« Investigative Media | Main | Auschwitz and Abu Ghraib - In the Same League / Auschwitz und Abu Ghraib - In einer Liga »

Comments

So far, Germany is training iraqi police and Schroeder says he will not block nato going to iraq - thats it.
That is definitely not enough. I expect my goverment to engage within nato to build a peaceful, stable, democratic future for Iraq.

Hey Gerhard, the war is over. It is in our vital national interest to build a peaceful Iraq. And by the way, it is never to late to aid friends and allies.
The German press did not yet acknowlegde that Germanys "demands" for Iraq are fulfilled or did they?

Der Artikel ist mir bekannt und ich finde ihn exzellent. Was ich als Antwort darauf zu lesen bekam - wie hätte es auch anders sein können:

"@ Downer
du willst uns also zu Kumpanen von Verbrechern machen? Die Zukunft für das irakische Volk wäre besser, wenn die USA und GB aus dem Irak abziehen würden. Stabilität gibt es in der Welt erst, wenn die Staaten solche Verbrecherregime wie die Bushisten in die Schranken weisen. Wir haben nur diese eine Erde. Es kann nicht sein, dass sich auf ihr einige auf Grund ihrer Stärke austoben können.

Dein Appell hier geht jedenfalls ins Leere. Ich sehe das Katastrophenszenarion nicht. Im Gegenteil. Bush muss weg. Ist er weg, wird sich vieles normalisieren."

Schreiberling, Mitte 40, Berlin

------------

Noch so ein Genius:

"Die NATO ist ein reines Verteidigungsbündnis. Jede Intervention seitens NATO im Irak ist illegal."

Exxtreme, Irgendwo

--------------

und noch mal der selbe:

"Der Irak war mehr oder weniger stabil bis die Amis meinten sie müssten ihre Wirtschaft mit einem Krieg ankurbeln. Ich habe keinen Bock, daß Europa mal wieder die Scherbenhaufen aufräumen darf."


Ich könnte mich permanent über solchen Bullshit aufregen...

Ich ziehe bald nach Amerika, Australien, ach, jedenfalls irgendwo, wo die Leute gescheiter sind :P

Jeff Gedmin in der WELT:

"Ich bin mehr denn je überzeugt, dass die Wahl John Kerrys die Spannungen in den transatlantischen Beziehungen abbauen könnte. Kerry spricht die Sprache des Multilateralismus. Er kritisiert Bush für die Vernachlässigung der Allianz. Liebes Europa, das sind die guten Nachrichten. Die schlechten: John Kerry wird nicht das Kyoto-Protokoll bringen, nicht den Internationalen Strafgerichtshof, keinen "kritischen Dialog" mit den Mullahs oder mehr Macht für den UN-Sicherheitsrat.


Womit ich bei der Feststellung wäre, dass wir alle einmal ein bisschen nüchterner werden sollten. Verachtet ihn, so viel ihr mögt, aber George Bush ist nicht unser Hauptproblem. Ich glaube eher, dass unser größtes Problem die Pathologie der EU ist. Unsere europäischen Freunde sehnen sich nach Emanzipation. Bedauerlicherweise ist ein Teil dieser "Wir sind jetzt auch erwachsen"-Phase begleitet von einem starken Wunsch danach, Amerika vom Sockel zu stoßen..."


Mehr hier

Von
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/files/2004_0621_letter.html


"An Open Letter to the American People
June 21, 2004

Presidential elections present us with choices about our nation's future. We support John Kerry for President and urge you to join us.

The prosperity, health, environment, and security of Americans depend on Presidential leadership to sustain our vibrant science and technology; to encourage education at home and attract talented scientists and engineers from abroad; and to nurture a business environment that transforms new knowledge into new opportunities for creating quality jobs and reaching shared goals.

President Bush and his administration are compromising our future on each of these counts. By reducing funding for scientific research, they are undermining the foundation of America's future. By setting unwarranted restrictions on stem cell research, they are impeding medical advances. By employing inappropriate immigration practices, they are turning critical scientific talent away from our shores. And by ignoring scientific consensus on critical issues such as global warming, they are threatening the earth's future. Unlike previous administrations, Republican and Democratic alike, the Bush administration has ignored unbiased scientific advice in the policy-making that is so important to our collective welfare.

John Kerry will change all this. He will support strong investments in science and technology as he restores fiscal responsibility. He will stimulate the development and deployment of technologies to meet our economic, energy, environmental, health, and security needs. He will recreate an America that provides opportunity to all at home or abroad who can help us make progress together.

