All you people from other countries saying the US shouldn't be there. You wait till someone attacks your country you will be so happy the US aids your army. So think they could become the people saving you.
@nelson3300 To supply our troops in Afghanistan with whatever they need. Kind of like why we are able to use soil in Pakistan. We also use Kuwait, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia to supply our troops in Iraq. They are just friendly zones we use to get support to our troops faster with whatever they need. It is also to surround Russia, China, and Iran in a show of military might. Kind of like we sent missile defence systems to Europe. Just defense measures.
So you are helping the dictatorial regime in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Kuwait, and surrounding Russia and China, clearly looking for trouble far away from your homeland.
@suarezjaguar No, learn how to read. We are using their land to supply our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan with the supplies that they need. We are not starting shit with Russia or China dumbass. We are putting up missile "defence" systems around their countries incase they want to attack (which will likely not happen). It's just defense systems, not attack systems. Worry about your own country, because it has far worse problems.
@bb152005 Yes, of course, "defense." Thousands of miles away from your home. Maybe SCO should put some military bases surrounding the USA...thousands of miles away from their homes as well. It is a matter of defense too. You know how it works...
@suarezjaguar We put them in our allies countries to protect them, not us. They wanted protection so we put them their. Russia wants to put missile defence in Cuba. I don't see what the big deal is with protecting your own country and your allies. It doesn't even hold any missiles in it. Most of them are lasers that heat up a warhead if fired, and blow it up in mid air. Why don't you go check it out before you keep making yourself look like an idiot.
@bb152005 No, it's only to surround the SCO. My country recently expelled USA bases (btw your base never helped us). I think the Russians will enjoy a new alliance in the Americas because of the USA activities in Asia.
I wish the US stops doing "service" around the world and starts using the diplomatic ways more. Naive as it might sound, today with the ever evolving communications any one dictator cannot really shape and hold an agressive autoritarian regime for a really long period of time because people will eventually just freak out because of the knowledge how life is in other democratic western countries.
what is interesting is none of this is reported in the US. non of it. its amazing how the media works with the government and media work together. and I'm not talking about Fox. i'm talking about the NY Times and Washinton post. so called liberal papers
what is actually interesting is how you were unaware that the US has a base in Kyrgystan. How ignorant are you? The prescense of the base has not only been reported, it's been reported a million times.
That was my home for 7 months, It was nice to see it a few years after I left. Kyrgyzstan is such a beautiful country, I hope to one day return once this stupidity ends.
The comment at the end though is downright laughable. That 9/11 has given the US an opportunity to get into Russia's back yard... I mean really? No offense to Kyrgyzstan, but we are there because 3000 of our people were murdered from nearby. And not because it is a great vacation spot (or particularly strategic either).
Anyway, Simon if this series is as good as your previous work, then I am sure it will be well received.
I think, the comment in the end is meaningful and well considered.
The reasons, why the US has still troops stationed in Central Asia are strategic in nature.
American citizens suffer every day under the pressure by domestic banking and by federal bureaurocracies - like health care insurances. Therefore to protect these citizens is only a rethorical statement.
To project military power - according to the 'silk road strategy act' from 1999 - is a very real - long term - national interest.
To be honest, after reading your comment I do not think that you will be convinced of anything other than what you want to believe.
But in the name of logical thought, and anyone else who may read our exchanges, I'll give it a shot.
Kyrgyzstan has some 9-12,500 troops actively serving in its military at any one time. The number of foreign military people at this base is about 1,000. So Kyrgyzstan could over run the base in a long afternoon, or maybe a lazy weekend if it wanted to.
This difference is magnified further when you note that almost all of the personnel are specialists in the maintenance of aircraft, air traffic controllers, refuelers, cooks etc. There is no significant ground presence by the US or other country on the ground in Kyrgyzstan. And what there is would be easily outmatched.
Further more the aircraft that is present is mostly transport aircraft. Hardly the stuff power projection is made out of. The combat aircraft by the way is hardly the pointy...
...tip of the spear either. As you can see from the video they are mostly older F-16s, Mirage 2000s, and the occasional F-15E ground pounders.
A squadron of Flankers from Russia could probably take out every combat asset on the ground in one sortie. Without even breaking a sweat, not to mention their inherent superiority in air to air.
So if you think the Russians are worried about such incredible amounts of Western power at their doorstep, then you have obviously not done the math.
Even if Manas Air Base would be part of an occupational force no official in the former Soviet Republic Kyrgyzstan would consider the idea of sparking a military conflict with the US.
By now the US pays a fee of 60 million USD annually - within a global economic crisis.
It seems, that You imagine, that my concept of military bases would be to control nearby territory. Manas is not a medieval castle - but rather an airbase, with the capacity to deliver payloads, troops and fuel within an enhanced radius of more than 2000 miles (F-15, F-18, C-130 - air fueled by KC-135).
