« European Parliamentary Elections: SPD Suffers “Unbelievable Crash” | Main | Kasparov on Terrorism »

Comments

Your understanding and support of the USA is very much welcomed! Thank you.

"Friedensmacht Europa? Wer’s glaubt, wird selig.

... Kurzgefasst: Die USA ist ein durch die Welt wütendes Untier – die EU ist die Verkörperung der Zivilisation, die nur durch Intransparenz ab und an schlechte Politik macht."

Mehr hier


del.

Notiz von David: Jo, ich bin relativ intolerant gegenüber dem Vorwurf der Lüge und der Desinformation - jedenfalls dann, wenn er in meinem Blog gegen mich erhoben wird.
Sie sind mir bislang schon mehrfach durch Ihre groben Formulierungen aufgefallen. Bitte beachten Sie, daß mein Blog kein öffentlicher Spuknapf ist. Wenn Sie gewisse selbstverständliche Etikette nicht beachten, muß ich Sie in diesem Blog gänzlich sperren.

Ich hoffe auf Ihr Verständnis.

@David

Akzeptiert. Hier das Zitat ohne meinen Kommentar:

Schroeder zum 6.Juni 2004 in der "BamS":

"Der 6. Juni 2004 ist der 60. Jahrestag des "D-Day". Des Tages, an dem 1944 ameri­kanische, britische, kanadische, australische und andere alliierte Truppen an der fran­zösischen Atlantikküste in den Krieg eingriffen, um ihn zu beenden. Sie kamen, um der Nazi-Herrschaft in Europa ein Ende zu machen.
[...]
Für uns in Deutschland war das Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs nicht Niederlage, sondern Befreiung.
[...]
Wir sollten uns aber gerade in diesen Tagen darauf besinnen: Die Vereinigten Staaten und das amerikanische Volk sind unsere Freunde. Amerikanische Soldaten haben ihr Leben gelassen, um Deutschland und Europa von der Hitler-Diktatur zu befreien, um uns Deutschen, zumindest im Westen unserer Heimat, einen Wiederaufbau in Frei­heit und Demokratie zu ermöglichen."

Ein Leser der Frankfurter Rundschau zeigt uns und dem Kanzler, wie man erst so "richtig" Geschichtsklitterung betreibt. Mir fehlen wirklich die Worte:

Zu: D-Day, Invasion in der Normandie

Ihre Artikel zum sog. "D-Day" sind leider so oberflächlich geschichtsbezogen wie die Äußerungen unseres Kanzlers: Natürlich verdankt Europa den Alliierten die Befreiung vom Faschismus - das wissen wir doch seit Jahrzehnten! Aber warum es zum Aufstieg des Staatsterroristen Hitler kommen konnte - das interessiert leider immer noch so wenig wie die tieferen Hintergründe des - natürlich viel harmloseren - Terrorismus heute. Haben sich nicht die USA 1914 ff. aus rein wirtschaftlichen Gründen (um durch Waffenexporte und entsprechende Kredite an die Entente-Mächte ihre daniederliegende Konjunktur anzukurbeln - und mit dem Tod von Millionen an den Fronten ein glänzendes Geschäft zu machen) in den Ersten Weltkrieg eingemischt und gerade dadurch an dessen Ende einen Sieger-"Frieden" ermöglicht - statt eines echten Verhandlungs-Friedens wie z. B. 1648 und 1815? Die Folgen waren Demütigung, Unterdrückung und Ausplünderung der Besiegten sowie Verhöhnung des vorher vollmundig verkündeten "Selbstbestimmungsrechts der Völker" - bis die Besiegten in ihrer Not, Wut und Verzweiflung "Erlösung" bei Hitler zu finden glaubten...

Gerhard Grassl, Pforzheim

http://www.frankfurter-rundschau.de/ressorts/nachrichten_und_politik/standpunkte/?cnt=454354&cnt_page=2

Und für Auschwitz können wir die Amerikaner sicher auch noch irgendwie verantwortlich machen... Unfaßbar! (Unfaßbar übrigens auch, daß die FR so etwas abdruckt.)

Now this little clown has gone too far. This man time and time again, shows he is a complete imbecile and a true human disgrace.
Germany "liberated" in the 40's by FRANCE and her allies? WTF is that people? Who is he kidding? Who are the german people who beleive that nonsense trying to fool?
Can this little twerp of a human really be trying to re-write history based on his own pathetic delushions?
How convenient all this would be, if indeed it was factual, for this pathetic weasle.
Does he truly believe what he says????
Somebody cough up an answer please, if there is one.
The german people LOVE what this ant speaks to the masses.
They cheer him in his anti-american drivel which he has made the basis of his existence, yet pound him in the ballot box.
IS this the after efects of two generations of deep-seeded hallucinations brought about by an over abundance of welfare, little personal responsibility and a forward outlook born of fantasy and virul pessimism?
Has schroeder simply been propped up on his little wodden "make me taller than napoloean" that stool he uses for so long he's lost his damn mind?
The german people's "resistance" to hitler was miniscule and damn near impossible to summarize it was so damn small. At the time he was adored by all but a few top generals and the german jews who hadn't been killed and had been in their basements for the 12(!!!) years of hitler's chaperoning of the german people.
D-Day was NOT (goddamn it!) a "liberation" of germany- it was NOTHING but the crushing DEFEAT of a brutal tyrannt freak with half a mustache who thought german blood was all powerful and pure. Just like THIS IRAQ WAR, nothing more, nothing less.
For france it should have been a lesson for how to take care of one's SELF. With 15,000 dead due to summer weather and un-caring offspring, one can tell the lesson has not been learned as far as self-sufficiancy or even self-efficiency for that matter.
What a damn insult this is to any american on this planet.
Germany- in modern times the US owes you nothing but a pounding in the damn head. Any "alliance" is over, regardless of who occupies the US white house in the fall. Though it will very well be a BUSH victory by a margin so big that it will spin the heads of the "failed-before-it got off the ground-"eu".
IS there any german CITEZIN outrage at schroeder's remarks? Is there any one in the entire country of germany other than David and Ray, Gabi, or Joe who truly cannot believe this outrageous szhit?
I have never before been witness to such insanity in this world when it comes to this guy schroeder's "historical" perspective. It is most likely quite safe to assume that his words reflect the minds of all of germany. I'll believe that untill I hear otherwise.
Please allow all US soldiers to get the hell out of your country. Stand up and tell the world that you have no problem with them leaving, and that they can leave sooner than simply over the next 12 months. How pathetic it is to anyone to hear the words of hatred coming from german towards the US, but to then witness the tears and horror the germans' feel as US troops begin to pull-out. This is indicative of a societal sickness beyond measure.
Your country is not worthy of their presence, and now would be a good time to show the world WHAT germany can do on it's own with deeds rather than childishly cheap rhetoric and propaganda.
OK, I feel better, thanks for the patience. Now- who can tell me who in germany does NOT believe what little man schroeder tries to con down the throats of his people and the world?
I have been laughing for days on this article by the great Victor Hanson which describes genl goering "prancing about in tights with reindeer antlers on..." http://victorhanson.com/Articles/NRO%20Index/Feeding_the_minotaur.html
"I think the Islamists and their supporters do not live in an alternate universe, but instead are no more crazy in their goals than Hitler was in thinking he could hijack the hallowed country of Beethoven and Goethe and turn it over to buffoons like Goering, prancing in a medieval castle in reindeer horns and babbling about mythical Aryans with flunkies like Goebbels and Rosenberg. Nor was Hitler's fatwa — Mein Kampf — any more irrational than bin Laden's 1998 screed and his subsequent grainy infomercials. Indeed, I think Islamofascism is brilliant in its reading of the postmodern West and precisely for that reason it is dangerous beyond all description — in the manner that a blood-sucking, stealthy, and nocturnal Dracula was always spookier than a massive, clunky Frankenstein.
"Like Hitler's creed, bin Ladenism trumpets contempt for bourgeois Western society. If once we were a "mongrel" race of "cowboys" who could not take casualties against the supermen of the Third Reich, now we are indolent infidels, channel surfers who eat, screw, and talk too much amid worthless gadgetry, godless skyscrapers, and, of course, once again, the conniving Jews.