John Kerry will restore science to its appropriate place in government and bring it back into the White House. He is the clear choice for America's next President."


@J.M
Where are yo ucoming from with this drivel?Keep your damn promotional nonsense to yourself you damn clown. Your post has no place here. You are promoting the election of a two-faced, duplicitous, and an opportunistic lying fool to the White House. This is a site on german media duplicity and hypocrysy, it is NOT a site created to promote such a desperate and guaranteed to loose imbecile like kerry. The words above are such simplistic idiocy it is amazing you embrace such puffery. Take a hike. If John Kerry were president he'd have us sipping tea for dialogue with the taliban and re-direct this country along the lines of EXACTLY WHAT HAS MADE THE "eu" FAIL.
His overtures to the french will even make him a target of assasination and make 10's of millions of americans march to Boston to kick his damn ass. You need to knock yourself about the head with your Brikenstocks and perhaps then feed your oxygen starved brain.

"Germany's Position on Iraq
Chancellor Gerhard Schröder has stated unequivocally that Germany will not participate in U.S.-led military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power. During his successful election campaign, he declared that "this country under my leadership is not available for adventure." In reference to Germany's $9 billion contribution to funding the first Gulf War,11 Schröder warned that "the time of cheque book diplomacy is over once and for all."12

In contrast to nearly all other leaders of the European Union (EU), the Chancellor has ruled out German participation in an Iraq war even if it is approved by the U.N. Security Council.13 Schröder cast doubt on the reliability of evidence regarding Iraq's development of weapons of mass destruction, and observed that the threat posed by Iraq "may be overestimated" by President Bush's senior advisers.14

Schröder is a firm supporter of a more robust, independent German foreign policy. For the first time since World War II, Germany's leaders are advocating a unilateral course. The general secretary of the Social Democratic Party, Franz Muentefering, summarized this position clearly:

Independently of what the UN decides, there must be a German way, that we must decide for ourselves what is to be done. That decision for us means no involvement in any...conflict or war in Iraq.15
National pacificism, however, does not excise national socialism.

German criticism of U.S. plans for Iraq frequently descended into crude anti-American polemic. The Chancellor himself mocked the American President in election rallies, telling crowds that he would not "click his heels" and say "yes" automatically to U.S. foreign policy initiatives.16 Ludwig Stiegler, the Social Democrats' parliamentary leader during the election, accused President Bush of acting like a Roman dictator, "as if he were Caesar Augustus and Germany were his province Germania."17 Stiegler also compared the U.S. Ambassador to Berlin to Pyotr Abrassimow, the unpopular Soviet Ambassador to East Germany prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall.18

Schröder's former Justice Minister Herta Daeubler-Gmelin compared the Bush Administration's policy towards Iraq with that of Hitler's strategy before World War II. She was quoted by the German regional newspaper Schwabisches Tagblatt as stating: "Bush wants to divert attention from his domestic problems. It's a classic tactic. It's one that Hitler also used."19 Daeubler-Gmelin also remarked that the United States "has a lousy legal system" and that "Bush would be sitting in prison today" if new insider trading laws had applied when the President had worked as an oil executive.20 U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice condemned the remarks as "way beyond the pale,"21and according to the White House the President was "very angered" by the comments.22

Disturbingly, the specter of anti-Semitism has also entered the Iraq debate in Germany. Former Defense Minister Rudolf Scharping, still a leading figure in the SPD, accused President Bush of wishing to remove Saddam Hussein in order to placate "a powerful--perhaps overly powerful--Jewish lobby."23

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/BG1609.cfm

It is always the old game again and again: you pressure one side with requirements you believe it will and can never fullfill..... and if it concedes and tries to make ends meet, you put in new and other requirements because you never wanted to follow up on your promises etc.

Of course, sending our German troops into Iraq under Nato command and within the order by a new resolution of the UN S.C. would mean, that some of them will die --- something you don't order easily. But we have to fullfill our comittments at NATO if a new UN resolution provides the right background. Watching I>raq go belly-up would mean a total bankrupt of the western world and would lead to more danger and terror at our own doorstep.

Hence I hope we get a change of government before 2006 in order to make sure we can be relied upon again to be there when duty calls.
but I doubt it......

