It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

American bases in Europe and the war on terror

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:
cjf

posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skibum



Umm…just why were are there US and NATO bases in Europe…please explain to a simpleton.



Originally posted by Skibum
Do you mean why were there bases in the first place or why are there bases still?


Why were there bases to begin with--



Originally posted by Skibum
First reason would be after being defeated in WW2 there was a need to keep troops in the area in order to keep the germans from rebuilding and starting up again.
Then after awhile the focus was shifted to defend against a possible Russian invasion.


Your statements (contained in brief above), are congruent with ‘reality’, my question, unfortunately, was posed to one individual who, only through personal opinion, claims…..


Originally posted by Simon666
Another ridiculous claim is a “security umbrella” effect and an “innovation diffusion” effect, the notion that US troops in German, Japan or elsewhere is necessary for "stability" for investors is based on nothing. There has been no instability in Germany or Japan, and US troops have nothing to do with that, the political system and inherent stability of those countries themselves has. Same goes with the "innovative diffusion" effect. Anyone who isn't brainwashed by rightwing rethoric can see right through it.



Originally posted by Skibum


Actually, it's not that simple. I'd bet on Stalin.


If that happened Europe would be speaking Russian.


Yes, yes and yes.

The poster to which I was answering has not addressed the instability caused by the nations he mentioned nor has addressed the stability given by the US and NATO allies, and can not give (using his/her line of logic) examples other than statements as to alluring to the idea ‘instability has never existed and stabilty can not be attributed to the US, NATO etal blah blah blah’. Etc. And I quote:


Originally posted by Simon666
There has been no instability in Germany or Japan, and US troops have nothing to do with that, the political system and inherent stability of those countries themselves has.


(unless he wants to tell us a story about pirates again... Caution: next comes Peter Pan) How large of a gross fals statment does one need?


Originally posted by Skibum
I think they are there now because it makes it much easier to support operations when you are closer to where those operations are.


This is a large element, but the downsizing of bases is an issue as being addressed inside this topic as is why are bases (US bases) in Europe to this day... France kicked them out and so on.... (added economic values, lease incentives, stability etc)


.




posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Don't forget that American companies and corporations also financed the Nazi party and then the Nazi war machine during WW2


One more thing, I think we Europeans should dismantle the European Union, or at least make some big big changes to it. It has not benefited me or anyone I know, the only thing I can see that the EU has done for my country, is that we've got more taxes and laws that restrict, limit and deny many various things.
It's a completly pointless organisation in my opinion, Norway did the right thing when they decided not to join the EU


[edit on 19/8/2005 by SwearBear]



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by cjf
This point, your point, is weak and is founded upon what….no real convictions?

Based upon incidents exactly like those I gave. The pilots who killed those skiers did get away with it through kangaroo court, as did those who killed the South Korean schoolgirls. You just happen to hammer on the fact that in another example I gave about Okinawa, they were actually convicted, while I never claimed otherwise and just gave it as example of an event that can catalyze an existing grievances against the bases into actually mobilizing public opinion against it. I don't know what exactly your point is against all of this - I suspect the classic nationalist denial and condoning of any wrongdoing - but it seems in any case a lot weaker than what you say my point is.



Originally posted by cjf
Your kidding right?... and you insulted me? This is a standard fallacious argument based upon false logic and assumptions which is commonly referred to as “Confusing Correlation And Causation”…Einstein look it up.

Indeed, and I used it as an example of the cofusing correlation and causation technique used in your Heritage Foundation article. Now put two and two together - you already seem to have the basic intelligence of recognizing my example as fallacious - and acknowledge your precious article uses the same misleading techniques and arguments.



Originally posted by cjf
Umm…just why were are there US and NATO bases in Europe…please explain to a simpleton.

So that in the event of communist and fascist uprisings after WWII the US could intervene quickly and later to take an aggressive stance against the Soviet Union. There has however not been any such revivals and only in Italy the communist party has been of some influence for some small amount of time. Germany has been politically stable ever since WWII, not because of US troops but because of the merits of German politicians. US troops were at best an insurance policy for the unlikely case something would go wrong.

[edit on 20-8-2005 by Simon666]


cjf

posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666
Based upon incidents exactly like those I gave. The pilots who killed those skiers did get away with it through kangaroo court, as did those who killed the South Korean schoolgirls. I don't know what exactly your point is against all of this
.


Your source:



It's a shameful verdict," said Klaus Stampfl, son of one of the victims. Stampfl attended a few sessions of the Camp LeJeune, North Carolina, court martial of Capt. Richard Ashby, who was found innocent Thursday of involuntary manslaughter and other charges.
"It was certainly not a serious trial, not as serious as it would have been in Italy," Stampfl said. "I had the impression that they were almost having fun at the hearings."


Victim’s son, maybe just a bit biased for opinion (yet quoted), yes.

The article posted about Korea is biased single source.

Here’s a differing ‘opinion’ about S. Korea.



