The US WANTS to be in those bases because it gives them a lot of soft power in foreign relationships, and a base to project power in the part of the world.
If the US gives up NATO, you can also kiss goodbye to any sort of influence on the European countries decision making, as well as any resemblance of military logistic in that part of the world (as well as any sales of military equipment to European countries as it’s starting to happen, with many countries investing in their own military industrial complexes). This is why in the past 50 years, regardless of the party, every single US president supported NATO regardless of spendings. It took a moron to say they want out
The US WANTS to be in those bases because it gives them a lot of soft power in foreign relationships
I’d say that military bases within European countries is the definition of projecting hard power. If 40 000 soldiers in a military base are called ‘soft power’, what’s hard power then? Nuking the city?
The US WANTS to be in those bases because it gives them a lot of soft power in foreign relationships, and a base to project power in the part of the world.
If the US gives up NATO, you can also kiss goodbye to any sort of influence on the European countries decision making, as well as any resemblance of military logistic in that part of the world (as well as any sales of military equipment to European countries as it’s starting to happen, with many countries investing in their own military industrial complexes). This is why in the past 50 years, regardless of the party, every single US president supported NATO regardless of spendings. It took a moron to say they want out
I’d say that military bases within European countries is the definition of projecting hard power. If 40 000 soldiers in a military base are called ‘soft power’, what’s hard power then? Nuking the city?