3 ms·

As a US citizen i would love to see Germany pay for their own defense. So sure have at it.

by cglace 8y ago

kevingrahl 8y ago
Ah man I hate that so many Americans seem to think they are paying anything for Germany’s defense. It’s just not true. Sure there are US troops in Germany but only because you need them to be here for your own purposes like that Rammstein base for example which is used to relay data so your drones in the Middle East can work. Of course you’ll have to pay for something like that one way or another. We even pay a percentage (~10%) of the construction cost of your bases. But you‘re not here for us. The majority of Germans is against US troops in Germany btw. We Germans don’t receive any kind of military financing from the US. In fact we pay you money in exchange for military equipment ($163.7 million in 2014 for example).
- cglace 8y ago
  I meant that Germany relies on the US for defense. Not that we directly pay you to defend yourselves. "We even pay a percentage (~10%) of the construction cost of your bases" Because that base is the cost of the US military. I think you are focusing too much on the US assets in Germany as the deterrent.
polotics 8y ago
As a non US citizen, may I ask you to please read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorbitant_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorbitant_privilege The US military defends this privilege. Everyone is open to the US dropping both its privilege, and its reliance on force to impose it. Since 2001 it's floundered mightily anyway.
- cglace 8y ago
  I'm not implying that the US should stop its military spending. Just that allies take their defense more seriously.
pasabagi 8y ago
Frankly, the only way the US could be said to 'pay for the world's defence' is if one could argue that the bulk of US military spending increases the security and safety of the world. Prima facie, this is obviously not the case. The big-ticket items, the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, have obviously reduced both regional and world stability, to the extent that bloody ISIS-inspired terrorist attacks are now a perennial threat in european cities. I'd hazard a guess that the Obama-era, 'drone strikes for jihadis' programme probably was a net gain for world security, but the whole point about drones and targeted assassination is it's very cheap. The other aspect of the US contribution to world safety is in the sense of a deterrent - the US keeps nations like Russia or China from getting too pushy. On the other hand, it has a habit of poking such nations in the eye with a stick. It's hard to see whether US actions have deterred Russian aggression, for instance, or whether they have actually provided the impetus for such aggression. Certainly, the latter interpretation is what the Russians think. So I guess the US does pay for a lot, but I feel it's more in the sense that the US pays for the world's healthcare. Being the sheep that gets fleeced the most doesn't put the less-fleeced sheep in your debt.

As a US citizen i would love to see Germany pay for their own defense. So sure have at it.

by cglace 8y ago

As a US citizen i would love to see Germany pay for their own defense. So sure have at it.

Ah man I hate that so many Americans seem to think they are paying anything for Germany’s defense. It’s just not true. Sure there are US troops in Germany but only because you need them to be here for your own purposes like that Rammstein base for example which is used to relay data so your drones in the Middle East can work. Of course you’ll have to pay for something like that one way or another. We even pay a percentage (~10%) of the construction cost of your bases. But you‘re not here for us. The majority of Germans is against US troops in Germany btw. We Germans don’t receive any kind of military financing from the US. In fact we pay you money in exchange for military equipment ($163.7 million in 2014 for example).

cglace 8y ago
I meant that Germany relies on the US for defense. Not that we directly pay you to defend yourselves. "We even pay a percentage (~10%) of the construction cost of your bases" Because that base is the cost of the US military. I think you are focusing too much on the US assets in Germany as the deterrent.

polotics 8y ago

As a non US citizen, may I ask you to please read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorbitant_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorbitant_privilege The US military defends this privilege. Everyone is open to the US dropping both its privilege, and its reliance on force to impose it. Since 2001 it's floundered mightily anyway.

cglace 8y ago
I'm not implying that the US should stop its military spending. Just that allies take their defense more seriously.

pasabagi 8y ago

Frankly, the only way the US could be said to 'pay for the world's defence' is if one could argue that the bulk of US military spending increases the security and safety of the world. Prima facie, this is obviously not the case. The big-ticket items, the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, have obviously reduced both regional and world stability, to the extent that bloody ISIS-inspired terrorist attacks are now a perennial threat in european cities. I'd hazard a guess that the Obama-era, 'drone strikes for jihadis' programme probably was a net gain for world security, but the whole point about drones and targeted assassination is it's very cheap. The other aspect of the US contribution to world safety is in the sense of a deterrent - the US keeps nations like Russia or China from getting too pushy. On the other hand, it has a habit of poking such nations in the eye with a stick. It's hard to see whether US actions have deterred Russian aggression, for instance, or whether they have actually provided the impetus for such aggression. Certainly, the latter interpretation is what the Russians think. So I guess the US does pay for a lot, but I feel it's more in the sense that the US pays for the world's healthcare. Being the sheep that gets fleeced the most doesn't put the less-fleeced sheep in your debt.