US Military Deployment

**War&Politics** · June 04, 2009, 12:43 PM

I love how Google Earth means no dictatorship can hide it's weapons from the general public. I love the feeling of power that comes from sitting in my chair, and spotting all the world's "secret" military bases. So, I was busy reading up on the DMZ/Spying on North Korea through Google Earth, when I decided to look up on how many US troops were deployed in South Korea. You can find all the deployment numbers here.

Anyway, I've always known of the heavy US presence in places like Germany, Japan and England. However, what makes these figures interesting is just how many troops the United States has deployed there. The USA has 56,000 troops in Germany, just short of 10,000 in both Britain and Italy, 33,000 in Japan and 26,000 in South Korea. This is especially interesting if you consider that there are just short of 200,000 in Iraq and only 31,000 in Afghanistan.

Anyway, I was wondering why the United States has 85,000 troops in Europe, and only 31,000 in Afghanistan. Especially since the war in Afghanistan is going so badly. Could anybody enlighten me a bit as to what all those troops in Europe are doing? I understand the USA won World War II, and kept the bases it gained there for use during the Cold War, and that as a global power it probably wants to keep bases in as many countries as it can but why does the USA need that many troops in Europe today, especially when US military power is badly overstretched?

**Poach** · June 04, 2009, 12:57 PM

It is indeed a good question, many of their soldiers could be put to better use but you must remember the individual soldier.

They need time off, in non-deadly deployments. Pouring more of their forces into Afghanistan forces them to put their soldiers into danger more often. That soldier who should only be doing a combat tour once every 2 or 3 years finds himself doing the tour once every year!

It's a problem here in Britain, a lot of soldiers are leaving the military due to the pace they have to work at, and I assume the US is trying to avoid this.

**Farnan** · June 04, 2009, 12:59 PM

The troops in Europe get deployed to Afghanistan and back to Europe. They go through the rotation the same as the ones in the US.

**Stavroforos** · June 04, 2009, 01:02 PM

To send more troops to Afghanistan, like ones which are stationed in Europe, it would require Congressional approval and financial backing.

Also, I don't even think that many of the 85,000 troops in Europe are combat troops.

**War&Politics** · June 04, 2009, 01:06 PM

Very interesting. So I have two new questions based on your answers. Firstly, what do non-combat troops do? Secondly, what would be the ratio of troops on combat duty to troops on rotation out of combat. I.e. how many soldiers does it take in support positions and on rest leave (or whatever they call it), to put a single troop in combat in Afghanistan? (If that question makes sense).

**chamaeleo** · June 04, 2009, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by War&Politics

Firstly, what do non-combat troops do?

At least a few are wasting away here, posting on TWC...not that there's anything wrong with that...

**Justice and Mercy** · June 08, 2009, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by War&Politics

Firstly, what do non-combat troops do?

Lots of things.

Detectives, lawyers, engineers, mechanics, military police, pencil pushers of whatever sort, training instructors, etc.

**Captain Jin** · June 04, 2009, 04:20 PM

You need to consider most of the troops in Italy and Britain are Air Force, they don't serve a purpose in Afghanistan. A lot of the units in Germany are also support units who aren't required to be in Afghanistan. And those that are needed there are rotated there the same as units from the US, as Farnan said.