US military shake-up: Your views

President Bush has announced a major reorganisation of US troops around the world.

The proposals include the withdrawal of up to 70,000 military personnel and their families from Asia and Europe, chiefly from Germany.

However, forces in Iraq and Afghanistan will not be affected.

The Pentagon wants the military to be more flexible in order to meet the demands of the war on terror.

However, there is concern that withdrawing troops from Europe could affect America's influence on Nato.

What do you think of the plans to reorganise the US military? What will withdrawal mean for countries like Germany and South Korea? If you are overseas with the military, are you looking forward to the shake-up?

This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.

---

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received:

I'm of two thoughts concerning this: It is a good thing to leave when you are not wanted and especially not needed and it is a bad thing for the smaller businesses and people who rely on the income provided by the Americans based there. I can't help but wonder if this is just Bush's agenda for re-election or if it is an honest move based on suggestions from military advisors.
Being born in Germany from a military parent and a German mother, I have to say that I'm at least glad we were there. I enjoyed my time in Germany. I have no ill will towards any other nation. I just wish others didn't hate all Americans so vehemently as I see coming up so often of late. There would be no wars if people stopped hating one another and started caring. (Just perhaps heated discussion - which is much more preferred).
Jen Edwards, Denver, CO USA

People on this board are talking as if the Cold war ended 50 years ago. The Berlin Wall just came down in 1989. We were and are still there because Europe for the most part does not have a substantial military. Also, wounded military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan are usually shipped to the Army Hospitals in Germany.
Matthew E. McCormack, Philadelphia, USA

Those countries might not miss our troops being there immediately, but they'll certainly miss the money those troops bring in to the local economies. Next time they have an armed neighbour threatening to invade them, perhaps they'll call the UN to sort out the mess. Of course, they'll probably spend a long time on "Hold" ...
Ian, Brit in USA

No problem with bringing back the forces in Europe, however, the forces in South Korea are another matter Pete, Las Vegas Nevada USA

I have no problem with bringing back the forces in Europe, however, the forces in South Korea are another matter. Many years ago the then President of the US sent the Secretary of State to the area to make a speech in which he stated that South Korea lay outside the area of US defence interests. Within weeks the North invaded the South and a bloody war ensued. The US forces in South Korea can in no way oppose the millions of North Korean forces if they should decide to move south. They are there to serve as a "tripwire" to indicate that if the North Korean forces move south that the US will retaliate. If the US greatly reduces the number of forces or removes them altogether it will signal a green light to the North to move South and the world will have a huge mess on its hands.
Pete, Las Vegas Nevada USA

Its about time America left Europe, the UK and the US have looked after the world for far too long, let France and Germany have a go!
Roy Millar, UK

This is by far the only intelligent move that I have seen from Bush during his 4 years in the office.
A'hura, Canada

As a former military man, I would think that the real reason that US troops are being withdrawn from Europe, Japan and other countries is that they are short of troops to rotate to Iraq and Afghanistan. This might not be a vote winner as the troops in "soft" postings will be asked to go there! After all they didn't join the Army to get killed!
Russell Taylor, Penang, Malaysia

I think we need to focus on the purpose for the U.S. presence in Europe in the first place, to deter Soviet aggression not to build strong economies. With the Soviet Union gone there is little need for such a large scale military force in Europe.

With the Soviet Union gone there is little need for such a large scale military force in Europe. Karl Boehm USMC, Okinawa, Japan

It is unfortunate that in these times it is hard to tell when your government is putting up a smoke screen or if they truly have the American peoples best interest in mind.
Karl Boehm USMC, Okinawa, Japan

It's about time! The Cold War is over and there is no reason for having such a large force stationed in Europe. Most Europeans do not want us over there, and those that do usually have their own agenda.
Scott, USA

The "possibility of war in Europe" has vastly diminished since 1945. American troupes are no longer needed and the US can reduce its military costs by their redeployment to areas where conflict is more likely to occur. Bringing them "home" is far more cost efficient than overseas subsistence of men, material and families.
Curtis Yant, N. Charleston, SC. USA