They fail to realize the reason those soldiers are there in the first place. The overwhelming majority of these protesters are too young to remember the Korean War, too young to know what it's like to live day to day fearing for your life without access to your basic needs. In the bloody war fought from 1950-1953, Koreans frantically fled their homes in search for refugee camps, safety, shelter, and food. By the end of the conflict over 3 million Koreans had perished, and guess who was responsible for repelling the Northern aggressors? The United States of America.
Source



Originally posted by Simon666
I suspect the classic nationalist denial and condoning of any wrongdoing - but it seems in any case a lot weaker than what you say my point is.


Your point is devoid of congruencies of facts, rather consists of a few small instances which overblown and full of misinformation concerning foreign bases which speak to nothing more than a generalization. However, most are invited, relied upon, welcome and when closures are announced, err… heavily campaigned against closure upon announcement by the host(s).


Originally posted by Simon666
Indeed, and I used it as an example of the cofusing correlation and causation technique used in your Heritage Foundation article. Now put two and two together - you already seem to have the basic intelligence of recognizing my example as fallacious - and acknowledge your precious article uses the same misleading techniques and arguments.


No, no where near the extremes of your fallacious logic.

I hope you can look beyond your ‘basic intelligence’ and start looking at the larger scene, the other sources are mentioned prior above and beyond ‘Heritage Foundation’ which you dislike so much. Simple economics would dictate a general understanding.


Originally posted by Simon666
So that in the event of communist and fascist uprisings after WWII the US could intervene quickly and later to take an aggressive stance against the Soviet Union. There has however not been any such revivals and only in Italy the communist party has been of some influence for some small amount of time. Germany has been politically stable ever since WWII, not because of US troops but because of the merits of German politicians. US troops were at best an insurance policy for the unlikely case something would go wrong.


You leaving out a great deal of history, but know at least I understand your point, however do not agree.


.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludo182
I'm French and i'm quite outraged. What would the American people think of French or German military bases on its soil? Europe and the US must treat each other as equals. We, Europeans, have not to accept every single American will.


*Contains factitious rhetoric*
You must understand, we are the great American Empire. We are stronger than Rome and Jesus combined! We are the new World Imperial Leader! We have been, read U.S. history. Every major event in American History is expansive cultural control. So put down that Le BigMac and open your eyes. We own the world. And within our lifetime, you will see all of which occurs in a one-governed world lead by U.S.

Welcome to AmeREICHa. Can I take your order?



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by cjf
Victim’s son, maybe just a bit biased for opinion (yet quoted), yes.

Wow, you single out just one guy's opinion and consequently state that because of that any statement that the verdict is unjust is "just opinion" of a victim. Anyone who looks into the case just a bit deeper than you just did, thinks it is shameful and that things were covered up. Do some research about the incident and then come back, but don't ever come telling me that things being seriously wrong in that case is just opinion.




Originally posted by cjf
The article posted about Korea is biased single source. Here’s a differing ‘opinion’ about S. Korea.

Like the US bailing them out, justifies driving over schoolgirls and getting away with it. You are really getting lower and lower in my eyes. In order to "counter" - or whatever you think you're doing - my example of an event that can mobilize public opinion against those bases, you think that the outrage over such events is but "biased opinion" and that repeating the reason why they are there suffices to end all criticism.



Originally posted by cjf
However, most are invited, relied upon, welcome and when closures are announced, err… heavily campaigned against closure upon announcement by the host(s).

You mean by the morally and otherwise corrupt political elite in those countries who think they can dismiss public opinion when it suits them.

[edit on 21-8-2005 by Simon666]



posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Having served over seven (7) years in Germany, I hope they finally get us out of there. Germany was a great country and most of the people were just fantastic and I did have a wonderful time. I do not understand why we are still there. The last time I heard, the French were still in Germany, and so were the British. With the wall and fence down, we need to pull the rest of our troops out. When they come back to the world, we need to send NATO troops home from here, also.


cjf

posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666
Wow, you single out just one guy's opinion and consequently state that because of that any statement that the verdict is unjust is "just opinion" of a victim. Anyone who looks into the case just a bit deeper than you just did, thinks it is shameful and that things were covered up. Do some research about the incident and then come back, but don't ever come telling me that things being seriously wrong in that case is just opinion.


No here is another:




"I was just shocked," said Sindy Renkewitz. "I cannot understand that the man that killed 20 people, among which were my dad and sister Mindy, that this man is not guilty."


And another from your article:



Rita Wunderlich, wife of a gondola victim: 'I buried my husband a year ago. Today it was his second funeral.'


Another source...bias?....



In Italy, leading Communist MP, Armando Cossutta, described it as a slap in the face for Italy and for the memory of the victims
(Link)


Look, what happened can not be considered ‘good’ in any opinion (regardless of the fence), but to think you have any insight to the trials other than ‘CNN’ via Reuters/AP and is just plain lunacy using examples from a second hand third person report given a single solitary ‘snap shot in time’.

How is it you would want to discuss only the 'human' side without the purported facts and focus on articles only about emotional outcomes? Yet, bring in the political side as fact? Try looking further.



During the trial at Camp LeJeune, N.C., defense lawyers
contended that the incident was purely an accident. They
said the cable was not shown on Ashby's map; the plane's
altimeter malfunctioned; and an optical illusion made the
pilot think the aircraft was flying higher than it actually
was….