Ok, my last question-
WHAT exactly was it that the french did to HELP with german unification? Has schroeder followed up with any specifics? Germans would be the one's to know about this "help" and I'd like to hear about it.

@ Niko

Aus reiner Neugier (ich studiere selbst Politikwissenschaft): Welcher Professor war das?

Schroeder is the brave European leader who stood up against the US, shouting to everyone who wanted (and didn't want) to hear that Germany is not a 'lackey' of the US, that Germany doesn't take orders from the US, and all sort of similarly deep statements.

The new German Way was born. Germanay was again someone, having the courage to speak up against what it believed was wrong. Fine...

Comes June 6, 2004, the day when the liberation of Europe started. It was led, financed and fought mostly by Americans. Where is the proud, independent German Way on this day ? Germany volunteers through Schroeder to be a French lackey, and twists history just to please the Master.

I thought the days of buying favors were gone, and a new self-confident era had begun in Germany. Now I see the only use of this self-confidence is to deny reality in order to buy favors with France, the shame of Europe.

Welcome to Schroeder's World ! Enjoy the ride, Germany !

Friedman zieht einen ähnlichen Vergleich:

That's what this D-Day looks like. It is not a single charge up a Normandy beach, but a long, hard slog to train an Iraqi army to finish the war that America started. This is the Iraqis' real war of independence. If they beat back the bad guys and hold elections, they'll be free of America and the worst of their past. If they don't or can't, this will be America's Waterloo, and theirs.


http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=524366.html

Ok, man hätte in der Rede alle beteiligten Nationen namentlich erwähnen können. Ich als Halb-Amerikaner sehe das aber nicht so sehr als Affront. Ehrlich gesagt finde ich es sogar ziemlich bedenklich, immer auf einer Art Sonderrolle der Amerikaner herumreiten zu wollen- schliesslich haben sie ja zusammen mit anderen gekämpft. Militärisch gesehen waren die Russen ein mindestens ebenso (wenn nicht der) entscheidender Faktor für das Ende des Nazi-Reiches (Schonmal was von der Ardennen-Offensive gehört? Und den abgestimmten Entlastungsangriffen der Russen an der deutschen Ostfront, die unter hohen Verlusten Truppen gebunden haben, um Patton zu helfen?) - ganz abzusehen davon, daß sie viel mehr Opfer zu beklagen haben. Ich glaube, man sollte sich etwas mehr an die Geschichte halten - der amerikanische Verdienst ist sehr herausragend in der Nachkriegszeit gewesen (Entnazifizierung, Marshallplan gegen Morgentauplan durchgesetzt, Luftbrücke, etc. pp.), aber bei der Landung in der Normandie waren auch andere Nationen zugegen, auf eine Sonderrolle zu pochen ist irgendwie unpassend.

Übrigens, Revisionismus als Vorwurf ist ganz schön hart. Immerhin haben die Franzosen (nicht so wie Maggie Thatcher) die Wiedervereinigung politisch unterstützt und Überzeugungsarbeit geleistet, somit kann man, wenn man eine Rede in FRANKREICH hält, das durchaus auch erwähnen.

Notiz von David: Die französische Regierung, und ganz besonders Mitterrand, haben die Wiedervereinigung nicht, jedenfalls nicht 1990 gewollt. Das ist aus vielen Quellen zu belegen.

Zitat: "Im Gegensatz zur französischen Bevölkerung zeigte sich die Regierung Frankreichs in der deutschen Frage zugeknöpft. Begeisterung für die Einheit war bei der politischen Klasse Frankreichs nicht zu spüren.

Staatspräsident Francois Mitterrand glaubte zum einen, dass durch mögliche Veränderungen in der DDR Gorbatschow gestürzt werden könne, was zu politischer Instabilität in Europa geführt hätte; zum anderen fürchtete er ein zu großes Deutschland, das an Wirtschaftskraft und Bevölkerungszahl Frankreich überlegen sein würde. Gestützt wurden diese Befürchtungen durch die Presse. So schrieb "Le Monde" über die Gefahr eines "deutschen Hegemonismus" und fürchtete einen "industriellen Koloss", der das stabile Gefüge der EG erschüttern könne. Außerplanmäßig besuchte Mitterand im Dezember 1989 die Sowjetunion. Mit Gorbatschow stimmte er überein, dass die deutsche Einheit nur nach einem längeren politischen Prozess möglich sei, die Frage sei momentan "nicht aktuell". Ein geeintes Deutschland wollte Mitterrand durch eine verstärkte europäische Integrationspolitik einbinden und damit potentielle Sonderweg-Tendenzen unterbinden. Dieser Kiew-Besuch Mitterrands führte zu erheblichen Irritationen im deutsch-französischen Verhältnis, die durch den DDR-Besuch des französischen Staatspräsidenten wenig später verstärkt wurden. Frankreich wollte die Souveränität und die Legitimität des zweiten deutschen Staates stärken. Mitterrand versprach Honecker: "Sie können mit der Solidarität Frankreichs rechnen". Frankreich hatte mit dieser Diplomatie Kohls 10-Punkte-Plan einer deutschen Konföderation eine direkte und eindeutige Absage erteilt. Die deutsch-französischen Beziehungen befanden sich auf einem Tiefpunkt."


@thomas

Regarding Gerhard Grassl's posting on the Frankfurter Rundschau I found to be so disturbingly obnoxious, that I had to translate it English for our many non-German-reading participants.


Ihre Artikel zum sog. "D-Day" sind leider so oberflächlich geschichtsbezogen wie die Äußerungen unseres Kanzlers: Natürlich verdankt Europa den Alliierten die Befreiung vom Faschismus - das wissen wir doch seit Jahrzehnten! Aber warum es zum Aufstieg des Staatsterroristen Hitler kommen konnte - das interessiert leider immer noch so wenig wie die tieferen Hintergründe des - natürlich viel harmloseren - Terrorismus heute. Haben sich nicht die USA 1914 ff. aus rein wirtschaftlichen Gründen (um durch Waffenexporte und entsprechende Kredite an die Entente-Mächte ihre daniederliegende Konjunktur anzukurbeln - und mit dem Tod von Millionen an den Fronten ein glänzendes Geschäft zu machen) in den Ersten Weltkrieg eingemischt und gerade dadurch an dessen Ende einen Sieger-"Frieden" ermöglicht - statt eines echten Verhandlungs-Friedens wie z. B. 1648 und 1815? Die Folgen waren Demütigung, Unterdrückung und Ausplünderung der Besiegten sowie Verhöhnung des vorher vollmundig verkündeten "Selbstbestimmungsrechts der Völker" - bis die Besiegten in ihrer Not, Wut und Verzweiflung "Erlösung" bei Hitler zu finden glaubten...

Gerhard Grassl, Pforzheim

Your article regarding the so-called "D-Day" is unfortunately so superficially historically-based like the comments of our Chancellor: of course Europe thanks the allies for the liberation from Fascism - we've known that for decades! But how it could come to the state terrorist Hitler - unfortunately that continues to interest few like the deep causes - naturally many innocents - of terrorism today. Hadn't the USA starting in 1914 ( boosted through armament exports and credit on governmental power agreements aided its low-laying economic situation - and having made a brilliant business with the death of millions on the front ) intervening in the First World War and through and allowing a "victor's peace" - instead of a genuine negotiated peach e.g. 1648 and 1815? The following was a humiliation, suppression and pillaging of the vanquished as a mockery of the beforehand wholehearted announced "right of self-determination of the people" - until the conquered in their destitution, rage, and despair found belief in the salvation of Hitler...


http://www.frankfurter-rundschau.de/ressorts/nachrichten_und_politik/standpunkte/?cnt=454354&cnt_page=2


I cannot let such an opportunity pass by without making my comments :

1) ...superficially historically based... And Grassl isn't. Comments to follow.
2) The USA is NOT the world's greatest exporter of armaments. See : The UK, Russia (and Soviet Union) and China.
3) I guess he means the Treaty of Versailles by "Victor's Peace." Hmmm, a treaty never signed by the USA, and I'm not sure that the USA even received reparations from Germany following WWI (you would have to have been a signatory to benefit from that). Several historians blame reparations as fuel for the anger that gave rise to Hitler.
4) ...made a brilliant business with the death of millions on the front... 53,402 Americans dead? Brilliant business? By the way, did we start that war? At the beginning of the second world war, the USA had an army that was rated number 18, behind Sweden ( Sweden was also neutral during the conflict). Had the USA "continued" to sell and manufacture armaments through this period, I hardly believe that the Army would have stood in such a poor position.

