President Donald Trump plans to pull about 20,000 U.S. troops from Europe, according to a leading Italian news agency.

A European diplomatic source told ANSA that Trump, who entered office on Monday for a second term, wants to reduce the American contingent in Europe by about 20 percent and plans to ask for a “financial contribution” for the maintenance of the remaining troops.

  • puntinoblue@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 hours ago

    The US uses their military bases to extend their sphere of influence: which makes me think that maybe they should pay the host countries not viceversa. If they invade Greenland the number of their bases in the EU will go to zero.

  • jaxxed@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Well that could be tough for Europe to quickly adapt to … but ok.

    Will they pull out of Greenland?

  • viking@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    Good riddance, we tried to get them out of Germany for decades. American soldiers off base are the worst. Drunk driving their oversized trucks, starting fights in village pubs, and generally being aggressive and obnoxious. And whenever something actually happens, they are picked up by on-base military police, get a slap on the wrist, and keep at it. Due to some bs agreement they are untouchable by German police, and only really end up in court if someone died.

      • viking@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Yep, it’s the only instance where they might, but even then it’s no guarantee. Closing the bases would be awesome for anyone but landlords in the areas who are charging extortionate rates to base personal rather than offering affordable housing to locals.

        • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          21 hours ago

          rather than offering affordable housing to locals

          Let’s be honest, this wouldnt happen. Ideally the base would close and basically have an entirely new village built on it, flooding the local market with available properties that helps reduce the cost of housing - an abundance of supply over demand.

          That said, the locals might have mixed feelings as US airmen will likely contribute to the local economy in some way.

          • viking@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            That’s exactly what will happen, since we have laws in Germany against leaving homes unoccupied (with severe fines), so if the landlord can’t find a tenant willing to pay the extortionate rate, they have to lower the rate closer to market or risk paying triple of what they might be missing out on otherwise.

    • Mubelotix@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      This is why we don’t allow foreign bases in France. Also, alliances are frail and cannot be depended on

  • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Donald Trump is going to kill millions, maybe billions of people in the long run from the collective effort of all his combined actions, and it sounds like the majority of people will be applauding the entire time right up to the very moment it’s their head on the block. Tankies, conservatives, and centrists cheer as Earth burns.

    • Kissaki@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Asia has a Chinese Taiwan threat. It’s a very different situation to Europe.

      What do you want to happen or change in Asia? Removing troops from where and to what degree?

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          I hate to be the “ra ra america” guy here, but you know that any country we have a base in can throw us out, right? Our base leases can all be terminated by the host country pretty much whenever they want, and we’ll leave (with oh, just one or two historical exceptions, but what’s a little bribery of corrupt puppet regimes between allies?). This even happens sometimes, too - it’s partially why we withdrew from Afghanistan.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    As an American, I could get on board for lower military spending, fewer people deployed, and Europe building up their own defense to make up the difference.

    But I don’t trust for one second that Trump is doing this for anything good. Maybe Putin thinks Europe will pay less attention to him if they have to make up for lost American defenses.

    • Nalivai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Well, right now Putin is the only one Europe needs to be defended from, so they will still devote full attention. More, probably, since Europe will be forced to hasten the military policy renewal

  • Zip2@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    Good and please clear out your airbases over here too. And take your shit cars with you.

  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I wonder. Maybe Putin and Trump had a backroom deal that if US pulls out of Europe, then Putin will go on the negotiating table to end the war in Ukraine, and Trump is using the argument of “free riding Europeans” as convenient pretext. Trump is showing to Putin that the West is de-escalating by withdrawing American troops. After all, the Russian president is complaining of NATO encroachment. American troop withdrawal is indeed evidence for de-escalation.

    Then at the same time, Trump wants to pivot against China. The US troops in Europe could be redeployed to Asia.

    This is simply my speculation and there could be more to this than we would know publicly.

