NATO and Missile Defense

1) The expansion is seen as a good thing by members who don't want to be perceived as useless by the US, as the EU was not so long ago. Also, it's probable that a military back-up for the Eurabia that France and Germany are plotting will come in handy.
2) The US has been keen to redeploy it's military assets from Germany and GB, in part because they're not needed and because keeping the families of troops in Europe is becoming increasingly expensive as the dollar falls. moving the bases further east was envisioned in the BRAC process.
3) The missile builders will be happy to upgrade systems and the people who are still counting on a satellite-based missile defense which will never work, will be mollified.
4) KBR and Halliburton will be happy to outfit new bases, built with cheap former East Block labor, ala Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, which was set up under the aegis of the Bosnia conflict but serves almost entirely as a surveillance outpost to "protect" the oil pipeline and gather data for the wars of the future which, as Rumsfeld said, will be fought in cyberspace--i.e. we won't be sending planes and tanks and boots on the ground, but rather "take out" the enemy's command and control and information and communication and financial systems with electromagnetic pulses, etc. That's why the Air Force is busy trying to set up its Cyber Command to extend its domination of air, land, sea and outer space into cyber space and the N.S.A. has been mapping the global communications systems. Can't take out nodes unless you know which ones so you won't disrupt your own.
5) The people who have a thing about "re-emerging Russia" and "a rising China" are no doubt enthusiastic about the chain of bases being planned in addition to those already functional in Kosovo and Romania. Poland and the Czech Republican are causing Putin to raise objections about radar and missile installations which aren't planned to be built for several years. What I suspect is that the mention of these facilities is designed to distract attention from what's already been built on the mega bases in Iraq where the facilities from western Europe were slated to be re-deployed in the first place--a project that was in the works long before Bush Two gave the green light for the invasion. (I have no doubt Russia and China know what's going on and, if the Iraqis ever agreed to let the bases do their surveillance and "stabilizing" of the region without interruption, would have to take more direct action against these installations on Asia's back door. Russia has not put its strategic bombers on patrol to counter bases that haven't yet been built).
6) Turkey has long proved an unreliable partner in the task of keeping the Eastern hemisphere contained even though, you'll recall, it was the installation of US missiles in Turkey that set off the Cuban Missile Crisis for JFK. A long relationship but not necessarily reliable.
7) The bases in Iraq are part of the long-term plan of redeployment not just from western Europe but from Korea and Japan and Diego Garcia, which has to be vacated soon. The Central Command will be in charge of Southwest Asia and North Africa and NATO will provide coverage for the northwest. Those who speak of US hegemony are merely responding to the plans laid out in the Quadrennial Defense Review and the Pentagon budgets, most of the Air Force portion of which is never discussed in toto, though quite a bit can be gathered from the purchases as they are announced.
8) From the speeches he's been giving, it's clear that McCain is still committed to this alternative to the bases on the eastern side of the Indian Ocean basin that were abandoned in Vietnam and which neither Vietnam or the other members of SEATO are willing to reconsider. If Republicans were better businessmen, they'd know not to throw good money after bad. The Pentagon seems ready to take the air assets out. At least that's what General Mullen said in a speech not long ago. (It would make sense for the Pentagon to take another look at Somalia if more bases are really needed in the region. It's not likely that the Iraqis will ever "cry uncle" no matter how long they are bombed back into the stone age.)
McCain probably thinks that if the US had been honest about the plan for long term bases and that we had no interest in the subjugation of the Iraqi people, the plan could have been pulled off. It was what Kerry seemed to think when he said "wrong war, wrong time, wrong place" but wasn't willing to admit that he'd been supportive of all the planning for fourteen bases and the pressure on Saddam which was supposed to make him "cry uncle." Four million dead and/or displaced later it's, IMHO, too late.
Besides, the vision of electronic warfare in the future is, again IMHO, a gross mistake. Electronics are too fickle. Atmospheric conditions cause them to be erratic. They can't even count our votes right.