US considering troop withdrawal from Germany, report says

Source

EU officials are reportedly trying to figure out if a US evaluation of the impact of moving troops from Germany is a negotiating ploy ahead of a NATO summit in July. The US Department of Defense has rejected the claims.

The US Department of Defense is examining options for withdrawing US forces stationed in Germany after President Donald Trump expressed interest in such a move, The Washington Post reported on Friday.

The newspaper, citing anonymous sources familiar with the evaluation, said officials were analyzing the cost and consequences of shifting either some or all 35,000 US troops to the US or Poland. Top defense officials, the paper said, have not been involved in the analysis.

The US Department of Defense rejected The Washington Post's report on Friday evening. A Pentagon spokesman told German news agency DPA that the National Security Council had not received any cost analysis from the Ministry of Defense for relocating US troops stationed in Germany.

Trump had reportedly showed interest in shifting US forces during a White House meeting earlier in the year after he had voiced shock at how many US troops were in Germany, the largest contingent of US forces in Europe.

Spokesmen for the National Security Council at the White House and the Pentagon said the Defense Department regularly analyzes the US troop deployments.

Serious consideration or negotiating tactic?

European officials have learned about the analysis, according to the newspaper, and are trying to ascertain whether it reflects Trump's intentions or is part of a negotiating ploy ahead of a July 11-12 NATO summit in Brussels.

Neither German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen nor her US counterpart, Jim Mattis, mentioned such a plan after their meeting last week.

The president has repeatedly condemned European NATO allies, in particular Germany, for failing to spend the NATO target of 2 percent of GDP on defense.

Germany spent 1.24 percent of its GDP on defense in 2017 and plans to hit 1.5 percent by 2024. Poland spent 1.99 percent of its GDP on defense in 2017 and is set to join only three other European NATO countries ― the United Kingdom, Estonia and Greece ― that have met the alliance target.

wait...they actually PAY. All this time people saying socialism would fail if we pulled out of their countries, yet they pay?

anyway...its whatever Russia wants at this point

Gee I wonder what guy whose name starts with a P and ends with an N is pulling the strings to get Trump to do this thing that the Russians have wanted since the end of WW2.

ha! just all pure coincidence is all

Honestly, I'd be all for shutting down some of our military bases around the world if it were to coincide with defense spending cuts. Which it wont.

It's about time the EU deadbeats were forced to pay their fair share of defending themselves. They committed to 2%, they should be expected to meet that commitment. I, for one, am glad to have a POTUS that stands up for the US taxpayer.

By my math, it's been 73 years since the end of WW2. Isn't it about time the haughty and sophisticated Europeans quit looking to their ol Uncle Sam to pay their bills?

We aren't in those countries for those countries. We're there for our own self interest. smh

Nobody's forcing the US to send in more and more troops to established NATO Bases, the US are the one going to the European countries and asking if they can deploy several thousand more troops every once in awhile.

You can't argue with people that aren't educated in a subject.

@deeliman: You got a more credible source

Also a "report" ?

This seems fishy and considering that there is not fact-checking when it comes to news that goes against Trump, I will take this on face value until more reliable sources either denies or confirms it.

Is the washington post credible enough? If you google the headline you get a couple more articles.

Who are "according to people familiar with the work." these people?

It´s funny with the Washout post, they always manage to reveal "top secret" stories but it´s always People or some anonymous with no other evidence to back it up. The level of journalistic work sure have declined.

But not a bad idea if troops were pulled back home, Germany and France seem to believe they can go on alone so let them.

EU countries committed to spending 2% by 2025, and originally the 2% target was just a guideline. The US isn't in Europe to defend us. Most of the personnel in Europe are logistical. Furthermore, without those bases in Europe it would become impossible/hugely expensive for the US to do anything in the middle east. Drones wouldn't be able to use as well. So, these bases are very important for US power projection.

European countries want the bases there as a deterrent, and because it boosts the local economies. It's a win win situation.

Or did you honestly think the US would spend billions of dollars for us out of the kindness of their hearts?

LOL he gets his info from Fox News.........

I'm starting to feel that way too.

Especially considering the trade war. Either he is an idiot or he consciously set his allies up to be against the US before attacking China in a tradewar. And that is very odd. Why wouldn't he have gotten his allies involved with that? Instead he chose to upset his allies, and then China. That doesn't make sense to me. Can someone else make sense of that?

@KungfuKitten: I'm sure the answer is something about 4D chess :p

We need money for the Space Force.

need to background on this 2% figure as it seems arbitrary.

is there some specific threat level or something that it is tied to? in a hypothetical world where there is total peace, 2% would be massive overkill and on one of total war, laughably low.

It's not a commitment, it's a guideline. Countries didn't have to meet the 2% goal.

If you don't spend 2%, you get bitched about on Twitter.

Good EU should ban all US militairy in there lands anyway. But they don't want too because they can't control/spy anymore.

With that, defense spending can also move even more down. No need for military anymore.

Besides the fact you are not paying any bills for Europe. Because Europe doesn't need your military to function. You need your military there to project power over world parts. Probably never thought about this right? Maybe sitting on that island screaming how everything around your boarders is out there to get you isn't actually what's going on in the real world.

What Europe should point out is that US needs to reduce there army to fall in line with any EU country, that there US basis's should be removed from EU soil so they no longer have power projections there or any influence for that matter. And with that cutting military spending even more.

What trump is doing is simple, he wants to reduce his military spending and i completely agree on this department. I think military is the main money dump what prevents the country from advancing towards EU levels of society.

However Europe isn't going to pay US bills for there power projections.

Europe should start to search for stronger relationships with Russia over the US and boot US out entirely if that's needed.

We need NATO now more than ever. Russia is more powerful now than it was at the height of the Cold War. The KGB could have only dreamed of getting one of their operatives into the White House during the Cold War. But Putin has pulled it off.

That would hurt them economically but that's okay with me. Also they don't need to be there to spy. smh............