Fact Checking: Ron Paul’s strange claim about bases and troops overseas, WaPo

[Domalais]

So, he tells us how many troops in some places, but um, is 1 troop= 1 person?!?

Yes.


You can't assume that every country that has members of the armed forces in it has a military base. For example, many US embassies are protected by Marines. This is, IMHO, a perfectly legitimate use of the military overseas. Contracting or otherwise providing that security privately would be vastly more expensive, and adding a 'security' wing to the State Department is simply not an option.

Those who oppose American Empire building should not use the numbers of 'bases' or quantity of countries 'occupied' as their statistics of choice. The problem isn't the countries with 1, 4, 10, etc. military personnel. Rather, it's the large basings: Germany, Italy, Japan, etc. that need to be addressed.

[jct74]

here's a rebuttal to the WaPo piece:
http://lewrockwell.com/vance/vance278.html

I didn't read it myself but thought some people would be interested.

[Chieppa1]

This Glenn is a really stupid dude.

[Edward]

here's a rebuttal to the WaPo piece:
http://lewrockwell.com/vance/vance278.html

I didn't read it myself but thought some people would be interested.

Nice rebuttal. + rep

[soulcyon]

What makes any sense about U.S. troops being stationed anywhere overseas?

What about the American embassies in some countries? Do they use US Military for security purposes?

edit: ah, well done sir. http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance20.html

[sailingaway]

Ive seen a couple different fact checks come down the opposite way saying it is true. Clearly, the NDAA just extended occupation of Iraq by another year, and having 'contractors' instead of soldiers directly sworn isn't much of a difference, so this author is clearly trying to spin the facts.