I'm kind of puzzled. I thought all US embassies had at least one or two military assigned as security (or perhaps just for show).
Is that not true? Or do we only have embassies in 70% of the world?
I would presume Mr. Vance's only true objection is the troops deployed to perform combat and the troops deployed to prevent combat. The handful in each country performing embassy duty, etc. are only thrown in to impress the reader that the US is truly an imperialistic country.
Good question BobG. I too remember reading that all US embassies have at least one member of the Army, Navy, Air Force or Marines.
In more than 70% of the countries in that list, the only military presence is a handful of personnel attached to the embassy. And the US is not the only country to boast of such a list.
Yes, you're right. This fact (misleading implication) has been posted before...
There is a little more to it though: pretty much every country has military liasons on embassy staff as well. I went on a deployment to 8 different countries on the northern coast of europe and in every port visit, we were met by a military liason. But one LT who exists only to introduce the ship's captain to the mayor of the town and to tell the crew where to pick up women is even less of an occupying force than a squad of Marines who exist to guard the embassy door and put the flag up every morning.
Yep. Its a pretty lame attempt to justify the assertion that the US is an empire.
Looks like Ivan beat Adam to the punch. :)
Is that an ad hominem which has zero to do with the topic?
It seems one of our enemies’ thinks another enemy of ours enjoys having US troops in their country.
“A German government source suggested the news of a major pullout had not been welcome, according to Agence France Press. "Berlin continues to signal its interest in an American military presence in Germany and has emphasized that it can offer ideal conditions for bases," the source told AFP on condition of anonymity.“
And it is worth noting that Germany is home of the largest permanent detatchment of American troops.
So, you assume that a post makes for an opinion? What exactly did I posit with this post? Did I add any comments? I saw this article and thought it was interesting fodder for the forum. As usual you assume way too much.
JD didn't say anything in that post about your assumed opinion. Are you assuming that he's assuming it based on what I can only assume is your assumption about JD's assumed opinion of Adam?
Why not just post your opinion instead of opening the assumption can-o-worms?
It caught my attention as a good post for discussion. That's all.
Okay, Russ PM'd and argued that I was being unfair. Look, I post a lot of things that have nothing to do with my own opinion. When I have an opinion you can be sure that you'll hear about it. I do sometimes delay my responses or comments due to time constraints. Sometimes I will post a link and comment later. This is not intended to trick anyone, it is a time thing. Also, I still think it is fair to recognize that a link does not make for a opinion. In fact, even specific comments made to defend an opinion might only be an attempt to be fair to all positions. It does not mean that this is my only perspective or opinion on something. I see very few things in black and white. In fact I usually agrue against any black and white perpectives no matter what side they take.
I was mainly joking. My post was in reference to Adam's continual posting of news stories with enormous flaws. A child can see that only having one soldier stationed in a country is hardly tantamout to the US controlling interests in that country.
A day later...sorry I went off on you JW. I need to stay off of the forums when I'm already angry. It was a bad morning.
It's cool. It's cool.
I wouldnt quite label the U.S. as a true imperialistic power. Sure it has had its times of manifest destiny (Philippines, Mexico, attempted Canada) but its has taken more of the role as the world's police force instead.
Separate names with a comma.