German troops/ US military bases?????

[wrbones]

http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=594


German Troops to Guard U.S. Military Facilities



by Kevin Dougherty
Stars and Stripes
Saturday, January 25, 2003
WIESBADEN, Germany - The German Ministry of Defense will dispatch at least 2,600 troops to U.S. military communities over the next couple of weeks, a deployment that could begin as early as Friday, a ministry spokesman said Thursday.

Corresponding with the U.S. military buildup in the Middle East, the German troops would provide security and other force protection measures in the event of war with Iraq.The spokesman said the first contingent, numbering nearly 300, represents the vanguard of a larger force that would assume responsibility for force protection at dozens of U.S. installations between now and mid-February...

While the German government wants U.N. weapons inspectors to have more time to continue their work in Iraq, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has said his nation would safeguard U.S. bases and personnel if war breaks out in Iraq.

"Our chancellor has said we will support you in several tasks, especially in the vigilance of protecting U.S. Army barracks," said the spokesman, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The spokesman did not immediately know if German troops would also be dispatched to U.S. Air Force bases.

While the troop commitment could well surpass 2,600, the spokesman said some estimates in the German press are too high. One recent article stated that about 7,000 German troops would be sent to about 95 locations.German troops fulfilled a similar roll in the aftermath of the Sept. 11th terrorist attacks.

About 800 German soldiers were sent to help guard dozens of U.S. installations from October 2001 to February 2002.Since then, Army National Guard units from the United States have deployed to Germany to beef up security at U.S. bases and to give the active-duty force a break from guard duty. A task force led by the Pennsylvania National Guard is in the process of redeploying back to the United States after a six-month stint in Europe. Based on earlier assurances from the German government, the United States brought up the issue this past fall when Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld met with his German counterpart, Peter Struck, in Washington.

U.S. Army Europe and German military officials hashed out the details in meetings held in December and early January, said Elke Herberger, a USAREUR spokeswoman."The plan is to have them [all in place] by Feb. 17," Herberger said.German troops could begin pulling guard duty and going out on patrol as recently as Friday in a couple of communities, Herberger confirmed. That timeline might get pushed back a day or two as some last-minute issues are worked out, such as access to military dining halls and exchanges.

"The Bundeswehr is on standby" to deploy, Herberger said.

Officials are also working on how best to incorporate private security guards into the force protection picture. Some U.S. military communities are already preparing to receive the German troops.

The issue was a topic of discussion at town hall meetings Wednesday in Wiesbaden and Würzburg.In Wiesbaden, about 170 German soldiers are expected to provide security at a few locations, such as the Army airfield. That's roughly twice the number of guardsmen allocated to Wiesbaden last year.

Lt. Col. Dennis Slagter, commander of the 221st Base Support Battalion for the Wiesbaden community, said the Army had planned to deploy a National Guard unit from Puerto Rico when the decision was made to ask the Germans for assistance."This relieves the Army from having to send another National Guard task force," Slagter said.

As Slagter understands it, German troops will be completely responsible for the installations they end up protecting."They say, 'How can we provide good security if we don't have 100 percent control?'" Slagter said.

In Würzburg, Lt. Col. Scott St. Cyr, commander of the 101st Military Intelligence Battalion, told a town hall meeting at Leighton Barracks that a combination of U.S. and German soldiers will replace the Pennsylvania Guardsmen who have been manning the posts since August.

"Don't be alarmed if you see some German uniforms," he said.

[wrbones]

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=12131&archive=true

Monday, February 3, 2003


German troops to guard U.S. military facilities


By Kevin Dougherty, Stars and Stripes
European edition, Friday, January 24, 2003



WIESBADEN, Germany — The German Ministry of Defense will dispatch at least 2,600 troops to U.S. military communities over the next couple of weeks, a deployment that could begin as early as Friday, a ministry spokesman said Thursday.

Corresponding with the U.S. military buildup in the Middle East, the German troops would provide security and other force protection measures in the event of war with Iraq.

The spokesman said the first contingent, numbering nearly 300, represents the vanguard of a larger force that would assume responsibility for force protection at dozens of U.S. installations between now and mid-February.

While the German government wants U.N. weapons inspectors to have more time to continue their work in Iraq, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has said his nation would safeguard U.S. bases and personnel if war breaks out in Iraq.

“Our chancellor has said we will support you in several tasks, especially in the vigilance of protecting U.S. Army barracks,” said the spokesman, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The spokesman did not immediately know if German troops would also be dispatched to U.S. Air Force bases.

While the troop commitment could well surpass 2,600, the spokesman said some estimates in the German press are too high. One recent article stated that about 7,000 German troops would be sent to about 95 locations.

German troops fulfilled a similar roll in the aftermath of the Sept. 11th terrorist attacks. About 800 German soldiers were sent to help guard dozens of U.S. installations from October 2001 to February 2002.

