Posted on Jun 28, 2018
Should the US permanently station troops in Europe? New US Army Europe chief weighs in
4.6K
44
18
11
11
0
Thoughts? We spent 5 years from 98-03. So I an a "Yes"... We should have never left... We need learn. Even after the wall fell, and 911, there are many reasons for us to have a robust presence in the region... Like Crimea... and Russia in general...
Should the US permanently station troops in Europe? New US Army Europe chief weighs in
Posted from defensenews.com
Europe
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 15
6
6
0
Good article. I don't think the question is an either/or - we have 1x rotational BCT and that works for the reasons cited and in the places those guys are operating. A balance is fine -- but I think my question would be this: do we have the right size / enough permanent forces, of the right capabilities mix, for a potential theater of operations?
(6)
(0)
5
5
0
4
4
0
COL Charles Williams I think there should be the right mix stationed there for any type of future operations (at least one or two BCTs). I think the cost definitely justifies the deterrence in that region for potential conflicts. Just my two cents. I enjoyed being station there for (3) years. It was great education and assignment (1977 to 1980).
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google