SUGGEST A DEBATE This topic was suggested by Kevin, USA: President Bush has announced a major restructuring of American forces abroad. Does this reflect a fundamental change in American foreign policy? Send us your suggestions for Have Your Say debates

I wonder how long it will be before people start complaining about the hit the local economies will take in those areas where US troops and families spend US dollars, and start begging for aid. I imagine it will end up like Puerto Rico, where people for years complained about a US military base, then when the base shut down, those same people complained that we weren't 'giving' them money to account for that city's economy being ruined by the loss of US dollars.
Darryn, Chicago, USA

Germany will not be a truly independent country until it provides for its own defence. Germans have been a bit spoiled in recent decades by decades of US aid and protection. Let them see how their foreign policy changes when their own security depends on them and not a benefactor who they can take protection from and yet condemn at the same time.
Phil Murray, Boulder, Colorado

I wonder if George Bush has truly thought this through, or if it is solely an election ploy, as the withdrawal of troops from many of these areas is going to devastate the regional economies and put further pressure on governments like Germany's who have increasingly less resources, judging from budgets, to handle economic slowdown. As a superpower America must not only think of itself, as choices it makes can seriously and more often than not adversely affect other, less powerful nations.
James Stevens, New Zealand

I believe that Bush is moving the troops so they will be able to be trained in Middle East conditions and will be used as an invasion and occupation force in Iran or Iraq.
Michael Sheridan, Washington DC

This has been part of a long-term strategy to reorganise the US military Dave, Cedar Rapids, IA, USA

I think a lot of people read too much into this announcement. This has been part of a long term strategy to reorganise the US military since the early days of the Clinton era. It started with the base closings here. And is now being followed by closings in Europe. We don't need to defend Germany from members of Nato. Also the only way the Germans "subsidies" the US military is by giving the land its bases are on "on the cheap". What I find most amazing is how so many folks from around the world have an opinion on this. It really shows just how important, one way or another, the US military is to peace and stability around the world no matter who is president.
Dave, Cedar Rapids, IA, USA

The Germans have been good hosts, but it is the job of every guest to know when to leave. It is time to come home. I am puzzled by the several Germans who believe they subsidise our presence in their country. I have seen the cities surrounding now closed US bases in Germany and they are dead, like those outside closed US bases. Regardless, it's time to leave and we shall see what happens to Nato. What is the purpose of Nato now?
Neil Goldwyn, Seattle, USA

Nothing more than an election ploy. They should be getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Stop exploiting the poor and defenceless countries. UN presence is needed not another occupier.
Ani, Canada

Having a more flexible force based in the US to be deployed anywhere in the world at America's discretion is smart in this increasingly unpredictable war on terror. Plus, the anti-American actions in some of the host countries is hypocritical and hurtful. Both sides are best served by providing for their own defence.
Tom, Chicago, USA

The US needs more troops to maintain the occupation of its new territories. A few years on since Afghanistan, and the country is run by warlords with their own agendas. Iraq is looking even less stable, and is surrounded by neighbours unsympathetic to US policies. These troops are going to be redeployed to these "hot" regions to reinforce the overstretched US military.
James W, London, England

People won't even notice when they're gone Mike, Darmstadt, Germany

I live next to three US Army bases in Darmstadt. There are thousands of soldiers based here and to be honest, you wouldn't even notice them if they left tomorrow. They never leave their bases for anything other than to drive to another base. They don't mix, socialise or integrate with anything outside of their army base. In short, people won't even notice when they're gone.
Mike, Darmstadt, Germany

I am amazed by the ignorance displayed in the posts of quite a few of the Americans. First, the main reason for the US presence in Germany is not the defence of Germany, but support of US national interest. Second, Germany subsidises the US presence. Third, the US presence also has costs attached with them, mainly the awful environmental record of the US military. One more point: I am sad to see the Americans leave and I believe we have been good hosts to them.
Martin, Hamburg, Germany

Based on all the negative rhetoric from Europe, I think it's time we re-evaluate who our 'friends' are. Americans have had enough bashing from Europe. Pull out all of the troops and put the money back into our own economy!
James, USA

After 6 years here, watching the Germans grow more and more hostile and contemptuous, I can't wait until we go home. They wanted us to leave, now they complain about the economic impact when we do. I wish I cared, but I don't.
John, US soldier, Germany

