Why are we still in these countries years after we've worn out our welcome?
2007-11-12 03:31:07 · 10 answers · asked by Ktcyan 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Maybe some of the ones in Western Europe, but then again those bases are vital for logistical purposes and if the governments of those nations don't mind why should we leave?
2007-11-12 05:45:25 · answer #1 · answered by 29 characters to work with...... 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Abandoning overseas bases would be disastrous.
If history has proven anything, it is that another major war is ALWAYS coming.
Maintaining foreign bases is a logistical necessity in times of war. Being able to strike and deploy troops from different locations around the world is vital in overcoming an adversary.
Think back to WW2, when the U.S. had to fight island to island because we had no sustained Pacific bases after Pearl Harbor was wiped out. The Pacific front of the war was much bloodier for our side than it would have been if it were the U.S. military entrenched in these islands with the Japanese attempting to capture them.
Abandoning overseas bases would leave our country and our allies vulnerable in a time that seems to have the potential to escalate into a full-blown WW3.
Bad idea.
2007-11-12 11:49:05 · answer #2 · answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I think Ron Paul is a nice old man, just like Mr. Magoo would be in the Land of Oz. Why is it easier to find a news story on how we should leave now, instead of on all the many normal people that are begging us to stay? Our present is making it easier for most of their population to actually sleep at night
When our troops do come home: a few new military bases on our boarders would be great.
2007-11-12 11:46:32 · answer #3 · answered by pacer 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Ron Paul lives in the 1920s. He wants to repeat the mistakes of isolationism.
2007-11-12 13:06:59 · answer #4 · answered by wichitaor1 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Vote for Ron Paul and you will guarantee a major war within a year!
2007-11-12 17:05:15 · answer #5 · answered by oscarsix5 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think Ron Paul has an ivory tower view of international relations. It's nice in theory, but doesn't hold up in the real world.
2007-11-12 12:19:38 · answer #6 · answered by strplng warrior mom 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He's an idiot. The bases are there to thwart any action by military powers from another country. Most of the countries where we have bases WANT us there. It's a deterrent. If the crap hits the fan it's better to be ready for it than to have to start from scratch.
2007-11-12 11:38:33 · answer #7 · answered by Dirty Dave 6 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Ron paul whoopdie doo anyone is going to do anything that they want to and if one knows that they are going to be tortured and penalized for doing the right things in life then who is really going to do what is right?
2007-11-12 11:41:12 · answer #8 · answered by Friend 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Let me ask this of you. suppose you lost your welcome on Yahoo, would you leave and never come back?
For once the LIEberal news has printed that the rocket attacks in Iraq is at a new low. It seem as though our efforts are working but you want to bring the troops home and leave it unfinished.
2007-11-12 11:40:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
I think it gives us a sense of security around the world. But really, if we go to war somewhere over there....those bases won't really help because we'll have to send troops over there anyway. Why are the bases there? I don't know? Just money spent where it doesn't need to be spent.....a free vacation for the troops though while overseas. Great for them to explore and see the world.
2007-11-12 11:37:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 6⤋