Poll: Half of German voters want US troops to leave the country

[Hnv1]

They do realize it means Germany would have to start spending real money into its defence?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

They do realize it means Germany would have to start spending real money into its defence?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Unfortunately there's some truth to what American NATO skeptics are saying. European countries should definitively invest more in common defense, rather than solely relying on the U.S. presence, which may very well not long that last.

[Kingpoleon]

They do realize it means Germany would have to start spending real money into its defence?

They can’t, due to restrictions the U. S. requires of them.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

They do realize it means Germany would have to start spending real money into its defence?

There's no evidence for that. It's more likely that Germany would simply allow its military to entirely atrophy without NATO. Germany isn't France, with extensive interests in its former colonies. Not is it the UK, which uses its military to compensate for lost prestige nor Poland which genuinely fears its eastern neighbour. The Germans genuinely don't care, and by this I mean the population as a whole; the German government and elite desperately want to become a "normal" country with a powerful military, which is why military spending has been creeping upwards.

[WMS]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, the fastest way to get to WW3 is removing the troops. They are there to deter Russia from salami slice attacks. If the U.S. pulls out of Europe, six months later there will mysteriously arise a 'east Latvian People's Republic', and a year later there will either be war with Russia or the collapse of NATO. Keeping some barrier troops there is much cheaper and better for everyone involved.

This is the sane and correct option. Continuous appeasement never, ever, works.

[GoTfan]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, that nuclear winter from the last war with the Soviet Union was really something, wasn't it?  

Anyways, the surest path to a nuclear war is when your adversary thinks you are either weak, or you don't have the will to resist them.  The stronger your deterrent, the less likely war is to break out.  Any response we make that gives Putin the impression that it is limpid is more dangerous than moving American troops from Germany and Italy to Eastern Europe in an effort to contain his ambitions.  

Yes because, increases in strength and "deterrents" worked brilliantly during the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't it?

[Frodo]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, that nuclear winter from the last war with the Soviet Union was really something, wasn't it?  

Anyways, the surest path to a nuclear war is when your adversary thinks you are either weak, or you don't have the will to resist them.  The stronger your deterrent, the less likely war is to break out.  Any response we make that gives Putin the impression that it is limpid is more dangerous than moving American troops from Germany and Italy to Eastern Europe in an effort to contain his ambitions.  

Yes because, increases in strength and "deterrents" worked brilliantly during the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't it?

Krushchev was emboldened as he perceived President John F. Kennedy as inexperienced, and -given his first impressions of him before the crisis- weak.

I highly doubt the Cuban Missile Crisis would have happened had Nixon won the election in 1960.  

[GoTfan]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, that nuclear winter from the last war with the Soviet Union was really something, wasn't it?  

Anyways, the surest path to a nuclear war is when your adversary thinks you are either weak, or you don't have the will to resist them.  The stronger your deterrent, the less likely war is to break out.  Any response we make that gives Putin the impression that it is limpid is more dangerous than moving American troops from Germany and Italy to Eastern Europe in an effort to contain his ambitions.  

Yes because, increases in strength and "deterrents" worked brilliantly during the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't it?

Krushchev was emboldened as he perceived President John F. Kennedy as inexperienced, and -given his first impressions of him before the crisis- weak.

I highly doubt the Cuban Missile Crisis would have happened had Nixon won the election in 1960.  

And Kennedy responded by ratcheting up the tension. At one point, the world was literally one person away from a nuclear war. In the end, it was negotiation that ended the crisis.

Intimidation and blackmail never, negotiation and sanity always.

[Karpatsky]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, that nuclear winter from the last war with the Soviet Union was really something, wasn't it?  

Anyways, the surest path to a nuclear war is when your adversary thinks you are either weak, or you don't have the will to resist them.  The stronger your deterrent, the less likely war is to break out.  Any response we make that gives Putin the impression that it is limpid is more dangerous than moving American troops from Germany and Italy to Eastern Europe in an effort to contain his ambitions.  

Yes because, increases in strength and "deterrents" worked brilliantly during the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't it?

Well, yeah? If not for the American show of strength, the Soviets would have installed missiles in Cuba, reducing the decision making time in a crisis before DC gets annihilated, and incentivizing a first strike on those positions. Odds would have increased dramatically of real nuclear war in a false alarm situation or any crisis really.

[America Needs R'hllor]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, that nuclear winter from the last war with the Soviet Union was really something, wasn't it?  

Anyways, the surest path to a nuclear war is when your adversary thinks you are either weak, or you don't have the will to resist them.  The stronger your deterrent, the less likely war is to break out.  Any response we make that gives Putin the impression that it is limpid is more dangerous than moving American troops from Germany and Italy to Eastern Europe in an effort to contain his ambitions.  

Yes because, increases in strength and "deterrents" worked brilliantly during the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't it?