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      also a good reason to make such a fuss about greenland:

      well if they won’t let us protect them, perhaps we should just leave NATO…

      smoke mirrors and bullshit, it’s all they have

      • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Trump is not as dumb as people make him out to be (he would not remain a billionaire if he’s that dumb), I reckon he’s got some sort of plan (or rather a concept of a plan). His wildcard, unpredictable foreign policy harkens back to Gaullism, when Charles De Gaulle pulled France out of NATO, because he is simply annoyed by the Anglos, and France is being France who loves being maverick pursuing its own independent interest. In the end, France pulling out of NATO was a nothingburger, because France has still been a nominal military ally of the West throughout and France eventually returned to NATO. That being said, Trump could be doing something similar and maybe he doesn’t even realise it. Trump’s current wildcard foreign policy is still driven by nationalist self-interests, which is follows oddly similar pattern to De Gaulle’s.

        • Kissaki@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          22 hours ago

          I don’t think supposedly remaining a billionaire necessarily correlates with intelligence.

          With enough money or influence, you get money. No need to be clever or sound.

          • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            There are plenty of rich people who lost their wealth-- mostly due to stupidity because they became decadent and resting on their laurels, believing their luck will last forever, like Charlie Sheen. Trump could have done the same and he has had plenty of lawsuits. And yet he’s still here. Edit: going on tangent, that being said, I would argue it’s far easier to lose money than to keep them.

            As someone mentioned, Trump’s antics are all smoke and mirrors for distraction. But didn’t realise that someone totally dumb would not be doing that all. The greatest trick that the devil pulled is make everyone believe he is stupid and harmless.

            • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              18 hours ago

              A multi-millionaire can lose their money, a billionaire gets more than they can spend just by having it

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          maybe he doesn’t even realise it.

          sure buddy. 4d chess. from a man who suggested bright lights and bleach for covid.

          doubt.

          • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I don’t want to give too much credit to Trump, but there is realpolitik reason for him wanting to take Greenland and retaking the Panama Canal. For him, it is securing perceived gap in American national security, but he’s doing it in old school imperialist way as if there’s no international law (think of Putin’s reason for invading Ukraine because he thinks the latter is the soft underbelly from which to attack Russia, even though before the invasion everyone thought it would be stupid of Putin to invade a country that historically hated Kremlin).

            Anyhow, as Sun Tzu said: never underestimate the opponent. There’s a reason Trump is a billionaire and the leader of the most powerful country in the world, while both of us are not any of those. People can be dumb, but not that dumb. People have also thought the same of Hitler, and he caused massive chaos before going down stupidly.

            • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              but there is realpolitik reason for him wanting to take Greenland and retaking the Panama Canal.

              and it makes sense if you’re a twelve year old, or, if you want to destroy NATO and our country’s other alliances.

              He’s wrecking the fucking place, you dolt.

              Cancelling NIH funding, leaving the WHO, jerking around our allies with bullshit… open your damned eyes.

              • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                Look, learn the basics of realpolitik, then come back. I’m not defending Trump, I’m explaining why he does what he does. A lot of people don’t understand what dry analysis is especially in realpolitik. I linked an article from an esteemed site explaining Trump’s motivation so that’s a start.

                Is what Trump doing stupid? Sure. But for him it’s not with respect to his nativist, nationalistic agenda. He’s going back to old school imperialism and unilateralism of a more powerful imperialistic nation state. People said the same of Hitler as being stupid, but no one can’t doubt he had been influential. In spite of losing the attempted coup, Hitler had been able to use the political system to gain power after all, and enact his own vision of ultra nationalism and shape the world to his liking. Still sounds dumb, does it? It’s the same with Trump. And again, Trump is the one in charge, not you nor I, so he’s not dumb in his own right.

                Keep underestimating the opponent, and you’re the one who will actually lose. A lot of people underestimated Hitler and his partner Mussolini and look what happened. You can imagine what Trump must be saying to us now that he’s back again in power.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  22 hours ago

                  Dude Realpolitik is not about ignoring effects getting rid of all your allies has, making yourself a pariah. That’s not dry analysis it is, as you correctly point out, stupidity.

                  If you had invoked geopolitical “realism” (as they call it) you would have a point: Because that stuff is inherently stupid. But it’s also not Realpolitik, which does not actually eschew ethics, it just has its own particular branch (Verantwortungsethik), prioritising ethical means over ethical ends.

  • Redex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Honestly? Sure. The NATO shield will still exist so it doesn’t affect the security of European countries much, and it only reduces American military influence abroad by reducing their capabilities to respond to events in the region, so what do we care? We should be investing more in defense regardles of whether the Americans pull out or not.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    The US doesn’t have troops in Europe to benefit Europe though. They have troops in Europe to benefit the US.