A military court martial acquitted Ashby of recklessly
causing 20 skiers deaths when his EA6B Prowler sliced a
gondola cable, sending the car they were riding in plunging
370 feet to the slope below. Seven Germans, five Belgians,
three Italians, two Austrians, two Poles and one Dutch
skier died in the accident Feb. 3, 1998.


The acquittal outraged Italians and family members of the
deceased, according to press reports. CNN reported that the
president of the province where the accident occurred
called it a "punch in the stomach," and Italy's prime
minister, Massimo D'Alema, was disturbed by the outcome.

D'Alema told reporters Italy seeks justice and will explore
all legal ways to ensure those responsible are held liable….

…. "We hope that the procedures put in place now will prevent
this from taking place in the future," Cohen concluded.
(Link)](Link)

I know the above information went under ectreme scrutiny before release plus....

Where is the outcry and representation from the 'other' countries? Not in your 'unbiased' article that is one item which is sure.



Ashby offered a conciliatory statement to the jury after the verdict had been read out.

He said: "Personally, I want to do what's right. I take responsibility for what I did or did not do. I wish we would have done things differently."
The videotape was shot from the cockpit of the Prowler during part of the flight by Ashby's navigator, Captain Joseph Schweitzer.
He said: "Personally, I want to do what's right. I take responsibility for what I did or did not do. I wish we would have done things differently."
(Link)
(emphasis added)

Is justice not about learning and taking individual responsibility when it is applicable? I guess all that is missing is the ‘money’, right? Money, money and more money...the families (Italians) tried to sue for min US$5 million for each....that's not punitive (how could it be), that is simple greed.


Originally posted by cjf
The article posted about Korea is biased single source. Here’s a differing ‘opinion’ about S. Korea.


How did they ‘get away with it’? or is it….


Originally posted by Simon666
I never said they weren't convicted…..



Originally posted by Simon666
….where they raped a 12 year old schoolgirl and nearly got away with it


Leads to petty insult….


Originally posted by Simon666
"Nearly got away with it" is different from "got away with it", Einstein.

Back to original my point and your lack therof….


Originally posted by Simon666
Like the US bailing them out, justifies driving over schoolgirls and getting away with it
(emphasis added)...for you Einstien.


Originally posted by Simon666
You are really getting lower and lower in my eyes.

I will not be loosing sleep, yawn….


Originally posted by Simon666
In order to "counter" - or whatever you think you're doing - my example of an event that can mobilize public opinion against those bases, you think that the outrage over such events is but "biased opinion" and that repeating the reason why they are there suffices to end all criticism.


Yes, as much as one can discount the entire Catholic Church and thier 'bases' over actions of the priests. Millions upon, millions are in the employ of both spoken organizations, yet both are under the applicable ‘law’…yes? Probalbly something you can understand...why are/is the majority blaming all of Islam for the actions a few radicals?...because?....how does it fit? You logic so far bunk! Pirates..Pffft...ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz

BTW the topic of the thread is about US/NATO bases in Europe, not trying all US international bases on the actions a a few (very few) and what the ‘locals think’ period. Economics is the player, money, money and money......oh, and mmore money

On topic:

German mayors: troop withdrawal will be disastrous
(Link)



"It's a very difficult situation," he added. "But if it leads to the Americans withdrawing from Germany, we and the Poles will welcome them. We need Nato." (Link)




Germany is particularly concerned about closures. It is home to the U.S. European Command and hosts about 80,000 of its 116,000 troops.
(Link)



Originally posted by Simon666
You mean by the morally and otherwise corrupt political elite in those countries who think they can dismiss public opinion when it suits them.




The suggestion that the proposed United States changes are "payback" for Germany's position on Iraq is wrong. The German government understands that our review has been under way since early 2001, well before 9/11, let alone Operation Iraqi Freedom. (Link)



Originally posted by Simon666
You mean by the morally and otherwise corrupt political elite in those countries who think they can dismiss public opinion when it suits them.


Which ‘one’ country does not do as you have stated above? Please enlighten us genius?




.



posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by cjf
Ashby offered a conciliatory statement to the jury after the verdict had been read out.

Is justice not about learning and taking individual responsibility when it is applicable?

They were acquitted the first time, during the second court martial they were however convicted when it was discovered that they destroyed a videotape that had been recording from the plane on the day that the cable car wire was clipped. Both were found guilty of obstruction of justice and dismissed from the marines; the pilot served six months in prison. They were guilty, that their altimeter "malfunctioned" was merely a very convenient excuse, they knew all too well they were flying too low and had done something wrong, or they wouldn't have destroyed the flight recorder. They were CRIMINALS and MURDERERS and you're insinuation that the families of the victims are all about greed is an insult, hey, would you want me calling the 9-11 victims family members dirty greedbags for getting several million each? You're getting lower and lower with each post you make.


talkleft.com...



Originally posted by cjf
On topic:

German mayors: troop withdrawal will be disastrous

Hey, I could try your extremely despicable argumentation style and call it merely OPINION of quite obviously BIASED people.

[edit on 25-8-2005 by Simon666]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join