Well, yeah? If not for the American show of strength, the Soviets would have installed missiles in Cuba, reducing the decision making time in a crisis before DC gets annihilated, and incentivizing a first strike on those positions. Odds would have increased dramatically of real nuclear war in a false alarm situation or any crisis really.

This, lol. Kennedy managed to resist pressure to attack and risk an actual nuclear war, and instead went on a path of showing strength and moving the ball in the Soviet park. It was a brilliant move, probably the only one of his term. So moving American troops into Eastern Europe would likely help contain Russian agression.

[TheSaint250]

The argument that Russia only gets provoked when American troops are in border countries or NATO expands into border countries is absolutely ridiculous. There’s a reason as to why Russia has invaded Georgia and Ukraine; if we weren’t in Estonia, for example, Putin would invade by claiming the Russians there are being persecuted.

It’s thanks to NATO and military strength, including military troops in Poland and other European nations, that Russia is kept at bay. Take them all out or significantly weaken NATO, and we will have starte the next major war.

[PSOL]

I really don’t think the Russians would risk war if military bases were moved to Poland, we already have a missile base there. Would also promote the Germans to build a military and get better social unity.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I want US troops to leave Germany permanently too, but by that I mean move them closer to the Russian border, probably Poland -not leave Europe altogether as the isolationists would have us do.  

You really want a second cold war that lasts decades. You know we have real problems to solve like climate change, housing shortages, low paying jobs. We don't need to create new ones where only the military industrial complex benefits. It's time for your side to lose power.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, that nuclear winter from the last war with the Soviet Union was really something, wasn't it?  

Anyways, the surest path to a nuclear war is when your adversary thinks you are either weak, or you don't have the will to resist them.  The stronger your deterrent, the less likely war is to break out.  Any response we make that gives Putin the impression that it is limpid is more dangerous than moving American troops from Germany and Italy to Eastern Europe in an effort to contain his ambitions.  

Yes because, increases in strength and "deterrents" worked brilliantly during the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't it?

Well, yeah? If not for the American show of strength, the Soviets would have installed missiles in Cuba, reducing the decision making time in a crisis before DC gets annihilated, and incentivizing a first strike on those positions. Odds would have increased dramatically of real nuclear war in a false alarm situation or any crisis really.

This, lol. Kennedy managed to resist pressure to attack and risk an actual nuclear war, and instead went on a path of showing strength and moving the ball in the Soviet park. It was a brilliant move, probably the only one of his term. So moving American troops into Eastern Europe would likely help contain Russian agression.

Your information on the Cuban missile crisis is a little outdated. The Soviets got exactly what they wanted from it, the removal of the Jupiter missiles from Italy and Turkey. They didn't care that the removal was secret and made it look like Kennedy totally won.

[America Needs R'hllor]

Not to mention there really isn’t a purpose in Germany, this isn’t the Cold War. It would make logical sense to build in Poland no?

That would be barely a step short of a declaration of war on Russia.

They already did that by interfering in our recent election, and having their Manchurian candidate installed in the Oval Office.

Coll. I'll sit out the Third World War you so desperately want, thanks.

Yeah, that nuclear winter from the last war with the Soviet Union was really something, wasn't it?  

Anyways, the surest path to a nuclear war is when your adversary thinks you are either weak, or you don't have the will to resist them.  The stronger your deterrent, the less likely war is to break out.  Any response we make that gives Putin the impression that it is limpid is more dangerous than moving American troops from Germany and Italy to Eastern Europe in an effort to contain his ambitions.  

Yes because, increases in strength and "deterrents" worked brilliantly during the Cuban Missile Crisis, didn't it?

Well, yeah? If not for the American show of strength, the Soviets would have installed missiles in Cuba, reducing the decision making time in a crisis before DC gets annihilated, and incentivizing a first strike on those positions. Odds would have increased dramatically of real nuclear war in a false alarm situation or any crisis really.

This, lol. Kennedy managed to resist pressure to attack and risk an actual nuclear war, and instead went on a path of showing strength and moving the ball in the Soviet park. It was a brilliant move, probably the only one of his term. So moving American troops into Eastern Europe would likely help contain Russian agression.

Your information on the Cuban missile crisis is a little outdated. The Soviets got exactly what they wanted from it, the removal of the Jupiter missiles from Italy and Turkey. They didn't care that the removal was secret and made it look like Kennedy totally won.

Not really. The Americans removed some missiles, sure, but many others remained in Europe, while the Soviets couldn't put a missile anywhere close to America, and both sides were now aware of the missile gap. I think a testament to how humiliating this was to the Soviets is that Khrushchev was forced to resign just two years later. He lost a lot of support over it.

[OSR stands with Israel]

They do realize it means Germany would have to start spending real money into its defence?

and stop freeloading

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

They do realize it means Germany would have to start spending real money into its defence?

and stop freeloading

Meme

[Torie]

That big Air Force base that the US has in Germany is valuable to the US. It has been used for the US adventures in the Mideast and Libya. Yes, I know, some, with some justification, would characterize them as misadventures.