|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources |
|
|
|
U.S. Troops in Europe: Pull Them Out Now
| Article
# : |
12507 |
|
|
Section : |
CURRENT ISSUES
|
| Issue
Date : |
7 / 1987 |
2,757 Words |
| Author
: |
Melvyn Krauss
Melvyn Krauss is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution,
Stanford University. |
After World War II, a devastated and demoralized Western Europe felt vulnerable to a Soviet invasion. To pacify European anxieties and deter a potential aggressor, the United States agreed to station the equivalent of six infantry divisions in Europe. According to President Dwight D. Eisenhower, first supreme commander of Allied forces in Europe, the U.S. troops would remain there for a limited time only. When the economies of the European allies recovered, it was envisaged that the U.S. troops would be brought home.
"When I went back to Europe in 1951, to command the forces of NATO," wrote Eisenhower in 1963, "the United States agreed to supply the equivalent of six infantry divisions which were to be regarded as an emergency reinforcement of Europe while out hard-hit allies were rebuilding their economies and capabilities for supporting defense. Now, 12 years later, those forces, somewhat reinforced, are still there."
Today, some 36 years after Eisenhower took up his NATO command, more than 340,000 U.S. troops remain in Europe despite the fact that the aggregate European gross national product (GNP) now equals that of the United States. The cost of these troops to the U.S. taxpayer is enormous. The U.S. government spends approximately $130 billion to $160 billion per year to support NATO. If the United States withdrew from Europe, a significant portion of this money could be saved and used for other purposes. For example, as a result of the savings derived from a U.S. troop withdrawal, taxes could be cut, the federal budget deficit reduced, or an antimissile system such as SDI financed.
Benefits vs.
... (1968 of 16532 Characters)
Read Full Article
|
|
