Unprecedented: German General Appointed Chief of Staff of US Army Europe

originally posted by: pennydrops
NATO?, Im talking about specific US military bases and equipment. NATO is another topic altogether. Would you like our nukes near your house?

Are your governments asking for the nukes to be moved elsewhere? NATO is not another topic. Technically this entire line of questioning you and Bj have gone down is another topic, but NATO is very much on the topic of US troops.

Just trying to make you see it from our point of view.

Would you like our nukes next to your home?????????

Has your government asked them to be removed?

PS, there is no excuse for your attitude. If someone else is being like that with you. Do not respond likewise as that makes you as bad as them.

I will no linger converse with you as I feel you cannot empathise.

No, it's because you just want to complain and not answer questions. A member with the same opinion as you calls others morons for having a differing viewpoint and threatens war and killing Americans, and says a general working with Americans should be KILLED, yet I am the bad guy. Hilarious, you back him up and high five him, then talk to me about empathy? Quite disgusting.

This is insane! This has to be the most blatant public step for one world government Ive ever seen. The Obama administration has fired so many top brass military leaders its scary and on top of it they are replacing them with foreign military generals!!!!..... ARE YOU SERIOUS! This is the start of merging military's into one a world Army. Truly scary times for humanity.

a reply to: LibertyPD32

Its the longest first step I've ever seen considering it's been happening since WWII.

a reply to: pennydrops

Iraq had their own army too.

I super shortened whats been going on in the world, but in all reality it started well before WWI. My point is that this is unprecedented because we have news agencies all around the world reporting that the U.S hired a German general and all that leads to is further mixing of nations armies. Before we were kept in a constant state of silence and suppression for matters not even close to this in magnitude but now they flaunt it on all the media outlets they own and soon the people are going to think this is how its supposed to be. Once again truly scary times. reply to: Zaphod58

originally posted by: oblvion

That is not true. Ike was in overall command of all allied forces, not a British general officer. A US commander was in command of US and allied forces. The orders might have been handed down by a Brit, but they were penned by an American.

So its ok for a US general to command us? But not the over way around?

Hypocrisy!

Total Hypocrisy!

Dont like it F on off out of Europe.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

Ooohhh scary. Who saved Europe's ass multiple times already?

The British along with American, Canadians and Australian allies......o and Russians

a reply to: LibertyPD32

They didn't hire him, he was assigned as liason by the German military. There was no suppression of stories like this in the past. It's just like when Russian bombers fly along US airspace. When the media needs a story they hype it up as something big and scary, when the reality is that it's a routine thing.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
America DID save you in WW2,

But dam well not on its own. It would have been up **** creek too if not for its own allies helping.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
America DID save you in WW2,

But dam well not on its own. It would have been up **** creek too if not for its own allies helping.

100% D-Day didn't happen without everyone involved. I never stated america did it alone. The fact still remains it's highly likely all of Europe would have been behind the Iron Curtain had america not joined. There was nothing left to stop them.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

Ooohhh scary. Who saved Europe's ass multiple times already?

The British along with American, Canadians and Australian allies......o and Russians

The Russians is what America saved them from. Russia would have beat Germany and marched to the Atlantic and all of Europe and most likely England would have fallen under the Iron Curtain.

America was not needed to beat Germany, but they absolutely did save Europe. Canada and Australia were, have been, and are instrumental allies and they bought victories with the blood of their heroes. Any American who showed the level of ungratefulness towards them that the people have shown in this thread towards the US are in need of a lesson.

Also anyone saying Russia is not a threat need only look at the Ukraine and Georgia, and the fact Eastern European countries are begging for a US presence.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
but they absolutely did save Europe.

With allied help.

Thats not what your getting and is pissing everyone off. You make it seem USA were the sole heroes and the rest of us just "support" at best non entity at worst.

At the end of WW2 Britain had similar amount of men and equipment in the field as the US. Its only later did the USA take over as sole superpower.

a reply to: crazyewok

Regardless of what people think, this is yet another example of a non story turned into a huge event. I have no problem with foreign officers helping to run things. It helps build a better understanding for when we need to work together.

Most people have no clue just how prevalent foreign troops on US soil, and even in exchange programs with the US actually is.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: crazyewok

Regardless of what people think, this is yet another example of a non story turned into a huge event. I have no problem with foreign officers helping to run things. It helps build a better understanding for when we need to work together.

Most people have no clue just how prevalent foreign troops on US soil, and even in exchange programs with the US actually is.

I personally have no issue with it. US/France/Germany/Australia/Canada/New Zealand/South Korea/Japan ? We are all basically in the same boat and have the same goals, we all value freedom and share pretty strong bonds (even if we do bicker) Id rather see us all work together and have each others backs. I don't mind who a defence jobs goes to as long as they have the qualifications for the role.

a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly. It builds trust as well as knowing the true capabilities of an ally, so if the time comes that they do have to fight together they have a better idea of who can do what.