What amazing irony and hypocrisy noted throughout schroeder's position on these issues.
What keeps the german people from seeing this crap?
Daeubler-Gmelin says
"Bush wants to divert attention from his domestic problems. It's a classic tactic. It's one that Hitler also used."
This is the same tactic schroeder himself has used for 3 years. It means NOTHING that this lady was "fired" (note her new talk show celeb status) when you have the same "policies" being implementede at home.
...."the US using the war on terror to deflect from domestic issues" AHHA HAAA!!HHAHHAHAAAAAHHhhhh That is THE PRIME strategy of child-like shcroeder govt. and 90% all the german political parties.

Iraq, with the US involved in it's liberation and re-construction will NOT go belly-up.
The significance of schroeder's statements mena only WHAT it is that germany can do on the world stage. Same goes for the failed french.
No german participation in NATO means germany kills the NATO alliance. It's that simple. Iraq may fail, but if so it will be along the lines of germany's failures which began immediatley after the US pulled back it's teat to keep it from being milked dry by euroland for 60 yrs. It's factual to state that had germany and france not played the roles of duplicitous pussys prior to the war, the war NEVER would have happend in the first place. And one need only look at the reasons those two countries wanted saddam to stay in power, and that false "moral high ground" that was slammed down the citezens of those countries throats becomes so much delushional pond scum.

@all An interesting comment from Pat above
"Watching Iraq go belly-up would mean a total bankrupt of the western world and would lead to more danger and terror at our own doorstep.."
Germans should understand who it was who kept back "terror and danger" from THEIR doorstep for 60 years. When terror and danger showed it's head in the Balkans and in Kosovo- whose assistance, men, monies, and technologies did Germany and the "eu" seek?

..and in closing ;-)- I'd like to say that it is safe to say that very, very few US citizens want german or french participation at this point. A clear majority simply say of the alliance "Good riddance!"
Why not Germany make a contribution to the world as thus-
Permit the US to remove her 35,000 troops from N Korea where they have been monitoing the UN truce for 50 years? Come on, you guys can handle it. Just bring along allot of schnapps and hang out by the 105 mm batteries to provide security AND to enforce this "un" truce/cease fire. You wouldn't even work up a sweat (unless a battle began) but it will cost you some euros. So what?
Then these 35,000 US troops can head to the middle east. Whats NOT to like about this from a german perspective? Would this instill fear within schroeder and his cabinet's minds that this would do nothing but demonstrate highly schroeder's grand impotence?

Hi David, how come no link to No Pasarán?

Note from David: Just an oversight... Added it. Thanks for making me aware.

June 22, 2004

Dear Stalwart Ally:

Germans know better than most about the cost and value of freedom. President Bush and his administration has sought to bring similar freedoms to the wonderful people of Iraq. While you felt it inappropriate to take an active role in winning the liberation from Saddam's tyranny, we have every hope that you will help the Iraqi people in earning an overdue and well-deserved freedom.

Won't you demonstrate once again that the values of the German people include winning the peace and freedom of an oppressed people. Won't you join the Coaltion of the willing?

Captain America

Armes Deutschland,
1. Nachricht: Foltervorwürfe Rumsfeld - Bush
2. Nachricht: die Hinrichtung
3. Nachricht: FUSSBALL, FUSSBALL, FUSSBALL

Kein Wunder, daß die Deutschen noch immer nicht mitbekommen haben, was in der Welt los ist. Wir können nicht besser sein als unsere Medien.

"Won't you demonstrate once again that the values of the German people include winning the peace and freedom of an oppressed people."

Unfortunately the values of those most vocal in Germany the last few years are nothing more than a disingenuous cause for "peace". This "peace" they protested for, the "peace" they whined for, the "peace" they marched in the streets for was the "peace" that continued to fill countless mass graves, the "peace" that allowed government backed thugs to take swords and chop people's fingers off, throw them off buildings, put explosives in their pockets and watch them explode, put people in wood chippers feet first, surgically remove hands for using dollars, dumping people alive in acid and watching them essentially melt and on and on and on.

Disingenuous, because where were these "peace" people during the wars in Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Chechnya, Kosovo, Congo, Sierra Leone, Sudan, etc.? Either those were examples of exactly the type of "peace" they like and were perfectly content with, or the recent obsession with peace has nothing to do with peace at all, and had all to do with some odd sort of anti-Americanism (which I also find disingenuous due to the soaking up of American pop-culture, if you hate Americans, don't try to be like them). They made it a fashionable cause for which the media helped enormously, like "hey lets march in the streets and make signs with cool provocative slogans. We'll be against the big ultra-publicized overexposed USA. It'll be OUR "cause", like the older generations causes against Vietnam or the nukes in Europe." Being that if their "cause" was followed, we could expect Saddam to continue his brutal reign and would eventually be taken over by one his sadist sons. You know, "peace" in the middle east would have been preserved.