Despite the attitude of the Kyrgyzian Parliament - it is Russia and China who feel threatened by a base, that is more than 600 miles away from the theatre of Operation Enduring Freedom - but only 150 miles close to the Akdala Uranium Mine or 250 miles to Kashgar. Therefore the Shanghai Cooperation Organization demands a deadline for the operation since 2005.
The SU-27 is the counterpart of the F-15 - but Russian air fleets lack maintainance and flight hours - which is why the F-22 is finally on hold now. Since the split up of the Soviet Union there are no Russian air regiments equipped with SU-27 in the region. Some SU-25 are stationed at 5th Air Army, 999th airbase in Kant.
Still there remains the question:
why would Russia start a war in Central Asia by attacking US bases ?
Also a study of the Viet Cong attack on Pleiku airbase in 1965 - and its effect of sending 200.000 ground troops within 10 months - may be helpful to comprehend the rapid escalation of conflicts.
All you people from other countries saying the US shouldn't be there. You wait till someone attacks your country you will be so happy the US aids your army. So think they could become the people saving you.
MrDrNo1 6 months ago
All you people who are from other countries saying they should not be there. Wait till russia or someone
MrDrNo1 6 months ago
good in bed... shake my head
xNiGhTxoP28 7 months ago
America, theyre everywhere. can get annoying. VERY... annoying
geowar42 1 year ago
wtf are we doing in KYRGYZSTAN!!!!
nelson3300 1 year ago 7
@nelson3300 To supply our troops in Afghanistan with whatever they need. Kind of like why we are able to use soil in Pakistan. We also use Kuwait, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia to supply our troops in Iraq. They are just friendly zones we use to get support to our troops faster with whatever they need. It is also to surround Russia, China, and Iran in a show of military might. Kind of like we sent missile defence systems to Europe. Just defense measures.
bb152005 1 year ago
@bb152005
So you are helping the dictatorial regime in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Kuwait, and surrounding Russia and China, clearly looking for trouble far away from your homeland.
suarezjaguar 1 year ago
@suarezjaguar No, learn how to read. We are using their land to supply our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan with the supplies that they need. We are not starting shit with Russia or China dumbass. We are putting up missile "defence" systems around their countries incase they want to attack (which will likely not happen). It's just defense systems, not attack systems. Worry about your own country, because it has far worse problems.
bb152005 1 year ago
@bb152005 Yes, of course, "defense." Thousands of miles away from your home. Maybe SCO should put some military bases surrounding the USA...thousands of miles away from their homes as well. It is a matter of defense too. You know how it works...
suarezjaguar 1 year ago
@suarezjaguar We put them in our allies countries to protect them, not us. They wanted protection so we put them their. Russia wants to put missile defence in Cuba. I don't see what the big deal is with protecting your own country and your allies. It doesn't even hold any missiles in it. Most of them are lasers that heat up a warhead if fired, and blow it up in mid air. Why don't you go check it out before you keep making yourself look like an idiot.
bb152005 1 year ago
@bb152005 No, it's only to surround the SCO. My country recently expelled USA bases (btw your base never helped us). I think the Russians will enjoy a new alliance in the Americas because of the USA activities in Asia.
suarezjaguar 1 year ago
I wish the US stops doing "service" around the world and starts using the diplomatic ways more. Naive as it might sound, today with the ever evolving communications any one dictator cannot really shape and hold an agressive autoritarian regime for a really long period of time because people will eventually just freak out because of the knowledge how life is in other democratic western countries.
pizzapingvin 1 year ago
They should not be there. It is far from American soil.
suarezjaguar 1 year ago 7
@suarezjaguar agreed
geowar42 1 year ago
бл малый ядерный заряд туда и нет никакой американской базы
Erakz100 1 year ago
янки об этом пол века мечтали и вот нате табички на английском и русском, типа оккупационных
Erakz100 1 year ago
that army chick is a fine bit of stuff
shamrock608 1 year ago
what is interesting is none of this is reported in the US. non of it. its amazing how the media works with the government and media work together. and I'm not talking about Fox. i'm talking about the NY Times and Washinton post. so called liberal papers
mizzoulibertarian 1 year ago
@mizzoulibertarian
what is actually interesting is how you were unaware that the US has a base in Kyrgystan. How ignorant are you? The prescense of the base has not only been reported, it's been reported a million times.
fshjshshhs 1 year ago
@fshjshshhs Oh, How ignorant? well ughhh i don't know.
mizzoulibertarian 1 year ago
Shes really cute & pretty.
T3kozRockz 2 years ago
That was my home for 7 months, It was nice to see it a few years after I left. Kyrgyzstan is such a beautiful country, I hope to one day return once this stupidity ends.
sadisticincubus 2 years ago
I love you, Americans.