His entire thesis suggests that all causes of violence in Europe are due to The American Military complex. Simply count Grassl has an "Amihasser."


@Pato

Please include me with David and Ray, Gabi, and Joe.

@ james-
I'd be happy to include you. Your comments are refreshing.
I want to thank you and everyone who provides the vital work and effort to translate the german pieces into english. That is an incredibley helpful gesture to those who never had a reason to study german.
Well, 12 hrs since my post now, still no reply from a german citezin in regard to my inquiries.
Come on now folks, help me out here, please try to provide an answer- I KNOW 11% or more of you are all not at work right now..

uhhh.. Didn't Wilson warn the French about the Versailles treaty they were to implement?

@ pato

You're so funny, spidding on the people you demand to answer you're questions

Ask this stupid little idiot called bundeskanzler schroeder - he seems to know everything

But be careful, he will tell u that the german social democrats were the first nazi victims and his party liberated Germany as an ally of....I don't remember

@pato

Other interesting points about the SPD:

1) Formed by Marx
2) Folded into the SED (the only party of the former DDR)
3) SED was renamed to the PDS and never had to forteit ANY assets to other parties as was true with the NAZIs
4) Was inundated with Stasi spies during the cold war

@me

Don't forget that the French had systematically lost in wars vs the Germans since those glory days of Napoleon. I think they saw more than one reason for reparations following the end of WWI (rightly or wrongly). Strangely, they didn't have the insight like Bismark who knew that in real-politik you need to be able to live next to your neighbors, even if they are the vanquished...

Another strange point in history is that West Germany became a great recipient of aid ( in the form of the Marshall Plan) and paid reparations to Israel for the Holocaust. East Germany never paid anything to anyone including Poland, Israel, etc. Today they receive all my tax Euros...

@ralf-
"spidding on the people you demand to answer you're questions" spitting? not from me. Note my use of the word "please" in my request for comment from germans. So you tell me to simply go and ask schroeder himself? Oh OK, that makes sense. Thank you for pointing me in another direction. If indeed you a part of the cabal that voted little shcroeder into office- I thought people like you could provide an explanation, and answer or two, or simply convey what it is that you think drives the ideologies of schroeder? The same ideologies that seem to come from one who is completely mentally and intellectually deficient.

Looks like David and Ray have been frantically looking for some German media to critize for their coverage of D-Day - to no avail. Now they have resorted to secondary targets such as Schröder, whom I wouldn't exactly classify as a newspaper or an online news magazine.

@unwichtig-
Nothing that David or Ray do seem to be the least bit "frantic" in nature. Seems like the duplicity and child-like rhetoric of the sophmoric german hacks in your media bring them a daily dose of nonsense right to them. They neverhave to look far, what is your point?
So you look at your leader schroeder as a "secondary" target? What the hell does that mean?? With that mind-set of yours- I know you can answer this question then- Why then has your govt and your leader AND your fellow citzens now made the US YOUR number 1 target? Where is the existence of ANY news or contributions from germany that the world outside germans would be interested in?
Are things that horrible in your country that you try to justify your pitiful existence and remove ANY focus from YOUR own problems by lashing out at the US on such a constant basis? This is the oldest damn trick in the political book, and look how easily you suck it all up.

@Pato

What my point is? German media are American-friendly, contrary to what David and Ray want to make you believe, that's my point. Look at the coverage of D-Day. However, some of the German media are anti-Bush, and that's what is driving David and Ray crazy. They are fervently pro Bush and they don't like when people criticize him. Their strategy is to equate Anti-Bushism and Anti-Americanism and to disguise their petty pro Bush crusade as "Medienkritik".

to Pato: o.k., blogging is also about ranting and there is nothing wrong in letting of steam. But if you expect a serious answers to your rants, than you might want to change your choice of words. Being collectively adressed as pathetic, anti-american, halucinating and lacking of repsonsibility etc. does not exactly provide a good base for answering you in an other way but with similar simpleminded cliches and generalizations. However: thats not my stile, thats why I#ll take a little time in answering your rant:

before I even start that I want to make one thing clear: I am an active member of the CSU and could go on ranting about Schroeder for hours without so much as taking breath. So it is kinda hard to defend this man, but there are certain points you rant about that are just misreading or totally misinterpreting his speech - and than some historical facts too.

a) Schroeder was obviously adressing his speech to the French President. I do not know the background of diplomatic protocol for this speech, but it seems therefore right to speak about "France and its allies". He is,afterall, adressing the leader of the french nation, the host of the celebration who invited him.Therefore I am sorry, but I can not be outraged about this particular speech of Schroeder.... but we can easily find other to rant about and there I'll join you!
b) conotation of "x and its allies": allies, I think, are as a group of nations united under a certain goal. those nations sign agreements etc. as equals - even though their economical weight, political weight or military weight may be of huge difference. If this is so, than you can simply talk about the United Kingdom and its allies (including now FRance and USA and the Soviets etc) or about US and its allies because there seems to be not leading nation with followers, but a group of equal countries. Therefore too the use of this phrase by Schroeder can only by understood as belitteling or insulting the US if one tries very hard to be insulted in the first place. And once again I can see no reason for outrage, sorry
c) "German people's resistance to Hitler was miniscule".... First of all, this statement depends on the timepoint you take for this measuring: 1933, 1935, 1939 or 1944? Resistance was at very different levels at different times. Of course when a large number of resisting people get send to KZ, forced to emmigrate etc. over time the resistance will cease to exist.So your statement about "impossible to summarize" just proves, that your knowledge off the facts appears to be rather miniscule in itself.
But I give you that: there certainly was not a 10th of the people in some form of resistance who after the war claimed to have been against Hitler and the Nazi. The number of followers and believers was, sadly enough, big. However: the Nazi-poison was kreeping amazingly slow under the skin of the people. I strongly recommend to read the diaries of for instance Victor Klemperer, a German jew in Dresde who survived the third Reich and later wrote the most famous book about the Nazi "newspeak" language (LTI: Lingua tertii imperii). If you read carefully through 1933 to even 1937 or 1939 you will see that even those most at risk from the Hitler regime did not believe many things, did not know many things and were still certain that things will still stange.

d) "D-Day was not a liberation of Germany": Correct, it was a liberation of continental Europe and for this we have to be eternally grateful to the Americans and their allies (here you go!). But the killing of Hitler alone would not have brought this liberation. Therefore it was aimed to rid the world of a systematic and very strong tyranny in toto.

e) France-bashing could be my favourite pasttime too. But your dig at the high number of death in FRance during last summers heat wave is a cheap and rather silly shot. First of all: last years heat wave was extraordinary and did cause a high number of dead people in several European countries. My wife's grandmather died probably because her blood pressure could not cope with the head in rural Germany, even though in a several hundred year old massive stone building. In FRance there appeared to have been serious trouble with the emergency system.... but every summer in the US whenever the heat rises somewhere above the 100 Fahrenheit you experience heat emergencies in Boston or NY too and people die without air condition. Not in these numbers, but still Americans suffer similar problems given similar conditions. I could just as well point at the huge black out due to obsolete utility lines and desolate energy distribution in major parts of the US and claim, that Americans obviously can not take care for themselves.And this would be equally silly.

f) where did you witness "tears and horror" by German in reference to US-troops pulling out? I have not seen that yet on a large scale. Of course you'll find people in trouble about loosing an important employer in weak regions, a number of important consumers and hopefully quite often also the personal loss of friends and neighbours moving away if US facilities get closed. But that is in no way different to what happens in any given US community if some army camps get closed too. On the other hand, at least from my experience (which is certainly biased by but not limited to contacts with my fellow conservative German friends) hatred against Americans is not a widespread commoditiy among the majority of Germans. And if I read many comments in other blogs from US citizens (democrats, liberals, radicals, whateverals) in hate of their own nation and their own government, I see more or equal of your "Societal sickness beyond measure". So, please, first bash it out with your own folks and than come back with your partly pointless collective accusals.