Don't ask them, the Germans, to help in Iraq. Iraq has neither the peace nor freedom apparently that the most vocal contingent from Germany approves of. That's why you continue to see whining and seething out of Germany. Until you get a qualified psychopathic murderous totalitarian regime back in place, Iraq will continue to not be the acceptable type of "peace" or "freedom". Once Saddam Jr. is in place, you won't hear about a peep about Iraq from Germany. Just like all those many years prior to any threat to the "peace" in Iraq by the US.

Laßt uns doch mal in Erinnerung rufen, welche Methoden es in Deutschland in Haft gab, als es um die deutschen Terroristen (Baader und Konsorten) ging. Jetzt klagt man Rumsfeld an, er hätte Isolationshaft erlaubt? Bevor wir weiter auf unseren hohen Sockel der Moralität klettern, laßt uns mal recherchieren, wie wir die RAF-Terroristen behandelt haben. Angeordnete Isolationshaft ist auf allen Kanälen die 1. Nachricht, die Hinrichtung kommt erst danach. Was soll das? Warum tun wir so, als gäbe es das nur in den USA? Das ist doch schon seit den 70er Jahren Thema in Deutschland. Aber das vergißt man jetzt gerne und zeigt mit dem Finger auf Rumsfeld und die ganze USA. Die deutsche Isolationsfolter verschwindet dadurch nicht. Warum ist dies dann Thema Nr. 1 und das wirklich Schockierende, die Hinrichtung eines Unschuldigen vor laufender Kamera im Namen Allahs wird wieder nur in kurzen Sätzen und auch nur für kurze Zeit erwähnt?

Die Terroristen lachen sich tot über unsere Dummheit.

Das Fatale an der gegenwärtigen Situation ist, daß Wahlkampf in den USA ist. Die dortigen Demokraten bewegen sich auf gleichem Niveau wie die deutschen Medien. Michael Moore und ähnliche Intellektuelle (Ironie) beherrschen die Bühne:


"As Moore is hailed by the liberal press in the coming weeks as a champion of the effort to unseat President Bush, and as he's embraced by mainstream figures within the Democratic party, he will inadvertently provide evidence of the intellectual depths to which the political Left has sunk.

That, in the final analysis, is Moore's special contribution to electoral politics."

http://nationalreview.com/comment/goldblatt200406220936.asp


Leider hat Deutschland keine konservativen Medien. Alles was "rechts" von links ist, wird als naziähnlich abgelehnt und draufgeschlagen. Und macht es doch genauso.

Auf N-TV ist die Köpfung des Südkoreaners um 8 Uhr nicht einmal in den Nachrichten, erst später bei den Berichten.


Gibt es Vergleichbares in Deutschland???

townhall.com

They still don't get it
Paul Greenberg


June 23, 2004


Which has become more politicized - the major media or the 9/11 Commission?

The answer was clear last week: The New York Times, NPR, the BBC, the television troika (Jennings, Brokaw and Rather), the "news'' columns of the Wall Street Journal . . . in short, all the usual suspects in the media.

Note the big headline on the front page of Thursday's New York Times: "Panel Finds No Qaeda-Iraq Tie."

The Times wasn't the only one to get out the big type. "Al Qaeda-Hussein Link is Dismissed," proclaimed the Washington Post. "No signs of Iraq-Al-Qaeda Ties Found," reported the Los Angeles Times. And so loudly on. (And earnest liberals wonder why folks increasingly turn to the Fox channel or talk radio.)

As for the "discovery" that Saddam Hussein's intelligence apparatus had no direct connection with 9/11, well, the administration has never claimed that it did. ("No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September 11th." - George W. Bush, September 17, 2003.)

What the administration did claim was that Saddam's ties to terrorism go back at least a decade, which is when Iraq made the State Department's list of terrorist-supporting states. The administration also pointed out that Saddam's agents established contacts with al-Qaida, a fact that no one seriously disputes - including the 9/11 Commission, however its actual findings may have been distorted by the major media, or anybody with an interest in hunting this president.

Indeed, the commission's investigators confirmed that an Iraqi intelligence officer met with Osama bin Laden himself in the Sudan as early as 1994.

