Trump orders big U.S. troop cut in Germany, official says

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, simple1 said:

US is a member of NATO. it is contrary to NATO membership for trump to unilaterally declare withdrawal of forces. The decision comes across as yet another act of spite against any one who critiques trump. The only party to benefit from trump's foolishness is Russia.

You think Russia is going to invade because a few troops were withdrawn? LOL.

[simple1]

10 hours ago, digger70 said:

That's just You're opinion,Leave some room for someone else's opinion OK. 

By the way you got a way with words ,Australian / English isn't my native tongue, it took a bit to sort it .

one could always use Plain English for us normal people.

Not saying you cannot have an opinion, but I do disagree with you.  English vocabulary I use and for people I know is 'Plain English'. Pleased to read you're able to 'sort it', will help to develop your English language skills.

[simple1]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You think Russia is going to invade because a few troops were withdrawn? LOL.

Did I claim US troop withdrawal with cause Russia to invade the EU? No.

[stevenl]

46 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You think Russia is going to invade because a few troops were withdrawn? LOL.

No, but shows again Trump's credibility when it comes to treaties.

 

I agree with withdrawal (how many exactly are withdrawn and how many moved?), but these decisions are not to be made unilaterally.

Edited June 10, 2020 by stevenl

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

Did I claim US troop withdrawal with cause Russia to invade the EU? No.

You said Russia benefits. How else could it benefit from the removal of a few troops?

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You said Russia benefits. How else could it benefit from the removal of a few troops?

By strengthen its strategical position. However with troops moving from Germany to Poland I don't think that is the case here.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

By strengthen its strategical position. However with troops moving from Germany to Poland I don't think that is the case here.

A few thousand troops makes zero difference in a Russia context, but I agree with your second sentence.

[stevenl]

19 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

A few thousand troops makes zero difference in a Russia context, but I agree with your second sentence.

Disagree with your first statement, it is not just about the troop movement and reducing, it is also about the, again, show of Trump ignoring his allies and partnerships and lack of strategic view. That strengthens not only Russia, also China.

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, stevenl said:

Disagree with your first statement, it is not just about the troop movement and reducing, it is also about the, again, show of Trump ignoring his allies and partnerships and lack of strategic view. That strengthens not only Russia, also China.

IMO you speak from the point of view that everything Trump does is bad. I try to look at it from reality and in reality a few thousand troops means nothing.

I suppose you think Trump just woke up one morning and decided to withdraw the troops, but he didn't. He had to consult with the military first.

Given the disgraceful lack of commitment by the Euro nations in NATO, they don't deserve a single US life being spent to protect them. In Trump's position I'd withdraw a lot more.

[micmichd]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's a long stretch to blame Trump for the ills of the US when they started long ago. As for trust, the US lost that when they ran away from Vietnam and abandoned those that had fought for them to the re education camps or death.

Wrong. 

Those GIs that changed sides in the Vietnam War did not have to go to education camps. They were fully aware that they were being sent to Vietnam to fight a racist war. And many resisted. 

[stevenl]

38 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO you speak from the point of view that everything Trump does is bad. I try to look at it from reality and in reality a few thousand troops means nothing.

I suppose you think Trump just woke up one morning and decided to withdraw the troops, but he didn't. He had to consult with the military first.

Given the disgraceful lack of commitment by the Euro nations in NATO, they don't deserve a single US life being spent to protect them. In Trump's position I'd withdraw a lot more.

"IMO you speak from the point of view that everything Trump does is bad."

I speak from a strategic point of view.

"I try to look at it from reality and in reality a few thousand troops means nothing."

You look at it from a single action point of view. And in that respect I agree, but strategically this is all wrong.

 

Oh, and brushing away criticism of Trump with 'orange man bad' is simply stupid.

Edited June 10, 2020 by stevenl

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, micmichd said:

Wrong. 

Those GIs that changed sides in the Vietnam War did not have to go to education camps. They were fully aware that they were being sent to Vietnam to fight a racist war. And many resisted. 

