Afghanistan isn't in Europe. Just saying.
Personally I think there should be no US troops in Europe, but then again I'm French so my country did that a long time ago.
Also, many European countries went to Afghanistan, so that trial would probably be uncomfortable for many here. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen.
No having US troops in Europe worked out so well in the last century. Are the French up for Round Four?
Yes, that's why we have our own, independently developed and controlled, nuclear weapons.
CDG's 1966 hissy fit, was nothing to do with that. Same year he went to Canada and tried to stir things up with the Franco-Canadian population. Commenting on CDG's apparent call for a 'liberated' Quebec, the Canadian PM said 'they are free, as are all Canadians, as too are the French due in no small part to the Canadians who fell in France in two world wars'.
And the first generation of French SLBM's had to use US sourced equipment for their navigation. Luckily by then, the US had accepted (or rather given up trying to stop), the UK and France developing and deploying strategic nuclear systems. A change from the early 60's.
The command and control system, the airborne component, for the subs, only two nuclear powers have also an airborne comms system, the US and France, the latter were installed in a couple of modified C-160NG's, guess where the equipment was sourced?
When France left NATO, he rang President Johnson and was quite rude about it, as in get your troops out NOW. LBJ replied 'even the ones buried there?'
But at least then they were mature enough to know this was one man's Anglophobia, his resentments. Plus it showed a massive contrast to the Warsaw Pact, no US retaliation, at all. Much less military force.
They would have also known that the French military and intel chiefs, at least in private to them, were horrified by the potential weakening of NATO, that France would be at a stroke cut from decision making and influence, from intel (still a sore point decades later).
Intelligence historians rate it as the biggest blow post war, to French intelligence gathering, the KGB and GRU never did anything like that damage.
Once CDG was out of power, then cold in the ground, slowly, crab like, the movers and shakers in French military and intel started to move closer back, NATO members in all but name. By the 1980's considerably so.
Still, it took longer than that for the trust they had before to be regained. Intel wise it never fully has.
Really, his move was about the presence of some US (and other NATO allies) in France was a living counter to his 'France liberated itself' stance.
In fact I have cited the shooting in foot move by CDG as a sort of French version of Brexit, naturally those keen on the latter never knew of the former, then again I find they don't know much about anything the tabloids don't tell them.
So LBJ, not known for his adeptness in foreign affairs to put it mildly, acted far more reasonably with France in 1966 than the US of GWB and much worse, Trump. At least in dealing with allies.
(And this POTUS did not have a good relationship with the British PM, Wilson, either. Mainly due to Wilson's refusal to send British troops to Vietnam, even a token force).