And let me finally quote our former president Weizsaecker on Germany taking care of itself:
"We shall soon find out the rest of the world is not too eager to detect (again) what good soldiers the Germans can be!" BTW: you may have forgotten that German soldiers are currently in harms way to as your trusted allies in Afghanistan, just a small reminder!

Cheerio from OLD Europe

@ the CSU dude from a self-professed old europe- (thansk for taking the time to respond)
Hm, I like the CDU overall. Angela M seems like a genious when put next to the other clowns.
"Schroeder was obviously adressing his speech to the French President. I do not know the background of diplomatic protocol for this speech, but it seems therefore right to speak about "France and it's allies".
This speech was made in front of the world, and was suppoosedly "for and TO the world". If he wanted to stroke chiracs ego further, he should have done that in private. NOT on the occasion that 1000's of 85 yr old US vets in wheel chairs make a trip across the pond for reflection and to pay last respects to fallen comrads. It is THEY who were insulted by this pathetic imbecile. This "liberation" nonsense he speaks of is nothing but damn intellectual psychosis.
* Let me quickly clarify WHAT it was that the great Donald Rumsfeld really said about europe and the old vs. new europe BS. A reproter at a press breifing had asked Rumsefeld "Can you comment on the fact that europe is not behind the US in it's intention to topple saddam?"
Rumsfeld says- All of Europe is NOT involved or interested in europe SIMPLY becasue the french and the germans are not involved? That is a wrong assesment to make. Germany and france are NOT all of europe, I look at that as old europe and there is now a plethora of new recent democracies and upcoming countries within europe that would like to see tyranny and dictatorship stopped. I do not think german yand france can speak for the entire continent of europe".
very true huh? and to see how the moniker of "old europe" is now used exclusivley by the "eu" press is hilarious.
Any allaince between france germany and the US is shattered. It is my hope that no re-kindling ever occurs as it is safe to say a majority of those in the US have no interest in such sophmoroc BS. Liek Bush sadi at Normanady- "...and we would do it again, for our friends". Keep in mind his phrasing- "for our friends". Germany and france are not "friends" of the US nor allies at this time, and for the long term future. Bush did NOT mean he would aid germany or france again. That point was missed by your press.
") "D-Day was not a liberation of Germany": Correct, it was a liberation of continental Europe and for this we have to be eternally grateful to the Americans and their allies (here you go!). But the killing of Hitler alone would not have brought this liberation. Therefore it was aimed to rid the world of a systematic and very strong tyranny in toto"
D_DAy was NOT the liberation of the continent of europe as that continent spent the next 60 years locked in a nuclear cold war. Your continent became "whole again" perhaps in 1989 and onward, but minds are still stuck in the 60's.
"Real" liberation only came years after the war ended. D-Day was simply the beginning of the crushing of the little half-moustached freak tyrrant, NOT a liberation. You'll truly know when the "eu" IS liberated from it's failures of the past.
" France-bashing could be my favourite pasttime too. But your dig at the high number of death in FRance during last summers heat wave is a cheap and rather silly shot."
Any country that has something like this occur throuhout it's major cities in such modern times is NOT qualified to say a damn thing on the world stage. You look at that heat wave and one can pull 1000 reasons why it occured, and it is entirely a product of the selfishness of the french culture, the neglect of it's "treasured" elderly, and a pompous fantasy life of a constant vacation-like existence. You say the heat-wave was "extra-ordinary" yet I face the same temperatures year after year and really enjoy it. No my friend- what was extra-ordinary was the fact that it happend at all, and in such huge numbers. 15 more years in iraq wouldn't equal that number of deaths for the US, yet these fools criticise the US and still struggle with trying to cancel ONE vacation day to fund their elderly while at the same time NOT giving it's citizens ANY reason to think that it won't happen again.
Hey, you talk about power failures with the US grid and such, and I am just relieved that some state ahole power company employee didn't turn off the switch with his striking friend, THEN I would be nervous. Note this week's issues in france. I hear the National French Mime Troup is next to strike. Now what the hell will they have to talk or complain about? That their little world is too "quiet"?
"where did you witness "tears and horror" by German in reference to US-troops pulling out?closed"
The mayors of 14 german cities came to the US to ask them not to leave. Take a wuick look at Bild of deutschwell for many articles on this. You will both see and hear the tears and horror of it all" put forth by your media. It's "payback" they say. How consistantly convenient for the german politik and media circles.
Trust me that I spend a great deal of time bashing the delushional fools in this country who follow a jackass such as michael moore. Thankfully they represent a mere 30% of this country, rather than 80 o 90%.

"And let me finally quote our former president Weizsaecker on Germany taking care of itself:
"We shall soon find out the rest of the world is not too eager to detect (again) what good soldiers the Germans can be!" BTW: you may have forgotten that German soldiers are currently in harms way to as your trusted allies in Afghanistan, just a small reminder!
The german troops in afghanistan are doing exactly WHAT? How many? 2,000? Now thats a mighty contribution from a country trying to call itself a "world power" and who wants a seat on the UN security council. Who is kidding who wit hthat crap? German troops arived in afghanistan arrived after the battle that formed the collapse of the taliban, and our now currently running like rabbits in Kosovo when approached by rioting albanians, and in the meantime 48 yr old US woman UN guards are butchered by a FELLOW UN "police officer" jordanian coward in Kosovo. Very impressive. With your poplulations and your "union" of 25 countries- why is it that the US is needed in ANY way within the "eu" whether it is to aid the "eu" of to aid the "un". Can you not draw from your own citizens for thiese actions? And when one looks at the mess in kosovo, or bosnia, or serbia it is INSANE to hear what the people and leaders within the "eu" have to say about the US and Iraq regarding a conflict that is just 500 days old.
Do a google search on "soldiers hid like rabbits in kosovo" and you will see the brave german soldiers in action jsut 6 week ago. Now, I do not think that demonstrates the capabiltiies necessary for a UN sec council seat or acting upon a world stage.
Again, I truly thank you for the time you put forth to detail a response. It all helps.

@James
I am not a big fan of the SPD myself but your 4 points are not only one-sided but also factual incorrect.

Strangely, they didn't have the insight like Bismark who knew that in real-politik you need to be able to live next to your neighbors, even if they are the vanquished...
Do you think the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine was part of this fundamental insight?

@Pato
"This speech was made in front of the world, and was suppoosedly 'for and TO the world'."

That is incorrect, the speech was given at the "German-French festivities for the 60th annyversary of D-Day" in Caen. It was NOT given at the international memorial ceremonies in Arromanches.

Who exactly is calling Germany a "world power"?

Btw: Germany currently IS member of the UN security council.

Now, when something is, for example, broadcast on CNN International, then I would guess one can say that it DOES reach an international audience, not just France and Germany.

my mistake then regarding location of speech.
that doens't change the fact that the speech was a disgraceful fantasy.
Don't simply gloss over a majority of my post, and Please then answer the main point of my inquiry- WHAT was it that the french did to aid german unification? And WHAT did schroeder have to say about german unification at the time it was occuring? Any answer related to that should not be such a great challenge to provide from a country of 60 million smiling and happy souls.
So I continue to wait, and thanks to all who may have an answer.
germany is NOT a member of the UN security council.
what it has is a temporary seat, just like mexico. And sudan (currently overflowing with race-based brown vs. black/muslim on muslim genocide attempts) is co-chairing the UN human rights commisson to, to try logically figure that one out.