Mehr hier


@ Gabi

In den "tagesthemen" war es:
1. Fußball
2. Themenblock Dresdner Frauenkirche (mit Interview, Bericht über ein neues Buch eines Briten zur Bombardierung Dresdens und Kommentar)
3. Nachrichtenblock
4. Hinrichtung, direkt gefolgt von einem Bericht über "Bush unter Druck" mit dem üblichen Inhalt

Allerdings: Spiegel Online hat tatsächlich das Wort "Terroristen" benutzt statt des üblichen "Widerstandes". Natürlich wird die nächste Ermordung von US-Soldaten wieder als "Widerstandsaktion" bezeichnet werden. Aber Kopfabschneiden scheint sogar den Leuten vom Spiegel die Bedingungen zu erfüllen, bei denen man von "Terrorismus" sprechen kann.

Gabi: I saw the same on SPIEGEL online this morning: first, they started with the article about Rumsfeld and than only as a second piece in line came the news about the murder of Kim Sun Il. An hour later the article of Kim Sun Il is posted even later in the line, after IPO of Postbank and Soccer.....

I am highly critical of the treatment of prisoners in Abu Ghoreib and Guantanamo and have written on this blogg about it before. But things have to be put in perspective and the murder of a helpless victim should deserve to be the headline before another article about alledged torture of prisoners......

At least FOCUS online puts it up front before the Rumsfeld news, but than why bring the sentencing of Kübelböck before the beheading? Is there anyone still out there who really cares about Kübelböck?

@ Pato: I am sorry that you are so deeply and permanently pissed off at the conduct of the German gov. in the past and present. While it may be hard for you to accept that, there are still numbers of Germans feeling gratitude and friendship towards the US. Usually those who know country and people first hand.On the other hand as mentioned before sometime, you experience a strong opposition still in your country against the war even after having been atacked by the terror, so don't blame us too hard and collectively for those mistakes and lack of friendship having been shown by Schroeder and the likes in the time of crisis and deciding about the war.I guess some of your rants about 60 years of hanging on the teat of the US require some controversal answers, but I will probably not get enough time for that before the weekend. If you care for such a discussion, maybe we should move this to David's platform for overall discussion, usually below some of the first three or so new articles..... put maybe you don't care at all? Just let me know. Oh, and one question: you write above as follows "It's factual to state that had germany and france not played the roles of duplicitous pussys prior to the war, the war NEVER would have happend in the first place." I don't fully understand that point and would love you to elaborate on it, if you'd care to take the time.

Finally: on "Watcher of Weasels" I found a link to "exultate justi" blog with an excellent but hard to diggest article about a video of tortures and mutilation in Abu Gohreib during the Saddam regime. From there those with a strong stomach can find a link in the comments with the download of that video.... The question is correct: why do the media not report about this video which has been shown to the public by American members of Senate? Why are there no pics from this video to show, what sadistic treatment prisoners were awarded during the time before the liberation of Iraq? Guess the answers are clear, but maybe some of the German bloggers should spread the word (and links) to that in order to bring some perspective to the reports of prison torture in that prison recently. These tortures by American personal were wrong for many reasons, but they do pale in front of Saddams butchery.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Published on TaipeiTimes
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/06/17/2003175429

Ugly bias underlies Europe's 'Swedenized' hubris

As anti-Americanism grows in Europe, its roots in guilt, shame and anti-Semitism are easily forgotten -- as is the US role in allowing Europe the luxuries of diplomacy and peace
By Per Ahlmark

Thursday, Jun 17, 2004,Page 9

YUSHA

Anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism and anti-Americanism are becoming linked and ever more rabid in today's Europe. They arise from a kind of blindness, combined with a strange mixture of alienation, guilt and fear toward both Israel and America.

Millions of Europeans resist seeing Israel as a country fighting for its survival. Israel cannot afford to lose one major war, as it would mean the end of the Jewish state. But huge numbers of Europeans believe that something is fundamentally wrong with the Israelis: they never compromise; they prefer using military means to solve political problems.

Something similar is behind the European attitude toward the US. Look at Europe, many Europeans say, we have eradicated wars, dangerous nationalism and dictatorships. We created a peaceful European Union. We do not wage war; we negotiate. We do not exhaust our resources on weapons. The rest of the planet should learn from us how to live together without terrorizing each other.

As a Swede, I have heard such pacific boasting all my life: that neutral Sweden is a moral superpower. Now this bragging has become the EU's ideology. We are the moral continent. Call this the "Swedenization" of Europe.

`Instead of supporting those who fight international terrorism, many Europeans try to blame the spread of terrorism on Israel and the US. This is a new European illusion.'


