Smaller lily pad bases still harm local communities despite hopes they would avoid controversy.
Evidence
This new generation of smaller bases is appealing to many who hope that lily pads and other relatively small bases can avoid the controversies and protests that have often accompanied the large bases worldwide. But this has often not been the case. As we will see, military facilities small and large alike all too often harm local communities in ways that locals do not easily forget. — David Vine, Base Nation_ How U.S. Military Bases…, 158
Categorization
Category: Causal Relationships
Related
- Small forward bases provoke local controversies just as much as large ones do (similarity 0.91)
- Smaller bases do not reliably avoid the local controversies large bases provoke (similarity 0.91)
- Small lily pad bases routinely expand into behemoth installations. (similarity 0.87)
- Small forward bases still harm local communities and provoke opposition. (similarity 0.86)
- Lily pad networks reproduce full military capacity while avoiding bases’ visible political costs. (similarity 0.85)
- Lily pads still generate local harm and protest despite their small footprint. (similarity 0.83)
- Lily pads provide redundancy so base denial by one host can be bypassed (similarity 0.82)
- Closing big bases drove the Pentagon toward smaller lily pad facilities (similarity 0.82)
- Losses of major bases drove the U.S. to build smaller lily pads worldwide (similarity 0.82)
- Lily pad bases cluster in weak states with lax environmental laws and lower costs. (similarity 0.81)
- Many dispersed bases give the US wartime redundancy and lower eviction costs. (similarity 0.81)
- Lily pads quietly expand US military reach into new conflict zones. (similarity 0.81)
- The Pentagon shifted to small covert ‘lily pad’ bases to evade local opposition. (similarity 0.81)
- Lily pads grant the U.S. Subic-era access without the political costs of large garrisons (similarity 0.81)
- Military bases magnify environmental harm beyond what any civilian concentration causes (similarity 0.80)