Die Leserbrief-Seite der FR entpuppt sich als wahre Fundgrube antiamerikanischer Tiraden... Heute zum Thema Reagan:

Nachruf auf Ronald Reagan

Er verdreifachte die Staatsverschuldung, aber er hatte Charisma. Er war für die Apartheid, war aber immer eine angenehme Erscheinung. Er unterstützte Saddam Hussein, aber er erreichte, dass wir uns selbst mochten. Er nahm den Werktätigen viele Rechte, aber man konnte gut mit ihm plaudern und ein Bier trinken. Star Wars entpuppte sich als zu teure Fantasie, aber er hatte eben diesen ansteckenden Optimismus. Er war für die Todesschwadronen in Mittelamerika, aber er hoffte stets auf das Beste in uns allen. Er schaute weg, als die Verbündeten in Salvador Nonnen vergewaltigten und ermordeten, aber er hatte diesen bescheidenen Humor. Er verwechselte seine alten Filme mit Außenpolitik, aber er hatte stets einen Scherz auf der Lippe. Er tauschte Waffen gegen Geiseln und zahlte Geld an Drogen handelnde Todesschwadronen, aber er verlor nie seine fröhliche Art. Kurz gesagt, er war der freundliche Nachbar, von dem man vielleicht sogar einen Gebrauchtwagen gekauft hätte. Ruhe in Frieden, Ronald Reagan.

Gustav Schaal, Krefeld

http://www.frankfurter-rundschau.de/ressorts/nachrichten_und_politik/standpunkte/?cnt=454970&cnt_page=2

Thomas,

>Die Leserbrief-Seite der FR entpuppt sich als wahre Fundgrube antiamerikanischer Tiraden... Heute zum Thema Reagan:<


Kein Wunder, schließlich will die SPD diese Zeitubng doch kaufen - Frage ist, ob die FR dann noch den Begriff "unabhängig und überparteilich" verwenen darf....


Beste Grüße

klaus

@James: little correction

1. The SPD was founded 1890 - formerly known as SAP (founded in Gotha 1875). 1933-1945 illegal in germany.
2. The result of the fushion (22.4.1946) of SPD and KPD (Communist Party) in east-germany was the SED - the successor is the PDS today.

SED was not the only one party in the east: They had CDU, LDPD (liberals) and the Bauernpartei (farmers party). But all this parties were like toothless doggies and under control of the SED


P.S. I'm not a/the Oberlehrer ;-)

@Pato
Sorry, I can't answer your questions right now but this book by Helmut Kohl might do the job: http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/3548362648/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/302-6071976-9421610

germany IS a member of the UN security council, albeit not a permanent one (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_members.html).

@Thomas
Wo ist da der Antiamerikanismus? Es mag vielleicht stoeren, schlecht ueber Tote zu reden, aber das allein ist ja nicht antiamerikanisch. Dieser Leserbrief kritisiert einen amerikanischen Praesidenten, nicht Amerika. Ich behaupte ja auch nicht, dass jemand, der Schroeder (oder meinetwegen Adenauer, Erhard, Brandt etc.) kritisiert, "antideutsch" ist.

@Thomas

Ich kann Jo nur zustimmen. Also entweder stellst Du Dich mit Absicht dumm, um zu provozieren, oder Du bist von den Autoren dieses Blogs inzwischen so indoktriniert, dass Du es selbst nicht merkst: Gegen Reagans Politik zu sein hat im Allgemeinen nichts mit Antiamerikanismus zu tun. Sonst müsste auch jeder US-Amerikaner, der mit Reagan nicht einverstanden war, anti-amerikanisch sein. Ist jemand, der gegen Schröder ist, auch anti-Deutsch? Sicher nicht. Ist jemand, der gegen Saddam ist, auch anti-Irakisch? Natürlich nicht.

"Ich kann Jo nur zustimmen. Also entweder stellst Du Dich mit Absicht dumm, um zu provozieren, oder Du bist von den Autoren dieses Blogs inzwischen so indoktriniert, dass Du es selbst nicht merkst: Gegen Reagans Politik zu sein hat im Allgemeinen nichts mit Antiamerikanismus zu tun. Sonst müsste auch jeder US-Amerikaner, der mit Reagan nicht einverstanden war, anti-amerikanisch sein. Ist jemand, der gegen Schröder ist, auch anti-Deutsch? Sicher nicht. Ist jemand, der gegen Saddam ist, auch anti-Irakisch? Natürlich nicht."

Ich kann Thomas nur zustimmen. Also entweder stellt ihr euch mit Absicht dumm, um einfach nur dagegen zu sein, oder ihr seid von Medien wie Frankfurter Rundschau oder SPIEGEL so indoktriniert, dass ihr es selbst nicht merkt: Gegen Bushs Politik zu sein hat im allgemeinen nichts mit Kritikfähigkeit zu tun. Sonst müsste auch jeder Deutsche, der mit Bush nicht einverstanden ist, auch nicht mit Clinton oder Kerry einverstanden sein. Ist jemand, der gegen Krieg ist, auch ein Freund des irakischen Volkes? Sicher nicht. Ist jemand, der gegen Bush ist, auch pro-Demokratie? Natürlich nicht.

Zu Schröders Aussage, daß Deutschland befreit wurde:
1.) Er hat ja so recht! Bisher wurden die Alliierten in Deutschland in den allermeisten Fällen als "Besatzer" bezeichnet, praktisch nie als "Befreier". Also ein toller Wandel in der Diktion!
2.) Von wem wurde Deutschland befreit? Von einem fremden Besatzungsregime? Nein, sondern von der eigenen Terrorregierung. Also, bedankt er sich für eine ähnliche Aktion, wie sie von den jetzigen Alliierten im Irak durchgeführt wurde, nämlich für die Beseitigung eines Terrorregimes.
Man sollte es ihm mal sagen!
Zu Frankreich:
1.) Als Alliierte waren sie klasse, die Franzosen!
In Churchills "Der zweite Weltkrieg" kann man nachlesen, daß die Engländer einen Teil der französischen Flotte bei Alexandria versenken mußten, damit diese nicht Hitlerdeutschland übergeben werden konnte. De Gaulle und den Befehlshaber der französischen Truppen in Nordafrika mußte man mehr oder minder prügeln, damit die Herrn gegen die Nazis zusammenarbeiteten.
2.) Man muß die Franzosen als solche garnicht hauen. Man sollte nur bei ihren Politikern Vorsicht walten lassen. Es gibt bei ihnen nur eine Maxime, nämlich "Frankreich zuerst".
Wenn man sie, wie Schröder Chirac, zu eng umarmt, kann es sein, daß einem ein Herr Chirac schon längst im Schwitzkasten hat und man dann außenpolitisch nur noch der Pudel ist.
Mal davon abgesehen, daß man wirtschaftspolitisch schon ausgetrickst wurde, bevor noch das Glücksgefühl der Umarmung abgeklungen war.
Muß noch viel lernen, der Gerd!
Die heimischen Hämmel kann man vielleicht mit Parolen wie "Frieden gibt´s, wenn man´s nur oft genug sagt" beeindrucken.
Chirac sagt auch "Frieden", aber unter der Prämisse, daß dieser Frankreich gerade in den Kram paßt!
Grüße von Franz

"Die Bundeswehr könnte aber auch als Sündenbock für Verbündete herhalten. Mohnbauern und Händler sind wütend, weil die USA-Armee Mohnfelder in der Region zerstören lässt. Schon vor Wochen hatten mehrere Soldaten in Kunduz die Befürchtung geäußert, dass sie angegriffen werden könnten, wenn die Aktion in der Provinz beginnt. Mittlerweile aber ist aus Kunduz zu hören, dass auch die US-Truppen ihre Offensive wieder abgeblasen haben. Als Grund wird die mangelnde Sicherheit in der Region genannt.

Für den Fahrer des Bundeswehr-Jeeps und die anderen Opfer kam diese Erkenntnis zu spät."

