George Bush's stance on Troop Realignment

Troop Realignment: The United States military stations thousands of the United States military personnel on bases around the world. This practice was a direct result of the Cold War and was designed so that the U.S. was capable of defending a variety of countries and regions from communism on short notice. Since the Cold War, and more specifically, as a direct result of the current War on Terror, the type of military necessary to fight global wars has changed. Both candidates talk extensively about modernizing our military and one way to modernize our military has been proposed by the Bush administration's troop realignment proposal.

George Bush:

Description of candidate's position: Bush announced the largest troop realignment since the end of the Cold War, which would send approximately 70,000 military personnel to bases in the United States. The plan will close hundreds of U.S. facilities overseas (mostly in Europe and Asia) over the next ten years while also maintaining and upgrading sites for specific purposes in some regions around the world. In addition to stationing fewer troops around the world, the Bush administration believes this realignment will help strengthen the military to respond better and faster to worldwide threats. Ultimately, the goal is that the military focus is on speed, reach, precision, knowledge, and combat power rather than on the number of troops available for military action.

Quotation from the candidate: "Over the coming decade, we will deploy a more agile and more flexible force, which means that more of our troops will be stationed and deployed from here at home. We will move some of our troops and capabilities to new locations, so they can surge quickly to deal with unexpected threats. We'll take advantage of 21st century military technologies to rapidly deploy increased combat power. The new plan will help us fight and win these wars of the 21st century. It will strengthen our alliances around the world, while we build new partnerships to better preserve the peace. It will reduce the stress on our troops and our military families." August 16, 2004, from

Assessment of the proposal:

Positive: Marcus Corbin, senior analyst at the Center for Defense Information and co-author of a report on U.S. forces and basing, praises Bush's redeployment plan as a way to make the military more efficient and effective. He explains that "the troop realignment also fits in with the efforts of the military to transform itself following the end of the cold War. U.S. advances in military transportation, logistics, information management and weaponry mean that its forces can get places faster and more efficiently and do not need to send as many forces, at least for conventional combat".

Negative: Lawrence Korb, Director of National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations and Assistant Secretary of Defense from 1981-1985, explains that proponents of Bush's redeployment plan argue that it will help the United States fight new wars in more diverse ways and that it will save the United States a significant amount of money. Korb's stance is the opposite. He says that Bush's plan would not save money or make us more strategically flexible, but would instead cost more money and not aid our ability to deal with a number of military conflicts around the world.

Comparison: Bush announced his troop realignment plan that would bring 70,000 troops from foreign bases back to the United States, which he argued would better equip the military to train and respond to current threats in a more efficient manner (http://www.georgewbush.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=3296). Kerry does not endorse this troop realignment and believes that Bush only made the announcement for political gain. Kerry does not offer a direct alternative to the Bush announcement, but has proposed increasing the number of active duty troops and those involved in special units in order to help meet the threats posed by the War on Terror.

Link to Kerry's Troop Realignment issue brief.