    Europe should be totally fine with them leaving. Get off their territory, give up all that power projection and hamstring yourself.

    What a weird thing to threaten.

    • Aniki@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Well i argue that it’s more complicated than that … Europe really did profit tremendously from the relationship with the USA after WW2, but now … not so much anymore, i guess. If one looks at recent developments.

      • MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        That will depend on whether Trump knows Putin has something planned for Europe now that his lapdog is in the White House

        • Jhex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          23 hours ago

          What could Putin have that could threaten Europe when he has been unable to make inroads in Ukraine for years?

          • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            19 hours ago

            It’s depressing, but the US is the largest supporter of the Ukraine war effort. Europe has been able to rely on a US-backed NATO for a long time, and boy oh boy is trump making it clear what a bad idea that was. If the US stops supporting Ukraine, even just materially (i.e. we keep supplying intelligence and similar), the war will turn depressingly quickly. Hopefully they’ve been able to inflict enough damage on the russian economy that they’ll agree to a cease fire, but no european nations are equipped to fight the war of attrition Ukraine has turned into. Even with the US + Europe together, we’re barely able keep up with the ammunition demanded by the war.

  • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    As a European, I say fine and sure.

    But then we also withdraw from the Plaza accords.

    Ever since China has winded down their US debt holdings, we have picked up the tab and the EU countries are now the largest foreign holder of treasuries.

    Time to start selling.

    And also, we only buy from European defense firms, no more spending on American defense.

    • Caveman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 hours ago

      If there are no buyers for treasuries it’ll tank the dollar value and go a long way to remove it’s status as a reserve currency. Trump insist on rocking the boat that has been working for the US.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      3 days ago

      what people don’t understand is that europe must say goodbye to america, things are turning.

      we (europe) should start considering being more independent (from the USA) and maybe, just maybe, actually talking to our eastern neighbours.

        • meowgenau@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          2 days ago

          No he means Putin and Lukashenko, the real vicitms of the war in Ukraine. Everyone knows that Zelensky is no angel.

          • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            39
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            The Vietnam war was 50 years ago. I think there was quite a bit of criticism of the Iraqi invasion which while already a bit dated is a more recent comparison, no?

            • eatMyTaxes44@futurology.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              20 hours ago

              Why go that far? There were still supporting a genocide last week.

              Ah wait germany is doing that too. Nevermind

            • eatMyTaxes44@futurology.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              20 hours ago

              Beside, it’s not that old so that people don’t get cancer from agent orange anymore.

              What a scummy country, the USA

            • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              21
              ·
              2 days ago

              yes i was referring to the vietnam one because otherwise people say “muh duh it’s because 9/11 and they had to defend themselves”.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 day ago

                Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Anyone who says that is trying to revise history. Bush lied about Saddam having a WMD program to send us to Iraq. It’s the perfect example.

              • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                20
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Well Vietnam is harder for most people to compare because most of us weren’t alive back then. So I don’t have a point of reference for how the media treated that conflict.

                There’s always some kind of flimsy justification for war but we all know that Iraq and 9/11 were in no way related outside of the propaganda. Did people really take those things seriously in your community?

                I’m in the US but even here many people rejected this reasoning, although you are right that the media and our political leadership were complicit. This was one thing that led to Obama’s election because he was one of only a few people in congress who opposed the war.

          • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            The US didn’t start the Vietnam War, maybe that’s why. They certainly exacerbated it and prevented it from being resolved, but it was just a civil war (kind of, Vietnam had just been divided into two countries, so I don’t know if it technically counts as a civil war still) at the beginning.

      • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Nice suggestion. Let’s abandon our strongest ally who are in an identity chrisis for literal terrorists. Thanks, Lemmy.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          America’s only real ally is Israel, the rest are just “allies” as long as it’s convenient.

        • valtia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Your “strongest ally” just removed 20% of its troops and wants to extort you for the other 80% in its obligations to said alliance

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      But then we also withdraw from the Plaza accords.

      The Plaza Accord ended in 1987. It was replaced with the Louvre Accord.

      • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        You are right. But I still see most people refer to the Plaza accords. I guess those are just more well known.