Since then, Army National Guard units from the United States have deployed to Germany to beef up security at U.S. bases and to give the active-duty force a break from guard duty. A task force led by the Pennsylvania National Guard is in the process of redeploying back to the United States after a six-month stint in Europe.

Based on earlier assurances from the German government, the United States brought up the issue this past fall when Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld met with his German counterpart, Peter Struck, in Washington.

U.S. Army Europe and German military officials hashed out the details in meetings held in December and early January, said Elke Herberger, a USAREUR spokeswoman.

“The plan is to have them [all in place] by Feb. 17,” Herberger said.

German troops could begin pulling guard duty and going out on patrol as recently as Friday in a couple of communities, Herberger confirmed. That timeline might get pushed back a day or two as some last-minute issues are worked out, such as access to military dining halls and exchanges.

“The Bundeswehr is on standby” to deploy, Herberger said.

Officials are also working on how best to incorporate private security guards into the force protection picture.

Some U.S. military communities are already preparing to receive the German troops. The issue was a topic of discussion at town hall meetings Wednesday in Wiesbaden and Würzburg.

In Wiesbaden, about 170 German soldiers are expected to provide security at a few locations, such as the Army airfield. That’s roughly twice the number of guardsmen allocated to Wiesbaden last year.

Lt. Col. Dennis Slagter, commander of the 221st Base Support Battalion for the Wiesbaden community, said the Army had planned to deploy a National Guard unit from Puerto Rico when the decision was made to ask the Germans for assistance.

“This relieves the Army from having to send another National Guard task force,” Slagter said.

As Slagter understands it, German troops will be completely responsible for the installations they end up protecting.

“They say, ‘How can we provide good security if we don’t have 100 percent control?’” Slagter said.

In Würzburg, Lt. Col. Scott St. Cyr, commander of the 101st Military Intelligence Battalion, told a town hall meeting at Leighton Barracks that a combination of U.S. and German soldiers will replace the Pennsylvania Guardsmen who have been manning the posts since August.

“Don’t be alarmed if you see some German uniforms,” he said.

[greensideout]

Bones, got it figured out yet?

You post a lot of info, thank you for that. The big picture however, shows a flaw in the overall activation of the great plan to rid the world of evil.

How about this? We'll have the German troops sit on their a** while the American troops go to battle.

Does it take American blood to clean the earth or could we get a little better help from the freeloaders?

You seem to think that it's us, (U.S.) against them. To that I say, NO, it's the world and us against them. Or at least it should be.

Tell me, why is it "our" war?

Got it figured out Bones?

Semper Fi

[wrbones]

I'm not much good at guessin' games, bro. Clue me in, would ya! :D

[greensideout]

I'm not going to go head to head with you, you're a sharp guy.

So, here's my statement/question. Why do you think that the U.S. should go it alone?

[wrbones]

The U.S. has been attacked, numerous times. The perpetrators have been identified. Even under UN 'rules' every nation has the right to self defense. The UN has allowed Iraq and Al Queda to proliferate and to continue their terrorist activities for over two decades even after numerous attacks on the ZUS and other free nations. Other nations have been been co-operative or active in anti-terrorism programs since at least 9-11. If the UN doesn't want to do their job, they should not stand actively in the way of any nation's defense of it's property and people. The US, having abided by UN resolutions concerning Iraq over the last twelve years has left itself open to attack by it's declared enemy, Iraq and Al Queda among others. Do to UN ineffectiveness and prevarication, if they will not back us in this, they have no future use to any nation.

It hasn't been my intent to aggravate folks around here. I made some statements awhile back and have been posting information and links as a measure of having facts, figures and well known government and privately funded institutions and news reports from a variety of sources to back my previously stated positions concerning Iraq and Al Queda.

This has also allowed others to examine my positon and the facts and resources that I've provided for their own edification.

I have said repeatedly that war is not a good thing, but there finally comes a time when you must act. If the President has said that it is that time, and a preponderance of the evidence does supports his claim, then it is time to act. With the UN or wwithout it.

[leroy8541]

i have been talkng to some of the royal marines, and reading some of their posts on their websites they seem to think its our war, but they are warriors and ready to back the U.S. on the most part anyways. they don't much like our pres though.

[greensideout]

I accept your statment Bones and understand---but still have reservations about this war. Gut feeling if you will.
I have said why already---seems a little green in the cutting.
My big question is, where is everone else when the fight begins?
War costs a lot of lifes, and a bundle of U.S. tax dollors.
Go it alone??? Why? I know. Our friends want US to pay the FULL price. Jerks!

Take care Bro,

Semper Fi

[wrbones]

I don't disagree with much of that GreenSideOut. There are aspects of what may come of this that I wonder about myself.

And I agree with you about other nations wanting us to bear the brunt of almost any conflict.

There has been some speculation that a number of nations in the UN have decreased their defense spending as a direct result of our own willingness to help them militarily when they get in a jam, the Europeans in particular.