Why do you think he spoke of GI's? Let alone GI's that changed sides?

[micmichd]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Why do you think he spoke of GI's? Let alone GI's that changed sides?

I think he spoke of GIs because that's the common name for U. S. troops. Remember, the U.S. Army is a multicultural organisation, not a WASP organisation. Even former secretary of defense Colin Powell stands up against Donald Trump now. 

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, micmichd said:

I think he spoke of GIs because that's the common name for U. S. troops. Remember, the U.S. Army is a multicultural organisation, not a WASP organisation. Even former secretary of defense Colin Powell stands up against Donald Trump now. 

Sounds like he spoke of the south Vietnamese who helped the US, they were the ones who ended up in the education camps.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You said Russia benefits. How else could it benefit from the removal of a few troops?

No matter, can't be bothered to explain the obvious. 

[sukhumvitneon]

On 6/7/2020 at 8:43 PM, TEFLKrabi said:

Um, the euro Germans and Italians against some other Euros. We Euros would like to thanks the US for turning up late twice and wish they’d stop trying to start a Third World War. We’d be happy to defend ourselves as we’ve been busy making friends for 70 years, not making enemies. ????????‍♂️

"Turning up late" lmao you're lucky we even turned up at all to save your sorry butts twice.  America should've stayed out of both wars.

[micmichd]

20 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Sounds like he spoke of the south Vietnamese who helped the US, they were the ones who ended up in the education camps.

Does that make any difference? 

Anyway, OP is about the EU - a second-class competitor for the USA.  

[stevenl]

21 minutes ago, micmichd said:

Does that make any difference? 

Anyway, OP is about the EU - a second-class competitor for the USA.  

Yes, it makes a big difference. 

But agree, off topic.

[digger70]

6 hours ago, simple1 said:

Not saying you cannot have an opinion, but I do disagree with you.  English vocabulary I use and for people I know is 'Plain English'. Pleased to read you're able to 'sort it', will help to develop your English language skills.

That's fine,I don't ask anyone to agree.    I hope so , never to old to improve.  

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, micmichd said:

Wrong. 

Those GIs that changed sides in the Vietnam War did not have to go to education camps. They were fully aware that they were being sent to Vietnam to fight a racist war. And many resisted. 

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was referring to the locals that had aided the US such as the hilltribes.

Why would you even think I was referring to US deserters?

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, sukhumvitneon said:

"Turning up late" lmao you're lucky we even turned up at all to save your sorry butts twice.  America should've stayed out of both wars.

Hmmmm. Russia won WW2 in Europe.

However, the US did win the war for the British and French in WW1, or at least shortened it by at least a year.

 

America did nearly stay out of both.

[RobFord]

On 6/8/2020 at 7:29 AM, Boon Mee said:

Bailed the Euros out of two world wars. Enough is enough. 

 

MAGA 

The only thing that got the US into World War II was Pearl Harbour, then Hitler declared war two days later. 
 

And they made nothing but money fighting wars in foreign lands, and still do. The US economy is a war economy. 

[Redline]

21 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's a long stretch to blame Trump for the ills of the US when they started long ago. As for trust, the US lost that when they ran away from Vietnam and abandoned those that had fought for them to the re education camps or death.

I agree, but it’s been accelerated in these past 3 plus years-internally and externally   

[micmichd]

6 hours ago, Redline said:

I agree, but it’s been accelerated in these past 3 plus years-internally and externally   

The USA had occupied Vietnam for the sake of their domnio theory fear. And they lost against the National Liberation Army. 

How do you expect winners should treat losers and betrayors? 

[Redline]

4 hours ago, micmichd said:

The USA had occupied Vietnam for the sake of their domnio theory fear. And they lost against the National Liberation Army. 

How do you expect winners should treat losers and betrayors? 

You can look at the history of European countries dominating other countries for centuries.  Now it is done through economics ,mostly.  Right or wrong, this is how humans work.

 

All powerful countries make grave mistakes-and we can also look at religions in the same light.