Nishkid641 2 years ago
That's one hell of a cute captain! Too bad our's was an angry old man... =/
TheCrazyFinn 2 years ago
hahahahaha that was funny : )
underground141 2 years ago
hilarious
ppitm 2 years ago
Nice video, very relevant right now as well.
The comment at the end though is downright laughable. That 9/11 has given the US an opportunity to get into Russia's back yard... I mean really? No offense to Kyrgyzstan, but we are there because 3000 of our people were murdered from nearby. And not because it is a great vacation spot (or particularly strategic either).
Anyway, Simon if this series is as good as your previous work, then I am sure it will be well received.
Morris1962 3 years ago
I think, the comment in the end is meaningful and well considered.
The reasons, why the US has still troops stationed in Central Asia are strategic in nature.
American citizens suffer every day under the pressure by domestic banking and by federal bureaurocracies - like health care insurances. Therefore to protect these citizens is only a rethorical statement.
To project military power - according to the 'silk road strategy act' from 1999 - is a very real - long term - national interest.
christophmahler 2 years ago
To be honest, after reading your comment I do not think that you will be convinced of anything other than what you want to believe.
But in the name of logical thought, and anyone else who may read our exchanges, I'll give it a shot.
Kyrgyzstan has some 9-12,500 troops actively serving in its military at any one time. The number of foreign military people at this base is about 1,000. So Kyrgyzstan could over run the base in a long afternoon, or maybe a lazy weekend if it wanted to.
Morris1962 2 years ago
This difference is magnified further when you note that almost all of the personnel are specialists in the maintenance of aircraft, air traffic controllers, refuelers, cooks etc. There is no significant ground presence by the US or other country on the ground in Kyrgyzstan. And what there is would be easily outmatched.
Further more the aircraft that is present is mostly transport aircraft. Hardly the stuff power projection is made out of. The combat aircraft by the way is hardly the pointy...
Morris1962 2 years ago
...tip of the spear either. As you can see from the video they are mostly older F-16s, Mirage 2000s, and the occasional F-15E ground pounders.
A squadron of Flankers from Russia could probably take out every combat asset on the ground in one sortie. Without even breaking a sweat, not to mention their inherent superiority in air to air.
So if you think the Russians are worried about such incredible amounts of Western power at their doorstep, then you have obviously not done the math.
Morris1962 2 years ago
I could go on here, there a number of significant points I haven't even touched on yet.
But I think once you actually start to look at the reality of the situation, it all makes sense.
This base is about as strategic as an imprisoned western reporter in North Korea...
Nothing real or significant to be worried about, but a convenient way to 'turn the screws' diplomatically.
Anyway thank you Christophmahler, for giving me an opportunity to elaborate further.
Morris1962 2 years ago
Even if Manas Air Base would be part of an occupational force no official in the former Soviet Republic Kyrgyzstan would consider the idea of sparking a military conflict with the US.
By now the US pays a fee of 60 million USD annually - within a global economic crisis.
christophmahler 2 years ago
It seems, that You imagine, that my concept of military bases would be to control nearby territory. Manas is not a medieval castle - but rather an airbase, with the capacity to deliver payloads, troops and fuel within an enhanced radius of more than 2000 miles (F-15, F-18, C-130 - air fueled by KC-135).
christophmahler 2 years ago
Despite the attitude of the Kyrgyzian Parliament - it is Russia and China who feel threatened by a base, that is more than 600 miles away from the theatre of Operation Enduring Freedom - but only 150 miles close to the Akdala Uranium Mine or 250 miles to Kashgar. Therefore the Shanghai Cooperation Organization demands a deadline for the operation since 2005.
christophmahler 2 years ago
You tried to draw conclusions from equipment.
The SU-27 is the counterpart of the F-15 - but Russian air fleets lack maintainance and flight hours - which is why the F-22 is finally on hold now. Since the split up of the Soviet Union there are no Russian air regiments equipped with SU-27 in the region. Some SU-25 are stationed at 5th Air Army, 999th airbase in Kant.
Still there remains the question:
why would Russia start a war in Central Asia by attacking US bases ?
christophmahler 2 years ago
I have not understood, why a detained reporter would not be something to worry about.
But if I could stimulate both of us to probe the facts, than we can both be content.
christophmahler 2 years ago
You replied not a word on the 'Silk Road Strategy Act'. I can imagine, that You heard of this topic rather for the first time.
If You ever consider to sharpen Your view on long term strategy and the role of military bases, I recommend reading for e.g.:
'The problem of Asia - its effect upon international politics' by Alfred Mahan; 1900, republished 2003 .
christophmahler 2 years ago
Also a study of the Viet Cong attack on Pleiku airbase in 1965 - and its effect of sending 200.000 ground troops within 10 months - may be helpful to comprehend the rapid escalation of conflicts.
christophmahler 2 years ago