Heinz Von Gufeenstafen, Oops guess I need to brush up on my german, Russian, and Chinese now. Since this is were the USA is heading. Sarcasim. No I dont really think its that big of deal, unless we were at war with Germany, then I could see an arguement

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
but they absolutely did save Europe.

With allied help.

Thats not what your getting and is pissing everyone off. You make it seem USA were the sole heroes and the rest of us just "support" at best non entity at worst.

At the end of WW2 Britain had similar amount of men and equipment in the field as the US. Its only later did the USA take over as sole superpower.

Except I said they had allied help. What is pissing them off is my suggestion they needed the US .. sorry, they DID. That does not mean the US did it alone, I never said that, I never implied that. The people who responded to me were of the opinion this German general needs to be KILLED for working with the US, and the US needs to leave Europe or they will kill all our soldiers.

I get it just fine, the US did not ride in tell everyone else to sit back and let us handle it. We did ride in, join our allies, and together kick some serious ass, and if the US did not join in then Europe was completely screwed.

Why do Europeans look down on Americans who don't think the French saved our asses in the Revolutionary War and then they do the exact same thing with WWII?

Sorry, facts are facts. Without the French there would be no America as we know it today, and without the US there would be no Europe as we know it today. That does not mean in any way, shape, or form that either party takes all the credit.

As to the OP this is exactly what I would like to see more of.

originally posted by: pennydrops

originally posted by: oblvion

originally posted by: pennydrops
Easy solution,

Get out of Europe, saves your tax dollars, saves EU tax dollars (cost us money to have you there....disgusting as Im sure you would agree if the roles were reversed).

Everyone is happy (apart from the US govt, but really, who gives a damn about them?


US army EUROPE????? what the chuff is that? We have our own army thanks. The US really needs to get its troops out of other countries. I know the govts agree to this but the people here just grow a hatred for it. Not good for EU and US relations at a people level.

I so wish we would just bring all our guys home, and GTFO of other folks lands.
We(the US) have no business keeping a standing ARMY for geopolitical propoganda or force projection needs in any other country on earth.

We have by far the biggest, most powerful Navy ever assembled. If we needed to bring war to any corner of the globe, we could do so.

I say we bring all our guys home, and let the rest of you guys sort out your differences on your own.

Just my 2 cents, ignoring it is probably the best option. I am nobody to decide these things for entire continents and countries.

I totally agree, the US is serving no purpose at all in the EU. They are not doing anything apart from costing us (EU) and you (US) taxpayers hard earned money.
We dont need you, you dont do anything anyway, so what is the point????

Not to mention all the crap the local residents near the bases have to put up with.

I just dont get it. My people, those of the US, are cut from a different cloth than other peoples of the world. We are always right, even when we contradict ourselves, we actively seek conflict at every turn, not just on the world stage, but in every day life the country and world over. We demand that other countries let us garrison our ARMY in their lands.

Let the Brits demand at the tip of a spear, that they can garrison a standing ARMY on US soil.......last time that happened we had serious issues.

Yet we have no problems doing the same thing.

Sometimes it just seems like colonialism didnt die, it just evolved to fit into new times.

Once again just my $0.02, ignoring it is probably the best option, as I do not understand the want of domination over your fellow man, so cannot pass judgement on those that do it, it is an enigma to me honestly, this lust of gold and control, I cannot wrap my mind around it.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: oblvion

That is not true. Ike was in overall command of all allied forces, not a British general officer. A US commander was in command of US and allied forces. The orders might have been handed down by a Brit, but they were penned by an American.

So its ok for a US general to command us? But not the over way around?

Hypocrisy!

Total Hypocrisy!

Dont like it F on off out of Europe.

I am not saying we should be able to command your forces, but I am adamant you dont command ours.

I am not implying that your(what ever country you are from)people would misuse my battle buddies against their own best interest, for the gain of them and theirs people. I am saying it is a fact, documented quite well throughout history, that people will misuse other peoples stuff for their own gain. Hence the American saying "beaten like a borrowed mule".

I do not advocate Americans leading your soldiers, if it happens though, I will not complain much honestly. I will pitch a fit though, if my battle buddies are under the command of anyone other than an American. I dont care if he was chinese, russian, quatari(did I spell that right, how do you say "the peoples of quatar if not quatari?)hell even cuban, and then became an American joined our military and now leads Americans. He is an American. I want my battle buddies led and commanded by an American at all times in all cases.

I am sure everyone feels the same about their guys though. So I have no problems understanding others not wanting us leading their boys.

Seems like a simple concept to me.

a reply to: oblvion

Those generals are all under the US chain of command, giving lawful orders from US commanders. This has been going on for years. It's not like a British general can suddenly order a unit to deploy and go fight for the Queen.

You and any battle buddies have probably already been under a foreign general and didn't even know it.