As far as I know from the recent TV interviews with both Republican and Democratic senators, this plan has been in discussion for years unlike people on this panel saying the move is due to political purposes. American tax-payers should end carrying the burden of protecting other nations, a thankless job.
Ellen Lin, New Jersey, USA

The Bush administration only acts in its own interest and uses the resources of America for the benefit of a few rich people. Therefore expect troops to go where there are resources to protect or to plunder.
David Stephen Ball-Romney, Seattle, USA

Bush has an agenda for everything he does Jamie Kelly, St. Louis/USA

I agree that most of our troops be brought home. However, I am so distrustful of the Bush administration. Bush has an agenda for everything he does, and most of it is purely political. He has systematically been planning attacks on several countries that he includes in his "axis of evil" speeches. C. Rice has already issued a statement warning Iran to "disarm or else" the same statement that was made to Iraq before US invasion. My concern is for our troops, what war are they to be thrown into next?
Jamie Kelly, St. Louis/USA

In economic terms, it makes good sense to withdraw troops from areas where they are underused and redeploy them. My concern is it could reinforce the slow withdrawal from the world that many US commentators seem to want. In spite of the noises made by a minority, the USA is seen as a positive force in the World whose absence will be regretted.
Barry P, Havant, England

I had actually heard the number was to be as high as 100,000 troops. I think it's a good idea, the forces aren't needed in Europe any more, and we're lowering amount of troops in South Korea, who don't want us there. This saves money and allows the US to develop a military more in tune with what is needed today.
Mike Daly, Miami, FL - USA

Having a retired Lt Colonel in the family who was stationed in Germany and Turkey at one point, I can personally say that many US troops feel unwelcome in those countries and unappreciated, hence would prefer to come home. I, myself am disgusted with the anti-American parades in several of these host countries, many of whom invite US military assistance. So, as far as I am concerned, let the UN and these nations fend for themselves. Let someone else take the label of 'imperialist'
Doug, Ft Lauderdale, FL, USA

The United States (and to a smaller extent the UK) have been carrying the defence burden of Europe for too long. European social programs have been funded by the US because the European powers didn't have the guts to choose safety over a few more votes for "Free" programs. And, as recent history has proved, the US is treated with hatred and contempt because European weakness results in despising their defenders. America is doing the right thing in pulling out.
Chris Gallagher, London UK

It probably means the end of NATO. I don't suppose the US has much time these days for an organisation which is increasingly used by 'allies' like Germany to attempt to control and influence the use of US military power, while contributing absolutely nothing towards the alliance themselves.
Anthony Jones, UK

I would like nothing more than to see all US troops back on US soil Todd, Virginia, USA

To Adam, Ryde, England (below): We were invited and encouraged to come to Europe 60 years ago. I would like nothing more than to see all US troops back on US soil. The truth is that if the US becomes an isolationist nation there will be another major war somewhere, not in North America, that the US will be called on to come and help sort it out.
Todd, Virginia, USA

It will be a sad sight to see the Americans leave Germany. They are great people and have put a lot into the German economy. I am ex-forces myself and worked with the US guys often. They have spent too much time away from their friends and family for a country that does not support them in time of need. I think that we should abandon NATO and start up a US & UK coalition, stick together with the people that we trust and support, let France and Germany carry on their relationship.
Gareth, London

An act of desperation. He's badly overextended the military and doesn't have much choice except to bring them home so he can begin rotating them into Iraq. It will be interesting to see how President Kerry handles the situation. I expect better from him than we've seen from President Bush.
Brian, Seattle USA

Americans should not be paying for the national defense of other countries Jim , NJ, USA

This is long overdue. The troops in Germany have been unnecessary for over a decade and the troops in South Korea have been unwanted for at least that long. Americans should not be paying for the national defense of other countries when our government can't find the money to provide services that other Western democracies provide their citizens. Of course, Bush has already committed the American taxpayer to a huge burden in Iraq for years to come. But at least this gives us hope that at some point in the future, our tax dollars will stopped being funnelled overseas for the benefit of people who don't particularly care for us.
Jim , NJ, USA