Yes, today's EU is a miracle for a continent where two modern totalitarian movements -- communism and Nazism -- unleashed rivers of blood. But what Europe forgets is how those ideologies were overcome. Without the US Army, Western Europe would not have been liberated in 1945. Without the Marshall Plan and NATO, it would not have taken off economically. Without the policy of containment under America's security umbrella, the Red Army would have strangled the dream of freedom in Eastern Europe, or brought European unity, but under a flag with red stars.

Western Europeans also forget that some areas of the world have never known freedom. In many places, torture chambers are the rules of the game, not the grotesque and shameful mistakes of ill-supervised troops. Any attempt in such places to go behave the European way and negotiate -- without the military power needed to back up diplomacy -- would be pathetic.

Instead of supporting those who fight international terrorism, many Europeans try to blame the spread of terrorism on Israel and the US. This is a new European illusion. Spain's latter day appeasement a la Munich arises from this thinking.

But what if Spain and Europe as a whole had reacted in the opposite way to the Madrid train bombing of April, saying: "We promise that because of that slaughter we will double our support for stabilization in Iraq by sending twice as many troops, experts, engineers, teachers, policemen, doctors and billions of euros in support of allied forces and their Iraqi co-workers." The triumph of terrorists would have been transformed into a triumph of the war on terror.

The images many Europeans hold of America and Israel create the political climate for some very ugly bias. You have the Great Satan and the Small Satan. America wants to dominate the world -- exactly the allegation made in traditional anti-Semitic rhetoric about the Jews. Indeed, modern anti-Zionist rhetoric portrays Israel's goal as domination of the Middle East. Such ideas are reflected in opinion polls in which Europeans claim that Israel and the US are the true dangers to world peace.

Ian Buruma, the British writer, claims that this European rage against America and Israel has to do with guilt and fear. The two world wars led to such catastrophic carnage that "never again" was interpreted as "welfare at home, non-intervention abroad." The problem with this concept is that it could only survive under the protection of American might.

Extreme anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism are actually merging. The so-called peace poster "Hitler Had Two Sons: Bush and Sharon," displayed in European anti-war rallies, combines trivialization of Nazism with demonization of both the victims of Nazism and those who defeated Nazism.

Much of this grows from a subconscious European guilt related to the Holocaust. Now the Holocaust's victims -- and their children and grandchildren -- are supposedly doing to others what was done to them. By equating the murderer and the victim, we wash our hands.

This pattern of anti-Zionism and anti-Americanism returns again and again. "The ugly Israeli" and "the ugly American" seem to be of the same family. "The ugly Jew" becomes the instrumental part of this defamation when so-called neoconservatives are blamed both for American militarism and Israeli brutalities and then selectively named: Wolfowitz, Perle, Abrams, Kristol, etc. This is a new version of the old myth that Jews rule the US.

Earlier this year, the editor of Die Zeit, Josef Joffe, put his finger on the issue: like Jews, Americans are said to be selfish and arrogant. Like Jews, they are in thrall to a fundamentalist religion that renders them self-righteous and dangerous. Like Jews, Americans are money-grubbing capitalists, for whom the highest value is the cash nexus. "America and Israel are the outsiders -- just as Jews have been all the way into the 21st century," Joffe says.

The links between anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism and anti-Americanism are all too real. Unless Europe's leaders roundly condemn this unholy triple alliance, it will poison Middle East politics and trans-Atlantic relations alike.


Per Ahlmark is a former deputy prime minister of Sweden.

Copyright: Project Syndicate


Copyright © 1999-2004 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved.

@Gabi

Heute:

1. BESTÄTIGTE Foltervorwürfe gegen Rumsfeld
2. Irakischer Terroristenführer kündigt die Ermordung des irakischen Premiers an
3. Sexuelle Dikriminierung durch den amerikanischen Konzern "Wal-Mart"
4. US-Regierung erpresst die UNO

Zum Thema Intelektuelle:

1. 48 Nobelpreisträger atackieren Bush und rufen zur Wahl John Kerrys auf.

Sicherlich fällt es langsam schwer, es ständig der "biased" Berichterstattung der deutschen Medien unterzuschieben, sprechen doch die amerikanischen Blätter und die Berichter diverser Untersuchungskommissionen und internationaler Institutionen mittlerweile eine Sprache.

Aus egoistischen Motiven heraus müßte man sich wünschen, daß GWB und Konsorten weiterhin an der Macht bleibt. Dies würde Europa einen maximalen Zuwachs an wirtschaftlichen und intelektuellen Ressourcen bringen.

Ansosnten freuen wir uns auf weitere Betrachtungen wie schlecht es doch Deutschland und Europa geht und wie mies doch die deutsche Regierung ist(was für uns nichts neues ist und ja auch gar nicht geleugnet ist - dies ist ja der Gegensatz zu GWB-Anhängern).

Nun ja, das Trauerspiel GWB wird sich glücklicherweise dieses Jahr erledigt haben, (glückliche US-Bürger, bei uns dauert das Trauerspiel noch länger) so daß man dann wieder zur Tagesordnung übergehen kann.

Gleichschaltung der Medien?

http://n-tv.de/5256961.html
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,305357,00.html
http://focus.msn.de/hps/fol/newsausgabe/newsausgabe.htm?id=3760

Who wrote the original Story?

This article by Victor Davis Hanson argues that it's too late for America to expect anything from Germany and France; that America should accept that fact, adjust accordingly, and move on.

http://victorhanson.com/Articles/NRO%20Index/Let_Europe_Be_Europe.html

Yes, Zober, VHD is right. He is, as usual, right on.

This says it all: Barring a 9/11-like event at the Parthenon or Louvre, one cannot — and should not — ask people to do what they simply cannot and will not do... We all like the Europeans and wish them well in their efforts to create heaven on earth

No need anymore for finger pointing, debating, arguing etc. The US and EU should move on. Keep communication channels open and move forward. That's it. Period.

It's not even worth speculating what will happen if the US and Europe go more or less separate ways. I have my personal opinion as to who will have more to loose on the long run, but this is irrelevant. Enough arguing. There is no need for a love story between the US and EU. A civilized partnership should do.

Pato:
I like your quote.

"Permit (!?!) the US to move its's troops from Korea" This says a lot about Europe's view of itself. To the public in the RF and BRD, another nation which is more engaged and involved in an affair is required to not hurt the precious little feelings of their leftists.

It's al about their feelings. A british friend of mine here in the US was aghast that Bush didn't go directly to New York City on 11 September, with concern about the nations "feelings." It was almost impossible for him to understand that blubbering on with a quivering lip would be VERY BAD for our "personal constitution", as it were. That we would take our first step in this affair with a tone of self-pity.

How pathetic that would have been. Nothing constructive would have come of it. He was also bloviated that the next day when Bush did go, that it was to thank and ENBOLDEN the people working at the scene of the disaster.

Best I can tell, this is all the Euro-left view of the world can give us. The specific type of self-pity that will make us unable to deal with life's challenges.

Well, I disagree with the premise of the article. NATO was seriously wounded during Kosovo when the French were found to be leaking allied bombing targets to the enemy. The death blow was delivered by the French when they denied NATO member Turkey the right to acquire defensive weapons in the runup to the Iraqi war. Fell free to close the barn door, the horse has already left, riderless.

Speaking for myself, the only purpose any French military would serve in either Afghanistan or Iraq would be for American target practice.

Pat wrote
>.On the other hand as mentioned before sometime, you experience a strong opposition still in your country against the war even after having been atacked by the terror, so don't blame us too hard and collectively for those mistakes and lack of friendship having been shown by Schroeder and the likes in the time of crisis and deciding about the war

We blame you because your leaders pandered to the worst excesses of anti-Americanism in order to get elected and get elected they did. Anti-americanism is an addiction in Europe and of all people who should know better than to succumb, it should be the Germans.

>Oh, and one question: you write above as follows "It's factual to state that had germany and france not played the roles of duplicitous pussys prior to the war, the war NEVER would have happend in the first place." I don't fully understand that point and would love you to elaborate on it, if you'd care to take the time.

The rationale is that if the security council had stood together against Saddam, he would have had no choice but to cave in to peaceful change. As it turns out, he correctly trusted the French and their German lackeys to guarantee U.S. failure at the U.N., but he mistakenly trusted to the notion that it would make a damn bit of difference to us.

To those who posted the heritage.com link and the letter from the Swedish ambassador, they are great reading, thank you very much.

The Bush Administration wants to keep its troops immune from any prosecution by the International Criminal Court. Eh, why? Are US Americans more equal than others?

Are US Americans more equal than others?


It's called sovreignity. Which you are in the process of surrendering without a fight.

@Unwichtig

Update:


US war crimes immunity bid fails

The US withdraws a UN resolution meant to give its soldiers immunity from prosecution at The Hague.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3834089.stm

That immunity bid was for UN peacekeeping missions. So don't expect the US to be sending any more troops to peacekeeping missions anytime soon.

