Comment by HenryKissinger | Hacker News Reader

Comment by HenryKissinger | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Yes, there is a level of pettiness at work in this recent decision. What they want to do is shift to a rotational force model and deploy another Armored Brigade Combat Team to Poland every 9 months instead of having an SBCT in Germany. Meaning you have to move 2 ABCTs(~4500 Soldiers and all their equipment) in/out of the theater. The main tactical problem with that is that those forces don't have standoff distance from Russian A2AD weapons.

The underlying causes of these changes are Germany (1) continuing to spend less than 2% of GDP on defense; (2) its 2019 announcement that its pushing back its 2% target date from 2024 (agreed upon in 2015) to 2031; and, (3) continued German support for Nord Stream 2.

America is publicly penalizing Germany for the above reasons, which will likely disincentivize similar actions by nations receiving US troops from Germany and other host nations in Europe. Moreover, it seems some troops are likely slated for rebasing in the Indo-Pacific which will bolster US' power there.

I think the defense spending reasoning particularly ironic, given that half of the troops being moved out of Germany are going to Italy and Belgium, which spend a far smaller share of GDP on defense than Germany.

I think the move is really poorly thought out if the goal is to penalize Germany and discourage their behavior. Because what is Germany losing? The political embarrassment of having troops leave? Is that really worth the billions it will cost to move troops? Because I feel like if the US was willing to spend billions to apply political pressure to Germany there could have been much more effective ways to go about it. And then there's the damage this does to the security of Europe broadly. If this in any way reduces our ability to deter Russia, that hurts all of NATO, not just Germany.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Italy having economic problems and struggling with austerity measures back before covid? If a state is on the edge of bankruptcy comparing it to the strongest economy in Europe that isn't exactly a fair comparison is it?

> which will likely disincentivize similar actions by nations receiving US troops

The only thing this will lead to is a breakup or a massive relevancy drop of NATO. Europe is already emancipating themselves, the US will continue to lose influence - to the benefit of China and Russia, of course.

What about the US blowing up the Middle East, where Germany and much of European countries having to deal with the refugees as a consequence of those wars? I think countries like Germany have been penalised enough by the US for not picking up the slack for the refugee situation.

The flows of refugees from Syria to Turkey and Greece were largely due to the fallout of the Syrian Civil War, which the United States was neither responsible for starting, could not have prevented from starting, and could not have stopped once it began.

Most refugees in Germany and most of Europe come from Afghanistan and Iraq. Which nation(s) started the wars there?

Iraq started the Iraq war when it invaded Kuwait.

Al Qaeda started the Afghanistan war.

Heard of Timber Sycamore?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com