I wholeheartedly welcome the return of US troops from ungrateful countries like S. Korea and Germany, 2 countries we fought for and protected from hostile neighbours for over 50 years. However, this is a campaign and political decision and doesn't affect my vote for John Kerry.
John, Los Angeles, California

To quote from the BBC story "Washington has been quietly negotiating with key allies for months." Why would the US have to negotiate with anyone to bring US troops home? This, "We must get the permission of the world to do anything" is getting old and sickening. Let these rich countries be responsible for their own protection
Tim H., New Mexico, US

I am very confused about the issue. During the beginning of the war in Iraq, I heard shouts of "America Go Home!". Now when America is pulling its troops back, I hear shouts of "America is Isolating themselves!". I am not sure what exactly the US should do to please the rest of the world.
Joseph Wojciechowski, New Jersey, USA

A more flexible military is good for all Penny, USA

A more flexible military is good for all to meet the demands of the war on terror. With the US troops removed, the countries from which they left will be encouraged to strengthen their own military.
Penny, USA

Where are they being redeployed - Iran or Venezuela?
Vin, The Hague, Holland (ex-UK)

The sudden announcement suggests to me that this reorganisation has more to do with budgets in an election year than long-term military strategy. It will also allow Bush, if he's re-elected, to produce more troops for Iraq at no extra cost!
JohnM, LyneMeads, UK

I certainly do not think that this is a return to isolationism, as a few other writers seem to feel. I think that while we're at it, we should pull out of UN and NATO, as well. Perhaps there needs to be a renewal of these organizations if we stay in.
Martin Nelson, Virginia Beach VA

Reorganization is an irreversible step backwards Jeremy, Atlanta, USA

I think the reorganization is an irreversible step backwards. Iraq and Afghanistan have shown that the US cannot rely on a small, high-tech forces to fight battles on the other side of the world, no matter how well-trained and equipped it is. Sending bombers from Nebraska on 28-hour round trip missions will not be effective against a determined guerrilla force. Large numbers of combat boots on the ground are still needed to win wars. You don't have to be a genius to see, for example, that if U.S. troops are taken out of South Korea and overextended elsewhere then North Korea could invade the south, and it wouldn't be easy or worth it for us to get them out.
Jeremy, Atlanta, USA

I am a great fan of Europe (having lived there for 2 years) and feel no animosity toward the Continent for not supporting the Iraq war (neither did I). However, in this day in age, Europe should not need US troops to defend it, and the US should not take on that responsibility. If there were ever another major European crisis, we'd come over again, but in the meantime we shouldn't maintain armies there.
Ed, New York, NY

I think the South Korean realignment is overdue, especially with the schizophrenic relationship that the South Koreans have had with US Forces in Korea since the end of the Cold War (not that that has truly ended on the Korean Peninsula.) That relationship can be best summed up as "Yankee Go Home, But Only When We Tell You To." South Korea is currently in la-la land regarding the North, and may snap out of it when they have to provide for their own defense by themselves, rather than have USFK as a convenient whipping boy for Korean xenophobia.
Rich, USA

Are these troops going to be disbanded for good? As long as the world remains as unstable as it presently is, I believe there is a real need for a large contingency available for intervention in 'hot spots'. If given the choice I would prefer an International force, at the service of democracy and peacekeeping.
Martin A. Prowse, Ceara, Brazil

The US is doing this because its military is desperately overstretched Matt, Boston, US

The US is doing this because its military is desperately overstretched by the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. Personnel who have just finished their service are being called back. Those whose tours of duty are about to expire are being heavily pressured to stay. Recruiting advertisements that urge young men to sell their bodies to the government are running on prime-time television - usually during sports broadcasts. Empires are expensive to run.
Matt, Boston, US

I believe that the redeployment is a delayed but practical and necessary re-alignment in a rapidly changing world. This transition not only further emphasizes the end of the Cold War era, but it is an indication that technological advances, inclusive of rapid deployment, are progressing so that the United States military will be much better able to meet its future challenges and responsibilities, with more effective and economical use of its assets.
Robert Morpheal, Canada

