Responding on behalf of Sen. Kerry to President Bush’s announced military redeployment that involves, among other things, bringing home a large number of troops from Europe, Former Everything (and Hopeful Secretary of State in Waiting) Richard Holbrooke said, astoundingly, that “it sends the message that this administration continues to operate in a unilateral manner without adequately consulting its closest allies.”
Holbrooke was also in a snit (as Mickey Kaus noted) because “I know that the Germans are very unhappy about these withdrawals.”
So now we’re not only supposed to get permission from the Germans and the French et. al. before we send troops anywhere but also before we bring them home? Do we really want people who regard the latter as unacceptably “unilateral” running the country?
WooHoo!
We finally have an exit strategery after 50 years!
For those that would argue that the war in Iraq is “racist” (which it most certainly isn’t), I pose this question:
Why do Europeans demand that American troops protect them, but not Iraqis?
Found this comment at Bros. Judd:
Drudge is now reporting that Kerry will, at his VFW speech tomorrow, criticize this announcement and advocate leaving **all** the troops in Germany and Korea as a means of shoring up our alliances. How’s that for a winning issue? I’m beginning to agree with Orrin that this is the worst run campaign ever.
The proposal to remove forces from Germany was made several years ago due to the incredible expense of maintaining facilities and family members in Germany, England, and Italy. It also has become very hard to train due to limitation placed on US Forces by NATO countries. The idea is to bring back the families to the US and just have remote locations in Germany (more like the deals we have with Qatar and Kuwait).
On another note, supposedly the Kerry campaign does not want another round of base closures to lower military costs.
I guess when you support huge tax increase, the idea of cutting the costs of government does not have to be considered.