News How many soldiers the USA currently has on foreign soil?

  • Thread starter Adam
  • Start date

Do you know how many soldiers the USA currently has on foreign soil?

  • 50,000 in 25 countries.

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • 100,000 in 50 countries.

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • 200,000 in 100 countries.

    Votes: 5 26.3%
  • 400,000 in 135 countries.

    Votes: 11 57.9%

  • Total voters
    19
16
0
Phatmonky, no poking in the dark is required. This thread is not about me, nor is it about my opinions. It is about the numbers of US troops on foreign soil. Knowing my personal reasons is not required.
 
16
0
Tsunami said:
Well, then - again, what's the point of this thread??
As should be obvious from the opening post of this thread and its attached poll, the point is to discuss the numbers of US troops on foreign soil.
 

jimmy p

Gold Member
347
28
OK, lets add a swing to this thread. What are the REASONS for such large amounts of US troops in these numerous countries. ESPECIALLY the ones that dont need them there. Actually there is a US base about 5 minutes down my road by the sea. I dont know why it is there, cos there is a British Military port only 10 minutes drive away. Unless the US troops are posted there for training purposes, i dont see the use of them there. Just a waste of money and people IMHO.
 
S

schwarzchildradius

Personally I find it despicable that we have so many troops on foreign soil given the vast number of highly destructive weapons we have in our arsenals. Why risk human lives, unnecessarily? Just build a robot that is capable of driving into a foreign country, drilling for oil, and hauling the oil back out.
 
jimmy p said:
OK, lets add a swing to this thread. What are the REASONS for such large amounts of US troops in these numerous countries. ESPECIALLY the ones that dont need them there. Actually there is a US base about 5 minutes down my road by the sea. I dont know why it is there, cos there is a British Military port only 10 minutes drive away. Unless the US troops are posted there for training purposes, i dont see the use of them there. Just a waste of money and people IMHO.

I agree, we should reshape our forces in a manner condusive to aiding in security where it is needed in this new world.
The reason for the remainder of the troops is multiple, depending on the area in which they are.
You've got S Korea, that is obvious. You've got Iraq and afghanistan, obvious.
You've got japan and the phillipines (training, and a quick strike force in response to Korea (and some would argue China))
Forces are in Germany, and while we looked to remove them, there was worry from the German populous about having 2 cities' economies completely wiped out over night.
Then there is the rest, which includes peacekeeping, emabssy protection, training, etc.
The overall goal is security and stability for us and our allies in any region we wish to be part of. You can't have trade and security in a region that is unstable. Stabilization doesn't come with diplomacy alone, and sometimes it doesn't come with diplomacy at all.
 
Michael D. Sewell said:
I can't blame Adam for this thread, we were the ones who were foolish enough to waste our time. Best wishes to all.
God Bless America,
Mike
Alas, you are right. Who is stupider? The man who makes a worthless statement, or the man who then is naive enough to debate it :frown:
 
16
0
You've got S Korea, that is obvious.
Tell me why you think that. And I don't mean "Repeat some government policy for me". What do you believe makes such a deployment necessary?

You've got japan and the phillipines (training, and a quick strike force in response to Korea (and some would argue China))
Again, why Korea? Why China?
 
16
0
phatmonky said:
Alas, you are right. Who is stupider? The man who makes a worthless statement, or the man who then is naive enough to debate it :frown:
Which statement in this thread was worthless? Why do you consider it so? And do you ever do anything other than ad hominems?
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,405
4,653
Adam said:
As should be obvious from the opening post of this thread and its attached poll, the point is to discuss the numbers of US troops on foreign soil.
Lol, Adam. If you didn't have an opinion, you wouldn't have posted the poll.

Yeah, phat - same as always.
 

jimmy p

Gold Member
347
28
Uh, why would Germany's economy crumble? Methinks a little bit of (no offence) US arrogance is into play here. What are the EU for? what about the Internet? what about all the other huge trade opportunities that are available, i hardly think a rich country like Germany in a rich community (the EU) NEEDS the funds from a few thousand American troops.
 

selfAdjoint

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,764
5
Germany as a whole doesn't, but the little areas around those US bases have lived by supplying them for half a century. To lose them is painful, and "all politics is local." Germany is currently going through an economic downturn, just as the US has been, and the government takes heat there as here when they let a source of income slip away.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,405
4,653
jimmy p said:
Uh, why would Germany's economy crumble?
Like SA said - not the whole German economy, just the towns that the bases are in. Its a huge deal. As in the US, the whole point of getting a seat on the legislature (in practice) is to bring your local politics to a national stage. Even if the town only has 50,000 people, thats 25,000 votors and every one will be pissed if you let them close that base.

Like I said, same reason its so hard to close a base in the US.
 
Adam said:
Which statement in this thread was worthless? Why do you consider it so? And do you ever do anything other than ad hominems?


I'm MAKING this thread into an actual worthwhiel thread. Something you failed to do after 2 full pages. :rolleyes:
 
16
0
I'm still wondering why phatmonky thinks the world is in imminent danger from Korea and China.
 

kat

12
0
Adam said:
I'm still wondering why phatmonky thinks the world is in imminent danger from Korea and China.
I don't see him saying he thinks the world is in imminent danger from anyone, not even Korea or China...wanna dig that quote up for me? I'm really curious.
 
16
0
You've got S Korea, that is obvious.
You've got japan and the phillipines (training, and a quick strike force in response to Korea (and some would argue China))
Well, there are the words about Korea and China, and requiring a strike force in response.
 
Adam said:
I'm still wondering why phatmonky thinks the world is in imminent danger from Korea and China.
Kat is right. I didn't say that, and for that reason I refuse to jump down your typical straw man road.
 
16
0
In that case, Phatmonky, please tell me what you meant about Korea and China.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,405
4,653
Adam said:
Well, there are the words about Korea and China, and requiring a strike force in response.
Wow, two incomplete sentences qouted out of context. Wonderful.


hey look - more emoticons: :confused: :confused: :confused: <-me still waiting in vain for a point to this thread.

Adam, do you have an opinion to share or not?
 

jimmy p

Gold Member
347
28
hey, i thought i made this thread worthwhile... see the last page and we get a LITTLE bit of continuation.... jeez
 
mer·ce·nar·ies
One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,405
4,653
jimmy p said:
hey, i thought i made this thread worthwhile... see the last page and we get a LITTLE bit of continuation.... jeez
You made a good swing at it anyway... I think it was a lost cause right from the start though.
 
16
0
russ_watters said:
Wow, two incomplete sentences qouted out of context. Wonderful.


hey look - more emoticons: :confused: :confused: :confused: <-me still waiting in vain for a point to this thread.

Adam, do you have an opinion to share or not?
Russ_waters, I know it's difficult, but I ask you to remain on topic.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,405
4,653
Adam said:
Russ_waters, I know it's difficult, but I ask you to remain on topic.
I'm still looking for it. If I find it, I'll let you know. :rolleyes:
 

Njorl

Science Advisor
245
8
So, do you think Bonds will catch Willie Mays tonight?

Njorl
 

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top