The US currently has its military stationed in 129 countries around the world. The sooner they all go home, and stay there, the better.
Adam, Ryde, England

Adam, Ryde - of the 129 countries you mention having US troops present, how many only have US troops serving as UN peacekeeping forces? If the US withdraws "all its troops from all countries" as you suggest then there will be no more UN peacekeeping missions. No other country can or will match the US's commitment to keeping the peace.
Peter, Nottingham (U.K)

I say it is high time that America bring all its troops home and demand that its "allies" shoulder the burden of their own defense. With the exception of the UK and a few notable others, many of our allies have done little but grow dependent on U.S. muscle and decision making, having long since lost any touch with the cold hard reality of world Real Politik. Perhaps if these countries had to build their own forces, they would be less dependent upon the U.S. to keep order. Maybe distance will make hearts grow fonder and make the world a better place.
Shawn Hampton, Eugene, OR - USA

I'm not so sure leaving South Korea is a good idea Rex Lester, Chessington, UK

It makes sense to put your forces where they will be most effective. Unless they are to be used as safe staging posts I can see no reason for US forces to remain in European bases. Military intervention is not needed in stable democratic countries. Since the fall of communism I think the US are questioning the value of NATO. I'm not so sure leaving South Korea is a good idea, but maybe with the growth of capital markets in China, the US no longer consider North Korea a credible threat?
Rex Lester, Chessington, UK

I heard that the UK's troops put around 1.5 billion pounds yearly into the German economy, I dread to think what the US puts in. I think Herr Schroeder's anti-war stance will backfire on him and trouble an already troubled economy even further. Also, maybe the South Korean students won't riot so much against the US when they realise Uncle Sam isn't stopping their Northern cousins any more!
Kye, London, England

The US presence and their muscle flexing tactics anywhere and everywhere in the world that is not sovereign to theirs only creates unnecessary tension with its neighbours. It is a good idea to just quietly walk out and go home since nobody other than their appointed or politically corrupted leaders needs them.
Mohsina, Malaysia

Personally, I do not feel we should have troops deployed around the world. Likewise, some countries such as the UK and Germany who have troops in the US, should be sent home as well. Unless the military is fighting a war in a particular country, there is no reason they should have troops there. Sovereign countries should be sovereign.
Jason, Cleveland, OH USA

Fortress America is pulling up the drawbridge Liane, UK

This is very worrying. Clearly, fortress America is pulling up the drawbridge and preparing to repel all boarders. The US has chosen which route it wants to take, and sadly it does not think that influencing world peace is as important as reacting to threats as they occur.
Liane, UK

It seems to me that with the UN and NATO hamstrung by the Chirac government, (with the tacit and open support of Schroeder) there is not much reason for America to keep troops in that country to assist it in its defense. When it is apparent that the standard of UN and/or NATO intervention in a place like Bosnia is predicated on whatever France and Germany thinks is best for 'Europe' and the standard of UN and/or NATO intervention in a place like Iraq is based on whether they feel the US is under an 'imminent threat' or not, most of us feel it is time to pull the plug on such close military cooperation with a nation like Germany. Besides, this will be a great boost for the Schroeder government and it's often anti-American take on things, no?
Tom, NYC USA

It's time to change with the times, the cold war is over. The USA needs to evaluate where it's troops are needed & welcome. The world has changed, so must American military priorities.
Dan Braverman, Minnesota USA

America needs an airbase in continental Europe Simon, Amsterdam, Netherlands

America needs an airbase in continental Europe to be able to reach the middle-east. The justification for large numbers of military personnel in Germany has disappeared since the end of the cold war. Russia isn't going to launch an invasion at short notice. Withdrawing troops from Asia is maybe not such an obvious move. North Korea is probably the biggest threat the world knows today, and who knows what crazy moves a desperate Kim Il Jung might make if he feels he can get away with it.
Simon, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Better this than a draft. The military needed a move like this anyway, threats have changed and we have to change with them. What I'm wondering is: With all the extended duty periods, not many soldiers have come home from Iraq yet. I want to know what people in the USA will think of the war, once they are sitting next to veterans of it.
Sorel, Los Angeles, USA

