G
Ghosty
Guest
This list is sufficient, I think:Sorry, but I have no idea what this means.
The United States gave up the vast majority of the bases it acquired during WWII, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. For various reasons.
France wanted us out. Fine. So we left. [Although France went ahead and spent BILLIONS to develop their own nuclear warheads, missiles, and aircraft.] Ditto, the Philippines; although the eruption of Mount Pinatubo got us out of there somewhat ahead of schedule. Ditto, Puerto Rico.
Bases in Thailand and various Pacific Islands and Morocco and Libya: We’re not there anymore.
Sometimes a friendly government would like us to stick around to act as a deterrent against aggression, such as South Korea … and it serves a training and logistical purpose for us.
When some crisis or other occurs, we negotiate with the host nation for basing rights. Some agree and some disagree. When the need goes away, we go away.
I asked some other poster to provide details of all the overseas bases and he was unable to provide any actual details. Just a bunch of generalities which didn’t pan out. Deliberately confusing “installations” with “bases”. An installation could be a rental locker at an airport in Karachi. A base could be a tent city in Iraq. And they open and close as needed.
In this age of internet and publicly available satellite photos, there are no secrets anymore.
No generalities or global statements, please. Specifics only.
So, sorry, but I just don’t understand your comment.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases
Frankly it doesn’t matter if a base is a tent city or not. The point is not how permanent a military presence is, but rather that it’s there at all. As for whether a foreign government wants us there, they typically would. We provide national security, and deterrent to their enemies, for them that they would have to provide on their own otherwise. Japan is a perfect example of this. Just because a country wants us there doesn’t mean we should be there.
We also don’t need to be involved in every “crisis” all over the world; raising the point that we negotiate for basing rights just begs the question. You assume that we must or should be involved in “crises” around the globe.
The point is that bases in Japan are not necessary to provide for our national security, nor are bases in Afghanistan, at this point, for that matter. The new base in Australia is a total joke when it comes to national defense.
Peace and God bless!