Das schreibt Matthias Gebauer im Spiegel:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,304446,00.html

Ist das nicht unglaublich? Wären die dummen Amis nicht gegen den Drogenanbau vorgegangen, wären diese Menschen noch am Leben und deutsche soldaten wären nicht in Gefahr. Die deutschen Soldaten bleiben jetzt möglichst im Camp, um keiner Gefahr ausgesetzt zu sein. (?) Deutsche Soldaten als Sündenbock für Verbündete??? Welch unglaublich feige und dumme Haltung sich hier verbirgt!


Jo: thanks for the clarification referring to the circumstances of SChroeder's speech on D-Day. Personally I do side with Pato insofar as I believe that SChroeder could well have mentioned the "other Allies" as well and their sacrifices, especially because he also explicitly (rightfully though) pointed out the sacrifices of Soviet/Russian troops in the same speech.

Pato:While you have read Jo's comment above, you still decline Schroeder the need to follow diplomatic protocoll. There are certain given and indisputable facts in life that one may not like, but which are there to be recognized and followed just the same. One of these things certainly is diplomatic protocol during official visits in foreign states. According to the circumstances of the speech (French-German celebration) and the invitation by the French president, Schroeders speech simply is diplomatically correct and one would expect from a first time invitee to follow protocol in full detail. Hence I stay uncorrected by you. BTW: if you would be invited into a neighbours house and would rise for a toast or speech, you would also adress the host and not any other of his guest or co-host (especially if the others did not invite you) or am I wrong here? I don't think so.In addition: if you check out the speeches of Queen Liz, PM Paul Martin and PM John Howard on D-Day, you will find that they only adressed the sacrifices of their own troops and disregarded at this special occation the sacrifices from the other Allies.... but I don't believe that any of the other veterans take that as insult or demeaning - because US Presidents also tend primarily to adress the deads and sacrifices of the US troops. That's how it works. Period. And unfortunately the American in most public or private discussion totally neglect the important role their Soviet ally plaid in bringing down the Third Reich. Without the 8,3 Million casualities among their troops (and don't forget the other 8 million civilian casualities, too, a truly staggering number!)and the binding of millions of German troops at the eastern frontier, the tremendous losses at Stalingrad and Kursk, American troops would never had a fighting chance to win the war at the Western front or at least not without terrible, terrible losses far exceeding the actual casualities.

Having said all that, you are still absolutely right, that a high number of leading German politicians hold an ideological grudge or even pending hatred against the American people and the government and Schroeder is just part of this generation. Therefore I join you anytime in pointing this out and attacking our lefties for this behaviour and ideology... but this Schroeder speech is just not the right base for it.

I find it sad, however, that you belittle the sacrifices of German troops in Afghanistan. Friends of mine are serving there, they ARE in harms way and only someone who did not serve or never was in harms way can probably belittle this service in toto like you do. I know that American and other troops there to think very different. You should backup there for a moment and rethink what you say and write. While you can blaim the German gov. for a lot of things, you should not get so low as to extend your rant to the common soldiers, NGO and Officers doing their job in a very dangerous environment. And, as Gabi pointed out above, obviously American troops refrained from some action in the Kunduz area against druglords because it is too dangerous there.... and thats where our troops are located, mate!

Change of topic:
Yes, Germany currently is a full member of the UN security council, nothing less and nothing more. You mistook the status of being permanent or non-permanent member of the SC. 5 nations (USA, Russia, UK, France and China) are permanent members with veto-power, 9 other nations are elected by the General Assembly every two years ---- but they are full members of the SC while sitting there nonetheless. BTW: Germany and Japan have been pushed in the past on numerous occations by members of the US gov. to become permanent members too in order to share the burden more equally, so it is not solely the wish of the Germans. Only problem with the reform of the SC is the question about veto-rights for new permanent members or rather the abandoning of the veto-rights for all members, as a majority of the GA repeatedly recommended. US is supporting Germans claim for a permanent seat and the most vicious opposition comes from.... ITALY! If Japan and Germany get admitted to the SC as permanent members, Italy fear to be left behind as the last and sole major looser of WWII.

Finally, to your pending question about: what did FRance do for reunification of Germany: they did just dick, nothing, rien! In effect, Mitterand and Thatchter tried hard to prevent the unification, so there is no thanks to them from my side, but a lot of thanks to Ronald REagan for providing the ground for the breakdown in Eastern Europe and for Bush I. for standing behind the wish for reunification. It is a sad mistake of German foreign politics, as someone pointed out above, to mistake French cooperation in certain political areas at certain times for friendship. There is nothing like "friendship" among nations and for the French, France comes first and than comes nothing for a looooooooooooong time. So any thanks for that are clearly misguided or a blatant misinterpretation of the facts.
Funny little historical note: the last East-German gov. asked for and received an honest analysis of the economic situation of the state in Oct. of 1989 by their chief economist Schuerer. He made clear that the GDR is bancrupt for many reason and would have to cut consumer products and social welfare by 30 % in order to survive the poor economic performance of state governed industries - which was not possible without starting immideately a real revolution. In order to survive, Schuerer recommended to ask those nations with the assumed strongest opposition against a change of status quo with Germany to fund credits in the range of 2 -3 billion dollars. He specifically named Austria, France and England! Fortunately no-one in the Central Committee of the GDR had the guts to do just that, because I am damn sure it would have worked. Given the choice of a crumbling GDR with the possibility of reunification of Germany or the continuation of two seperated Germanies, FRance alone would most likely been eager to spent the requested billions plus some small change for the leadership just keep the GDR alive and kicking!

I have lost faith in Old Europe obtaining any further economic prosperity. Socialism Kills. The EU has dig the grave for Old Europe to be buried alive.

France will fall first, then Germany, then Spain, Italy, Portugal, then the rest of Europe will be dragged into the sewer of Socialists oppression. Britain will be the last to teeter on the sideline of this grave.

As far as economic stability is concerned, Old Europe is fucked.

It is simply a matter of time.

The other problem is that Old Europe refuses seriously recognize Islamic fascism has for years now been weaving its' web throughout the entire continent and is growing in strength. Fascist Islamic terrorism is still treated as a 'law enforcement issue" in Old Europe. America treated Islamic terrorism in the same manner as Old Euopre for over two decades, 9/11 represents the failure of 'law enforcement' policy.

Old Europe is really, really fucked.

Continue to close your eyes Old Europe it will help ease the pain of impact when the whole thing comes tumbling down.

@Niko
Es ging in dem Leserbrief weder um Schroeder, noch um Bush, Hitler oder Ashcroft. Der einzige Name der erwaehnt wurde, ist Reagan. Ich bestreite nicht, dass jener Vergleich von Herta Daeubler-Gmelin antiamerikanisch und indiskutabel war, ich bestreite nicht, dass Behauptungen, die die USA in die Naehe eines Polizeistaats ruecken, einfach nur dumm sind. Aber ich bestreite, dass jener Leserbrief antiamerikanisch ist. Der Beweis des Gegenteils steht nach wie vor aus.

syn: there is a German saying: "totgesagte leben laenger". Loosely translated it reads: those pronounced dead prematurely will live all the longer!

Not everything is good in the US and not everything is bad in good OLD Europe. Let me just point out a few things were the US is way behind Europe and other develloped nations (Japan for instance):

mobile telecommunication/ cell phones: the US is way behind in ratio of cell phones per 1000 people. Many economist believe that this will hurt the US economy on the long run, because a huge number of modern services will not take foot in the US due to the lack of this. In Estonia, the European country with the highest ration per 1000, people even pay with their phones in bars or at public services, just for example. Problem in the US is systematic, due to the use of area codes for cell phones instead of seperate number codes just for cellphones. as a result, the owner f the cell phone has to pay for calls received too in the US in contrast to Europe where you just pay for calls made.

utility system/grids: here US has at the standard of a third world country. I have never epxerienced so many shortages and balckout after simple rain or snow storm like during my two years in the Boston area. the extremly grwoing consumption of energy (also due to the fact that electric heating and/or cooling in poorly insulated houses waste a high percentage of input energy) will bring more blackouts and hurt the economy in the long run.

energy waste: due to poor standards of insulation of houses and also due to those gas guzzling SUV and trucks, US is extremly vulnerable also to oil prices and shortages. This too will hurt or cripple your economy on the long rung without major changes.

Europe does have its problems with overgrown social welfare system and the like and the US has more or less suceeded in cutting back right there, but we will tackle this topic soon enough, (yet still too late, so you are right about that).

Anyway: the US is not on the highground tolook down on Europe and you aren't either

Cheerio fromOLD Europe

@syn
in old europe, we call this a cassandra complex...

@pat
thanks for your thoughts and the blast of ensuing hot air that came with it. Some of your points are well taken, and you should be commended for attempting to apply healing salve to the german zeitgeist.
How do you explain the recent G3 spectrum auctions auctions in the "eu"? What did they mean for the "eu's" mobile technology companies? What amount of $$ was lost? 40 billion USD or so?
Your claim of the "eu" being far ahead in cellular technology ignores the fact that americans land lines for local calls are free. If one needs a new line or a new number to their house- they can get that in less that 2 days, rather than a 6 to 8 to 12 week wait as in the "eu". The same reason that the US has minimal cross country train service is that most prefer to fly and we have 1000's of airports. Has there been such a great need for cellular service it would have been rolled out sooner. What "modern services" will the US then miss out on due to this? The ability to request a date from the chick on across the aisle from you on the train?
Now, let's talk about the importance of the development of efficient air-conditioning systems....

pat,

it may be true that the u.s. does not have as many cell phones per capita as estonia- and certainly not japan- but people that want them, have them. trying to find someone in any metropolitan area without one would be an excersise in frustration, at the very least. beyond people not wanting or needing them, there is a prohibitive cost to putting cell phone towers in vast tracks of low-density rural areas across much of america. if there's a customer base to support a tower, they put one up, if there isn't, they don't. classic capitalism. it makes sense. just like japan's density is so extreme it makes sense to put up towers everywhere, because money can be made from every tower.
as for economic penalties for not 'riding the wave' of new cell phone technologies- we'll follow the trends when they are economically feasible, or, at least, usefull. i don't think that people are going to stop carrying their wallets. cash is still a viable solution for the time being.
as for the boston blackouts, i have never heard of such a thing. i lived there for a year and never had any electricity problems. i lived in new york for 5 years and had a couple for less than an hour. certainly the system needs updating, especially post "BLACKOUT '03"- where most new yorkers took it as an opportunity to have parties- but to compare it to the third world is just silly.
i can't wait for the day we can declare independance from oil (foreign, especially), but for now we're stuck with it. i don't think that we're in any danger of being 'crippled' by this dependence, though. america is not 'extremely vulnerable' to fluctuating oil prices. as much as the media made of recent gas prices, you'd think it was armeggeddon out here. but the fact is that the gasoline is about $2.oo a gallon and that isn't so bad- especially if you are from europe. if gas prices keep going up, we'll drive less, buy more fuel efficient cars, and spend an extra nickel on non-locally produced food. that's it. it's not the plague. the sky isn't falling on anyone...


@pat

I too like pato must commend you on your responses, they have been well argued and formulated. Some of them I agree with, some of them I don't. Some of them also my own:

German troops in Afghanistan.

While I do appreciate German contributions to the efforts to try and stabilize the country, I still remain critical of the German military and leadership. Fact : American and British were the ones who "liberated" the country, not the Germans and other nations that are also involved there. Americans and British paid for the liberation with their own blood. Germans didn't arrive until the Taliban was well on the run and bullets were no longer flying. Question, how many Germans have been KIA (killed in action) in Afghanistan? How many Americans and British? How many Taliban ( A: not enough ).

Please don't take this as an attack on your military, but they would not be there were it not for the US and the UK paving the way. The same thing happened back in Bosnia in 1996, the Europeans were not able to take care of their backyard and the States had to take the initiative. I DEFINATELY do see the need for allies that have specific tasks to undertake during the stabilization of a given country.

My point here is that the USA will continue to act boldly and other nations will have to fill their other rolls wherever they can: perhaps in stabilization. This is not to belittle other countries contribution, but I think that the model works, so long as all parties agree to that arrangement.

Cell phones.

"way behind"... Sorry, don't think so.

1) The USA invented them.
2) I've had GSM cell phones from : UK, Germany and USA. The American one was, by far, the cheapest of all of the phones to own. I had a contract with Voicestream ( now a German company ) that allowed FREE calls on the weekends, and the first 2000 minutes were free. I don't think that I ever paid more than 60USD a month for my phone. I pay, on average, 200 Euros a month for my D2 German cell phone. In Germany, you have to pay for even the smallest of phone calls, weekends included.
3) Japan is the clear leader in cell phones, not Europe or the USA.
4) If there are business models out there that make financial sense. I can almost guarantee that the States will soon adopt them. But, you must agree that the States is a business leader in many of the worlds industries ( i.e. Biotechnology )


Banking

Germany has the überweisung facility that the States does not, which I like. But, on-line banking requires diligent record keeping of the TAN number, so I think the states is up on that one. Plus many more banks are open on Saturdays in the States than in Germany.


Service

USA 1, GY 0

Shopping Hours

USA 1, GY 0

Energy Usage

1) Italy had a country-wide power outage last year as well. But was you point about American vs Europe or just Germany vs the USA. Last years power outage in the Northeast also struck Canada as well.
2) I'm originally from Boston. It snows a lot there. And I don't ever recall having lost power due snow or other reasons. I live in Münich now and seldom see the amount of snow fall here than what I was familiar with in Boston.
3) "Third world" are you an expert in this area? I've seen power control boxes that look like spaghetti in Kyoto, Japan. So much that I took a picture of it! I think calling it the third-world is really a stretch...
4) The price of oil and America's gas guzzling SUVs. Firstly, I'd like to say that I don't like SUVs myself, I would prefer a brand new BMW 645 myself. But it's rather expensive! Considering for one that most of the cost of oil in Europe is due to excessive taxes, a doubling of prices in EURO is not a doubling in the cost of gas in the States. More importantly, the cost of energy in general is an important issue. I was reading an article from the Economist the other week that showed how much GDP can be produced by one unit of Energy input. This is measured in GDP/BTU or ( British thermal unit ). The states if far more capable of producing wealth with small increases in energy input that all of the other countries they had listed. Unfortunately, Germany was not on the list. But countries like India and China are far lower on that scale and thus are more sensitive to minor prices changes in oil. So, economic calamity is not around the corner as it was perhaps back in the early 1970s when oil really made a shock...


Remember Heaven is :

When the cook is French, the car is German, the police is English, the woman is Italian and the service is American.

And Hell is :

When the cook is English, the car is American, the police are Italian, the woman is French and the service is German.

I am quite happy to have provoked such an interesting debate. thanks to James, Henry and Pato for taking their time and answering in such a friendly fashion (hey, a little bit of ranting and provocation is always well deserved and adds to the fun of blogging, otherwise we could just swap scientific research papers and yawn ourselfes to death).

Today my dayjob (just begann at 5:50 a.m. local time) will probably prevent me from contributing in length, but maybe I'll find some time for answers and comments around lunch time..... which should be early enough to make your mornings in the US.

While I hope that this shines through my lines somehow, I still would like to make one thing clear: I consider myself a true friend of the American nation and the American people. I will be eternally grateful for our liberation in WWII, but even more for the support in bringing the wall down (thanks, R.R.!) and unification (thanks Bush I.). The 2 1/2 years living in greater Boston were a terrific time and there are many things I still miss while living back here in Germany ( the "History Channel" and C-Span up front). However I learned something the hard way in my own life: true friends are the one's not brown-nosing around your back, but helping when in need and openly critical when well deserved. Hence I am a friend and not a cheerleader (far to pudgy and ugly for that anyway) for the US.

Write to you later......


Cheerio from OLD Europe

on second reading of above reactions on my prior comments:

the "thirld world" comparison for the US grids and utility was not my own and personal brainfart and I should not seek credit for it nor get blame for it:
-----We're a superpower with a Third World grid," New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a former energy secretary say.---- August 17th, 2003, source unclear (yet)

thanks pat..
I am an american who lives in Europe.. I have my concerns with the uses (and abuses) of American power throughout the world. American needs friends who are honest and open.. Joschka Fischer is a friend to america.. IMHO Schroeder is not..
Der Ton macht die Musik...