The withdrawal from Europe has been coming for a long time. Germany no longer needs US forces based on its territory as the world map and the geopolitics that necessitated the original purpose of these troops has dramatically changed. Europeans can defend Europe. If they need US support, they can buy US Equipment and technology. The same applies to Japan. Honestly, isn't this what everyone wants anyway?
Anthony R. Seta, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

It's the beginning of the end for NATO Tony, Kent, UK

Let us be clear NATO's time, or at least its accepted role, is over. There is no threat to countries bordering the North Atlantic from accepted conventional weapons. Moreover, the position viz a viz America is changing - especially from a European perspective. The recent changes have been more about saving jobs than they have about a real military threat. Of course, the Americans have spending power and their troops support local economies. Much of the NATO equipment is US, but much is also European and more recently Soviet. As the Americans go more for their own agenda, fewer countries from NATO will follow. Nor do I expect European troops to take their place. Europe does not really have a military agenda at all. In short, it's the beginning of the end for NATO
Tony, Welling, Kent, UK

I strongly agree with President Bush. If fact, if I were president I would withdraw US military forces from Europe and Asia. I would support Iraq and Afghanistan until they could support themselves, then pull those troops home too. It is time the rest of the world stood on its own feet an not expect the United States to care for it. During my extensive travels I found out the majority of Europeans hate Americans. Bring our troops home now!
Lynn Hanson, USA

It is alarming, living in a city that is experiencing a massive influx of defence-related infrastructure, to hear of the relocation of so many troops. What is not being explained is whether the troops are coming home or moving elsewhere. In Adelaide and the Australian outback, companies such as Halliburton are building railways, nuclear waste dumps tank and missile refurbishment facilities, and participating significantly in global activity. While it's great to see the troops moving from where they no longer need to be, it will be relieving to know that they're not going to where they're not wanted.
Richard Tonkin, Adelaide Australia

It's about time we Europeans realised that our own Armed forces should be sufficient Richard, Bridgend, UK

Its about time the Americans left Germany. S.Korea is a different story - there, the N. Koreans are still a credible threat to the south. Who are the Americans defending the Germans from, though?? It's about time we Europeans realised that our own Armed forces should be sufficient for World Policing and return us to a more stable Bi-Polar world.
Richard, Bridgend, Mid Glamorgan, UK

Mr Bush's proposals are one of the best so far. I think this will help protect America from terrorist attacks, and if only the same will be done to the other armies that are in both Iraq and Afghanistan that one too will be better.
ChernorJalloh, Almeria, Spain

The only loser on this will be all the small businesses in Germany (particularly) that rely on the spending power of the US military. Otherwise, it's a great big "win" for the US taxpayer and the military itself. As for NATO, its usefulness, or the US status within its organization, will not be affected. Unless, that is, one seriously thinks that France can be relied upon to do anything not in its self interest!
Mark M. Newdick, Danbury, CT, USA

Long overdue. It's time the US stopped subsidizing the European welfare states. After Schroeder's performance on Iraq, I have no problem at all with pulling US troops out of Germany. We should pull them all, including the troops in Spain and Turkey. The only problem is that Europeans might return to their old ways and start another world war.
Mark, New Jersey, USA

We just have to hope for complete withdrawal in the future JP, American immigrant to Germany

I am delighted by the idea that the US troops will largely be removed. Russia and France had removed their troops by 1994, leaving only the Americans and British. They are occupying military forces that invaded in 1945. The world has changed in 60 years, and there is has been no threat of war either from or against Germany in over a decade. Permanent removal is long overdue, and the fact that they are even here is seen simply as US domination and imperialism. They have started down the right path, now we just have to hope for complete withdrawal in the future...
JP, American immigrant to Germany

I hope they withdraw most of their troops from Germany. The German taxpayer has to pay a billion euros each year for them. That money would be a lot better spend on our own military. There is no hope for a complete withdrawal though, the Ramstein base is just too important for the Americans.
Dine, Germany

I hope the US will send to Darfur-Sudan some of those military personnel who are to be withdrawn from Europe and Asia. I think any US military intervention in Sudan will be welcomed by the vast majority of Sudanese people as we are fed up with the rule of those Muslim fanatics.
Bara, Sudan