nonetheless have self assurance that Saddam could desire to have been removed from power whether wmd weren't got here upon. as properly, merely because of the fact they weren't got here upon, would not propose they did no longer have them. they could have been moved so because it extremely is mute element. Do you forget that he grow to be torturing and finding out chemical weapons on his very own human beings? He had buried human beings in mass graves. somebody else in historic previous did some thing like this and his call grow to be Hitler. could desire to we've merely permit that go on? Saddam grow to be tried in a courtroom of his very own human beings after being got here upon in charge, grow to be completed legally by skill of his very own human beings, or do you forget that? He wasn't a ****** saint. WMD's weren't the only reason we went into Iraq.

2016-11-26 20:10:54 · answer #10 · answered by pariasca 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers