« Werner Hoyer: A Continuing Disaster | Main | Vote for Davids Medienkritik: 2006 Weblog Awards »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c42969e200d8342e7fcc53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Iraqschadenfreudegruppe:

» Schadenfreude? How the Smearing of Iraq War Critics Has Changed from Atlantic Review
Monday marked the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein. But instead of celebrations, the tone in Iraq was set by angry anti-American protests, writes Spiegel International and then translates several German editorials on this subje [Read More]

Comments

The ISG report?

Four words for our European friends...

Dead. In. The. Water.

Or, to quote another famous Bush, "Not gonna happen."

Nothing tops Schadenfreude for these guys, you know the deal. And they still don't get it: It ain't over tell it's over.

One would have to assume that Germans see an advantage for the FatherLand. Equally they seem to think this will some how enhance their secuirty.

It does cause me to wonder what they are thinking but if this is the road that must be taken to unwind NATO then....full speed ahead.

Schadenfreude is something you feel when you are happy about the misfortune of somebody else.
It is not Schadenfreude when you are happy that somebody finally tries to correct a (perceived) error you told him about time ago. There maybe a certain "toldya so" factor to it but it's not Schadenfreude.

Schadenfreude would be stupid since U.S. failure in Iraq would not be to the advantage of Germany, quite the contrary. A "failed state" of Iraq does not help anybody, not even trade.

A Middle East in chaos does not inspire Schadenfreude to anyone.

As for the trade with Iran: Italy's trade with Iran is two times as high as Germany's. And that was in Berlusconi's time.

Note from David: "Italy's trade with Iran is two times as high as Germany's." Can you come with facts? The stats I found tell a different story: Germany is number 1.

As to your claim that there is no Schadenfreude in Germany about the Iraq situation: SPIEGEL ONLINE, Stern, tagesschau, etc., etc. don't show Schadenfreude? What do you smoke? Any plans to learn German?

Amelie,

One good thing about never doing anything is you can always say "I told you so"

And given the support from Germany as it concerns Iraq it would seem the goal of German policy is to have a "failed state" in Iraq.

The Germans might just get it along with lots of other goodies. Hope they enjoy it.

Amelie's analysis is in fact correct: You can't feel Schadenfreude - IF you understand what losing Iraq would mean not only for the US, but for the whole free world and its war against Islamism. Unfortunately, many Germans including politicians and journalists have no idea at all of these consequences. They still think that the Islamists "only" fight against Israel and the US: "We didn't take part in the adventure in Iraq, why should they hate us?" Why, indeed. Because they hate us not for what we do, but for what we are.

David

I've been wanting to make a suggestion for several years, so I guess I could do it now: maybe you could use a different font for the "Notes from David/Ray"? They are indistinguishable from the rest of the text and therefore easy to overlook. Other than that everything's OK :-)

David: "Italy's trade with Iran is two times as high as Germany's." Can you come with facts? The stats I found tell a different story: Germany is number 1.

So interesting, so telling. Readers like Amelie don't bother to read the factual reports published on DMK. When have facts become relevant? Readers like her show up only to rationalize, minimalize or deny those aspects of reality, which are incompatible with the Greater Truth.

I need to correct about Italy. I read yesterday that Italy's exports to Iran were 8bn which is obviously not true. Unfortunately I forgot the source but it was a major newspaper.

Given the fact that Germany is the world's major exporter of goods (not services) it is not that astonishing that it leads in Iran as well. A per capita tally would be more revealing.

And @joe
Failed states do not make good trading partners. A strong stable oil exporting Iraq would certainly be more beneficialo to Germany's trade than a country sinking into a bloody civil war.

"A per capita tally would be more revealing."

Logically true from a statistical standpoint, but I can't for the life of me see how it would reveal any information relevant to the topic at hand. That topic is the German media and their attitude toward U.S. involvement in Iraq. That has nothing to do with Italian exports; at least, not if you are of sound mind, which many in the Left are not.

That said, I agree that schadenfreude is not the correct term. I would call it exultation. The German media has provided the terrorists and Saddamites in Iraq with moral support for nearly four years now. It's not surprising that they rejoice when they perceive (incorrectly in my estimation) a faint ray of hope for their terrorist friends.

BTW: The population of Italy is about 58 million, that of Germany about 82 million (CIA Factbook).

"Given the fact that Germany is the world's major exporter of goods (not services) it is not that astonishing that it leads in Iran as well. A per capita tally would be more revealing."

Why were you in such a hurry to claim that Italy's trade with Iran was twice as great to begin with, if, as you say, it doesn't really matter? Just asking.

@Helian,

because if Italy's exports to Iran were twice the German figure it would really be significant given the fact that Italy's population is much smaller than Germany's.

On the other hand Italy seems to import a lot more from Iran than Germany does.
If we believe SPON German trade with Iran is down in 2006:

"Doch das harmonische Bild hat jüngst gelitten: Im laufenden Jahr gingen die deutschen Ausfuhren in den Iran gegenüber dem Vorjahreszeitraum erstmals deutlich zurück, laut Deutsch-Iranischer Handelskammer um 11 Prozent. Im Vorjahr hatte es noch einen deutlichen Zuwachs gegeben. Der Rückgang bei Irans Ausfuhren nach Deutschland beträgt sogar rund 18 Prozent."

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,454053,00.html

@beimami

you could also argue that Iraq has little to do with Germany's exports to Iran. I was referring to the quote: "Following America's defeat, Germany will inherit Iraq's oil from the U.S. and will - again - be able to provide German nuclear technology to Iran."

That's quite a strong and rather weird statement to make. It just begs for the questions:

Does the U.S. own Iraqi oil now? Or how could Germany "inherit" the oil from the U.S.? (Btw German oil companies play a very minor role, the big non U.S. companies would be Russian, British, French and even Italian, with China coming up).

Why would Germany want to provide an out of control Iran with nuclear technology it would be threatened with?

Because they are unable to recognize the fact that they would be threatened as well. For (many of) them, it's just business with some strange guys with turbans who happen to dislike the US. Well, now that's an attitude old Europeans can understand, isn't it? Then why not sell Iran anything they want?

Check out SPON's "Feindbild '68," but make sure you have a fresh hanky to cry into. It seems the unfair and mean-spirited criticism of the poor, misunderstood '68'ers makes America bashing look like child's play.

I especially loved this line; "Vom vielbeschworenen Werteverfall kann vor allem bei der jüngeren Generation keine Rede sein." No objection there. When it comes to the "values" of promoting mindless hatred of America, of blindly and obsessively searching out any "evil" they can find about her and convincing themselves that is the only truth about her worth knowing, of being profoundly ignorant of her history and what she stands for other than the murder of the Indians and oppression of black people, of being mindless dupes of negative propaganda when it comes to assessing her role in the world for the last 200 years, the younger generation in Germany stands second to none. I see no erosion of "values" there at all. There has also been no erosion of the '68er "value" of pretending to superior moral virtue, and reviling others for not making sacrifices one is not willing to make oneself, taking care to ignore one's own faults in the process. In a word, they are just as unwilling to confront the evil in their own hearts and minds as the '68ers who taught them these "values" so well.

Like the '68ers, they can work themselves into a fine lather over all the perceived "evils" of American history, but what happens to that indignation when real historical evils are denied, as is now happening in Iran? Suddenly, their finely tuned sense of virtuous indignation takes a vacation.

How is it that, on such an occasion, we see none of the same moralistic preaching we are treated to every year on the anniversary of Hiroshima? How is it that the "younger generation" doesn't recall the 200 Jewish citizens of Freiburg, who were hanged and left dangling out of their windows to watch their synagogue burn and their rabbi beaten to death? How is it that they don't recall what happened in Szczucin in Poland on September 23, 1942, when, on their Day of Atonement, the Jewish population were in their synagogues praying, as German soldiers in trucks arrived? Have they forgotten how those German soldiers burned those people, bakers, millers, students, wives and husbands, in their places of worship, and turned machine guns on those who tried to escape? Do they, on such occasions, recall the time in Lublin, when Germans stood 500 women and their children against a wall in the market place and machine gunned them all? Do they remember how the Germans saved money in the Ukraine, when they became angry because the Jews were costing them too much to exterminate with bullets? They devised a less expensive method. They took Jewish women into the roads and tied them together with their children. Then they drove their heavy military trucks into and over them, running them back and forth over the bodies. Do they recall the innumerable similar "minor historical anecdotes," such as the time that a thousand Jews arrived in Riga as conscripted laborers? After looking them over, their merciful German captors decided that, after traveling in sealed compartments for days without food, they were too weak to work. Instead, they were sealed in large wagons, driven into the fields, and dynamited. How is it that we don't see the constant recollection and recitation of these "minor incidents" that the German younger generation so delights in when it comes to recalling the sins of others?

Yes, the German younger generation appreciates the "value" of self-righteously condemning the evil of others. They condemn the past sins of others, but they themselves are morally pure and spotless. After all, they have learned the lesson of history from their forefathers. They, like the generation of '33, have learned how sastifying it can be to pretend to moral purity while promoting mindless hate of other peoples and countries.

No fair bringing up Freiburg, Helian. It gives lie to the comforting myth that what happened to the Jews was caused only by the Nazis who just happened to be German. Culture has nothing to do with it.

Or with this, I suppose.
"This isn't a Jew state, this isn't the German Jew Republic

Just a note from a young German, who has to do with many other young Germans.

The irony is that younger Germans - though having nothing to do with the holocaust - claim to know everything about evil, and hence to be beyond it.

This remembers me of a "domesticated" pitbull, reminding other dogs not to bite - "I know what I'm sayin'". And because they assume to know it, they have the unbearable hypocrisy to put their moral attitude above all others, especially the US. It's grotesque.

This is only obliquely related, but I was floored this morning when I read this:

Which President said this during the State of the Union address?

"Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force."

Anyone?

(Assuming no one guesses correctly, I'll post the surprising answer later.)

@Amelie

'...you could also argue that Iraq has little to do with Germany's exports to Iran. I was referring to the quote: "Following America's defeat, Germany will inherit Iraq's oil from the U.S. and will - again - be able to provide German nuclear technology to Iran."'

I still don't get it. What on Earth do current Italian exports to Iran have to do with what the Germans might do if the U.S. pulls out of Iraq?

David's statement about German exports of nuclear technology to Iran was polemic to be sure, but not far-fetched. That the moral indignation of the German press and government at the U.S. presence in Iraq has more to do with thwarted German/French oil and export interests in the Middle East than with any concern with the safety and free determination of the Middle Eastern population is obvious.

Why the Germans would sell nuclear technology to Iraq?
1. Greed.
2. So the Iranians can finally get rid of those pesky Jews.

I know that some might consider #2 to be unfair, but I never see German Lefties get so excited and angry as when they discuss Isreal and the Palestinians. It's not like there aren't other problems in the world. Their angry focus on that one issue makes me suspect that anti-semitism plays at least some role in their passion.

Scott H.

Dhimmi Carter

Ding, ding, ding! And the winner is...Pamela! The use of military force to protect US interests in the Persion Gulf, as espoused in that quote, is known as the Carter Doctrine. The quote is from his State of the Union speech in 1980 and was aimed directly at the Soviet Union. Imagine that! Jimmy Carter advocating Blood-for-Oil. Who'da thunk it? Kinda puts a new perspective on current affairs -- at least, for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_Doctrine

Hey Scott, here's one

Who wrote Carter's infamous 'malaise' speech?

Hint: He's currently known for his apparently congenital inability to shut up already.

Here's a link to the '68er article, BTW. It was such a joke even SPON couldn't stomach leaving it up there for too long. It seems those evil neoconservatives are up to their old tricks again: "Gegenüber jener Generation, die vor knapp vierzig Jahren gegen die herrschenden Verhältnisse protestierte, gerieren sich die Neokonservativen von heute als selbsternannte Chefankläger."

It seems that SPON chose one "christlich-konservative ZDF-Journalist Peter Hahne" to play the role of neoconservative villain in this instance. This vile spawn of the bourgeoisie has apparently claimed that the uniformly loving and peaceful exercise of freedom of expression by these same '68ers was, somehow, "scandalous:"

"Der Muff von tausend Jahren, raus aus den Talaren, skandierte der Mob auf der Straße. Ich konnte das in der Hochburg der Kulturrevolution, an der Universität Heidelberg, Anfang der Siebzigerjahre hautnah miterleben. Und bin bis heute erstaunt, in welchen Schlüsselpositionen die damaligen (auch geistigen) Rädelsführer jetzt sitzen."

SPON's Christian Rickens replies, "Nur mal zum Verständnis: Bei Hahnes "Mob auf der Straße" - Mob ist übrigens laut Duden das englische Wort für "Pöbel" - handelte es sich offensichtlich um Studenten, die von ihrem verfassungsmäßig garantierten Demonstrationsrecht Gebrauch machten und auf die unrühmliche Rolle hinwiesen, die viele der damaligen Professoren im "tausendjährigen Reich" gespielt hatten. Das klingt für mich nach einem einigermaßen legitimen Anliegen. Warum diejenigen, die solche Demonstrationen als "Rädelsführer" organisiert hatten, später keine wichtigen gesellschaftlichen Funktionen ausüben sollten, bleibt Hahnes Geheimnis."

Tears rolled down my cheeks as I read that bit. The injustice of it all! Of course, it happens that I was also a student in a German university at the same time, and what was "offensichtlich" to Rickens was hardly "offensichtlich" to me, and, I daresay, to many others. The one professor I know of who was a focus for the ire of these dear, peaceful, law-abiding students had nothing to do with the Third Reich. He did, however, express political views that were mildly to the right of center. For that, he was subjected to intimidation, disruption of his classes, threats, and insults by these same, loving, law-abiding '68ers. Why, indeed, should such intolerant jerks be given real power over others? One wonders!

The only significant political activity I witnessed among the students at that time was shared between the mutually hostile tribes of Maoists and Stalinists. These, however, were very active indeed, plastering every wall of the university buildings with their slogans and mutual recriminations. Surely, of course, belief in the doctrines of such benign historical figures as Mao and Stalin should not disqualify one from assuming a leading role in ones chosen profession! Where's the harm?

Rickens goes on to lecture us about what the '68ers were really all about:

"- Wir mussten zum Beispiel flexibler werden, um uns auf unsere schneller wechselnden sozialen Rollen einzustellen.

"- Wir mussten toleranter werden: Wer hätte es sich in den fünfziger Jahren schon vorstellen können, an seinem Arbeitsplatz einen Asiaten oder einen Schwarzafrikaner als Chef zu akzeptieren? (You see, the '68ers don't have any power to begin with. Everything in Germany is really being run by the blacks and Asians.)

"- Wir mussten kreativer werden: Mit der bloßen Anwendung einmal erlernter Fähigkeiten lässt sich in immer weniger Berufen Geld verdienen.

"- Wir mussten lernen, mit ganz neuen Wertekategorien zu leben: Vor vierzig Jahren wussten die Menschen noch nicht einmal, was Nachhaltigkeit heißt. Heute gilt es als asozial, sein Altpapier in die Hausmülltonne zu stopfen."

Are you still with me? I know, you need a strong stomach and a good pair of rubber boots to wade through the bullshit, but sometimes it's informative to learn what the self-image of these people looks like.

Me? I just apply Occam's razor. People who act like intolerant, self-righteous prigs probably are intolerant, self-righteous prigs.


@Helian
My person favorite: "- Wir mussten zum Beispiel flexibler werden, um uns auf unsere schneller wechselnden sozialen Rollen einzustellen.

"Sometimes we'll have to sell out".

And in order not to be accused of torture the person who wrote the Carter 'malaise' speech is

drum roll

Chris Matthews.

(note to non-American readers: He's got a talking head show on one of the cable channels, MSNBC, called 'Hardball'.)

He also worked as Tip O'Neill's press guy. In a town full of obnoxious people, Chris Matthews is working toward the John McLaughlin lifetime achievment award. Nobody can stand the man.

/inside DC culture stuff, sorry

@Pamela

"My person favorite: "- Wir mussten zum Beispiel flexibler werden, um uns auf unsere schneller wechselnden sozialen Rollen einzustellen.
..."Sometimes we'll have to sell out".

BOOM CHUCKA-LUCKA!! It's amazing how many of them found they could best serve the cause of social justice as shills for third rate brokerage houses.

"And in order not to be accused of torture the person who wrote the Carter 'malaise' speech is

"drum roll

"Chris Matthews."

Oh, man! I didn't even get a chance to mull this one over. I was sleeping. I'm not sure I would have figured it one out, though. Even my good buddy Google wasn't much help.

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