[Barrio_rat]

Personally, I hope the UN does take a stand against the US involvement in Iraq. It would give good reason to get out of it. I don't trust the UN and every conflict that we've been a part of under some UN resolution or guidelines, the United States has had to supply most of the equipment and man-power as well as the finacial burdon. Also, all of these conflicts - Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Somalia, Kosavo and Bosnia - have been basic faliures when the UN brings in their politics of when the United States needs to stand down from agression and pull out. Long and the short of it is, the UN will not allow us to finish the job. I doubt if they would allow us to finish it here as well. What I see happening here, with Iraq, is that the UN will 'allow' the United States, and any country willing to participate/help out, to take action against Saddam Hussein - but not under the UN banner. Once we have accomplished that mission they will be on a band wagon for us to get out and leave 'em alone.

As far as Germany sending their troops over here to safe-guard our bases. How about we let the Germans stay over there and bring our troops back? Let 'em know, either your with us or against us - if yer with us, come on to the Middle East. If yer against us - ya got NATO to yerselves.

My 2 pennies....

Semper Fi!

[firstsgtmike]

I figured it out. I forget what the question was, but I think I have the answer. Although at this point in time I don't know what is to come of it, or where I'm going with it.

I'm reminded of the story of the man who pondered about the problems in the world. He felt that if he could get away and meditate that he might find a solution. Suffering unspeakable hardships he crossed a desert, climbed a mountain and then meditated for twenty years. Finally, EUREKA! He had the answer. He came down from the mountain, relived the unspeakable hardships as he crawled his way across the desert to civilization.

Once there, he announced to the world that the underlying problem that affected all of the world's ills, was APATHY. But nobody gave a ****, so he returned to his mountain.

I'll start with my situation, and thus my perspective. I'm retired, with a guaranteed pension and thus able to live a comfortable life, equalled by only 10% of the population here in the Philippines.

My only concern is the solvency of the United States. If I encounter problems here, I can always find another place, another country. My income is guaranteed.

As I did, most people in the developed world work a lifetime to achieve my level in life. During that lifetime, for 99.44% of us, that is our primary concern. Personal? Yes. Selfish? Perhaps. But it is our primary motivating factor.

Yes, we can express concern about this, that, or the other thing. But few of us would give up what we have finally achieved to support those still struggling. If you have a problem accepting that, remember, you Christians, that Christ said, "Give all you have to the poor, and follow me." If you've done that, I'll accept your criticism and listen to your argument. You've joined the 0.56%. If not, like it or not, you're on my side of the argument.

I'm not a student of history, therefore, I can only go back so far.

Hitler had a dream of conquering Europe. He was permitted to do his thing until other people realized that what he was doing would also affect THEM. Ditto the Japanese in Asia. Then they were stopped.

Communism then became the threat to the industrial world's lifestyle. Battles and wars were fought to defeat communism and to protect our lifestyles. People and countries throughout the world recognized the potential risk to their living standards and their dreams of achievement. For the most part, they either assisted, supported, or accepted our efforts as being to their benefit as well as ours.

Vietnam, I think was a turning point. It was difficult to convince Europe and the rest of the world of the need to rescue Vietnam. They did not feel their personal lifestyles threatened by events in Asia.

Since then there have been countless civil wars throughout the world. None of which made the world at large feel insecure. There have been land grabs, one country fighting over boundaries with another. Since it only affected a small portion of our planet, no one cared or paid much attention to it.

Israel and the Palestinians? Those that pay attention and are concerned do so primarily because of the risk of esculation throughout the Arab world and how it will impact on them.

Of all the potential "hotspots", Iraq has our attention. Next, I believe, it will be North Korea.

The world's attitude is to leave them alone, because they are not affecting the rest of the world. Yet. They fail to see or appreciate the potential impact on their lives.

The American government, and a few other countries feel that it is best to nip it in the bud, to take on a "weakling" before it matures into a monster. We are having a hard time selling that to people who don't feel that their comforts and lifestyles are threatened.

Back to me. I lead a simple life. A lack of oil means I will switch from a car to a bicycle. No electricity means I will go to bed earlier at night. I don't watch tv, but I will miss my computer and the internet. As long as the U.S. is solvent, I will still enjoy the lifestyle of the top 10% here in the Philippines. Those that have less, will settle for what they have.

I can understand why the rest of the world is relatively unconcerned about the events in Iraq. They feel about Iraq the same way that Americans feel about what is going on in the Ivory Coast and other parts of Africa, South America, and the former parts of the USSR.

Ae they right to feel that way? Are we? I don't know.

On the internet, I read the U.S. newspapers, and until the Challenger pushed it off the front page, IRAQ was the dominent concern. Here, it is a very minor issue and doesn't get too much attention.

Me? I have faith that the U.S. and my pension will survive. Therefore, like the rest of the world, I'm primarily concerned with the local news and how it will affect me and mine.

It may not be something to brag about, but that's life.