According to a Gallup poll, only 34% of Americans had a favorable image of France last year. That's only one third of the population.

Nuff said...

... well, not quite: The other two thirds are probably the ones who also whine about how they aren't loved by the French.

@ Niko:You said "Most of the Nazis' own European subjects did little to stop their mass murdering." and furthermore towards Gemany and France: "Meanwhile, those born after World War II in these two countries either know nothing about the American sacrifice or chalk the invasion up to the insanity of war in general."

Now, lets put that in some perspective from outside the US-American view on the world as an appendix to America, shall we?

Below you find a list of casualities, both military and civilian during the war. First you will notice, that the number of US-American casualities in toto are around 500 thousand. this is a terrible number of young lives ended prematurely, of hopes and dreams never lived, of chances missed forever and it is very very sad. for these sacrifices we (I mean us Germans) owe you thanks. Period.

But, getting back about your rant of European nations not fighting back against the Nazi occupation and risking anything, check out the other numbers:

Russia/Soviet Union: While one could argue, that Russia in not included in your perception of Europe, we should never, never forget that 20 Million people lost their lives, among them 8,3 million soldiers! The military losses exceed the American 16fold! And it should be obvious, as the Russian are "accountable" for German losses of around 2,5 Million soldiers, that without them D-Day would have become domesday for the American and British forces. Just get me right: I am not belittling the American sacrifices, i just hate when American forget that other nations suffered much more in fighting the Nazis and that the Americans did not singlehandedly win the war. Without the Russians you would either have lost the war or would have had to nuke Germany big time. Please do alsways remember while looking at parades of veterans from WWII during Fourth of July in American towns, that in Russia there are the birthyears of 1923 - 1925 (or -26, I'll have to check that again) of which only 3 % survived the war! Unfortunately enough, because they were the enemy after the war, American tend to forget this. And because of the murder,rape and "ethnical cleansing" at the end of the war and after, Germans tend to forget this to.

Now look further at French casualties: exceeding the American casualities by a much smaller population.

Poland - now that is Europe too - lost around 6 Million ! people. the losses in Warshaw alone exceed all losses of Americans and Brits in the war!

Therefore I think you accusation of the Europeans is not fair and not correct when looking at the numbers. And not a good proof for your "knowledge" about sacrifices in war other than the American. Hence your statement seems to come from a hypocrit. Sorry, had to say it. Unfortunately I don't have the numbers of inner-German resistance, but it was more than you think, less than I would have hoped and defintely less than people claimed after the war. So I more or less concede to this point of yours.

Die Menschenverluste der einzelnen Staaten:

UdSSR: 20.000 000
China: 10.000 000
Polen: 6.028 000
Deutschland: 6.000 000
Japan: 2.000 000
Jugoslawien: 1.706 000
Frankreich: 653 000
Griechenland: 520 000
USA: 503 000
Österreich: 485 000
Rumänien: 460 000
Ungarn: 420 000
Italien: 410 000
CSR: 400 000
Großbritannien: 388 000
Niederlande: 210 000
Belgien: 88 000
Finnland: 84 000
Kanada: 34 000
Albanien: 28 000
Indien: 24 000
Australien: 12 000
Norwegen: 10 262
Neuseeland: 10 000
Luxemburg: 5 000


Pat, wo sind die Deutschen aufgeführt, die jüdischen Glaubens waren, und durch Deutsche umkamen? Sind die in den 6 Millionen eingeschlossen?

@ Niko: Geeh, Niko, did I hit a nerve? Good!

First off all: just looking at your contribution one could assume that the lines have been written by you. Might be helpfull to use "quotation marks" for differing your own words from a quotation. But thats probably just the "Oberlehrer" in me again......

Btw: Nice to hear that you are German, but since the article posted and quoted by you came infact from an American, I guess my pointing out of some typical American misinterpretations and misunderstandings of historical facts just hit the nail right on the head, regardsless of where you come from.

So while you rant around a lot in your new comment (this time presumably written by your sweet self), you don't get to the facts I presented.While you embrace Hanson's writing, you seem not to be able to hold the facts presented above against this writing and come to some simple conclusions as to his/yours wrong assesment of some historical facts.

For instance: you quoted/ Hanson said: " Most of the Nazis' own European subjects did little to stop their mass murdering." and I gave you detailed and concrete numbers of casualities during war and occupation, clearly demonstrating that your/his assesment of the resistance in occupied Europian countries during the war is obviously not correct. I can not detect and "smear" by that, but of course if you just hate to find yourself rightfully contradicted and reproached, you are getting smeared with the truth. Too bad.

Russia/Soviet Union: calling something lunatic that you don't like to hear is not much of an argument. Or are you somehow disputting the facts in the above paragraph? I can't see that anywhere in your writing. But then you don' seem to be able to present much of argument in your own words anyway. So perhaps you better keep at clipping interesting articles for your comments, what say?

thanks for your advice on "channeling anger and frustration". Funny you of all people should mention that, looking at the stile and choice of agressive/frustrated words in your comments.

as to where and what I write: if you don't like it, don't read it, it is sooooooo simple! And on his own blog, why don't you just let David be the judge of that, I am not sure your opinion does count there for anything ( but David can of course correct me/support you.) However bloggin is, from what I experienced so far, about exchange of controversial arguments and opinions and it is kinda sad if you, dear Niko, rather prefer just to get confirmation for whatever you decide to believe in right now. Not much of a strongminded person, it would appear.... (o.k., o.k., now I AM dropping down to your level of rants, but what the heck).

And as to your singlehandedly ending of all discussions by a simple "nuff said": that just means dick to me! You don't shut me up (David can, however, but only on this blog anyway).A number of conservative American blogs actually seem to enjoy my sometimes supportive and sometimes opposing comments, because, unless you, I try to be not directly insulting (though I may not always succeed)

Meanwhile to all other participants: Cheerio from OLD Europe and don't let super-tough-guy Niko shut you up too

addendum: @verständnisfrage: excellent question, thanks, will have to think about it and get more data. Guess one would find the numbers within the respective population, so it would mean that German jews would be counted among German losses (which makes me a bit uneasy with reference of mixing murderers and their victims in one number) and Polish or Russian jews among these countries numbers of civilian losses.

Pat,

"Geeh, Niko, did I hit a nerve? Good!

First off all: just looking at your contribution one could assume ..." [followed by a lame attempt to mix up cause and effect] "... Meanwhile to all other participants: Cheerio from OLD Europe and don't let super-tough-guy Niko shut you up too"

So, jetzt hör mir mal gut zu, du Wicht: ich habe oben lediglich einen Artikel von VDH zitiert. Aus dem Kontext und der Formattierung war vollkommen offensichtlich, dass es ein Zitat war. Hättest du dir die Mühe gemacht, tatsächlich auf den Link zu klicken, anstatt deine vorgegebene Meinung zu Amerikanern als solchen zum besten zu geben, dann wäre dir z.B. aufgefallen, dass zu Beginn des Artikels bei NRO gross und breit Victor Davis Hanson drübersteht.

Deine sonstigen Ausflüchte und Rechtfertigung sind ähnlich dämlich. Abgesehen davon rate ich dir nocheinmal dringend, beim nächsten Aggressionsschub gegen Amerika (oder meinetwegen Papua-Neuguinea) dir ein anderes Posting zu suchen, das du als Vorwand für deine Litanei verwenden kannst.

Ich hatte oben lediglich zitiert, und zwei Wörter dazugestellt. Nach deinen ersten wüsten Beschimpfungen kommen jetzt die nächsten, und du hast dazu noch die Frechheit, dich als Opfer meiner angebliche "rants" zu stilisieren, oder - als Höhepunkt - den Lesern zu raten, "and don't let super-tough-guy Niko shut you up too".

Sorry, David, das kannst du gerne zensieren, aber ein mieseres Arschloch ist mir hier im Blog noch nicht begegnet.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

May 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31