The US, like many other countries, is vulnerable to governments making our troops into political hostages to win concessions, etc. Every nation negotiates immunities for their troops (from other nation's laws only) before sending them abroad. The French, Germans, Swiss, Swedes, Italians, Russians, Chinese, and others all do it. Go on a peacekeeping mission sometime and speak to the attorneys on the various staffs. For some reason, people only want to speak about the US position on these matters when virtually all others demand the same.

On the ICC, we simply cannot sign a treaty placing our citizens under a court in which a person would not be covered by the Bill of Rights. Perhaps if Europe (who is pushing this form of legal imperialism) would make concessions to provide these humane protections for the accused, the USA would be willing to sign on. Since they refused to compromise on these points, we did not and will not be joining anytime soon.

Perhaps now we know why the French signed the ICC with a 7 year immunity deal for their people (as a condition of signing).


@unwichtig

"The Bush Administration wants to keep its troops immune from any prosecution by the International Criminal Court. Eh, why? Are US Americans more equal than others?"

The Germans really never need to concern themselves with such issues. During "Peace-keeping, peach-making" instances, the lines of combat become unclear, things happen, innocent people get killed.

Since when have the Germans ever acted boldly to enforce peach-keeping activities where one invariably gets drawn into such situations? Bosnia? Hmm... I recall Germany electing to boldly recognise Slovenia and Croatia very quickly: at the apprehension of several other western countries (fearing what eventually unfolded). Then shamefully hiding behind their constitution claiming that they were prohibited from assisting. This action demonstrated the gutlessness of the German government.

That fine line of knowing who to shoot and when and where to drop the bomb was left to other governments who choose to act. It seems absurd to be judged by those who will not, and cannot act. Even when it serves their own interest to do so.

Unwichtig, I guess you can't get prosecuted if you don't even participate? Fine then, have your cake and eat it to. But, you have none of my respect. Don’t expect us to ask for your opinion either.

Those soldiers will never be immune from law, my friend. In fact they remain liable for what they do after they leave the military, and for the rest of their lives if they're officers.
As for the ICC, when are they actually going to go after someone like Mugabe or Assad.

No one questions whether those soldiers still fall under the laws of their own nations (they all do).

Would be nice if the ICC would go after someone like Mugabe but I doubt they will do so anytime soon.


@hector

Ironically Mugabe should be a rather easy villain to find, he's often found sipping tea in Paris.

The ICC is there to cover the lack of law in failed states. That is it's stated purpose. To deal with nations that do NOT have functioning legal systems.

This whole matter has been co-opted by political flunkies who stay up at night thinking up ways to indight exxon, shell, coca-cola, Pink Floyd, and any other body that they dont get a good "feeling" from.

In effect, these lefty morons will dismember the entire thing and do far more HARM in the area of human rights than anything else. But then again, it's not about what they do, it's about what they can appear to do, and claim credit for.

Great - they can take credit for every "warm fuzzy" in the world. The rest of us will feed the poor, give them a tenible way to get out of poverty, and give them a shot at a healthy and dignified life.

Let them make their signs, march, stamp their little fists, and moan. That will keep them out of work of creating progress where they could do more harm.

Does the US need Germany's opinion on everything? Does the US also need to ask Germany how to play soccer?

Does the US need Germany's opinion on everything? Does the US also need to ask Germany how to play soccer?

@erik
WTF kind of questions are you asking and whats your point? Germany throws it's opinion around the world even as it acts like an impotent and childish prik, and has no ability to solve the issues it demands be solved alwasy by others. It is always others that are demonized in an attempt by germany to wipe it's own arse with the face of others. This type of approach and ensuing ideologies will find germany lying on it's back gasping for air within a decade.

"NATO-Generalsekretär Jaap de Hoop Scheffer steht dem Engagement der NATO im Irak abwartend-kritisch gegenüber. Die Allianz solle sich auf bereits bestehende Einsätze und Aufgaben konzentrieren, insbesondere die Mission in Afghanistan, forderte der Generalsekretär in seiner jüngsten Rede in London am 19. Juni. Denn offensichtlich sind die NATO-Staaten nicht einmal in der Lage, genügend Truppen und Ausrüstung für den Einsatz am Hindukusch zu mobilisieren. "Wo ist der Fehler in unserem System", fragte de Hoop Scheffer, "wenn wir es nicht schaffen, die paar wenigen dringend notwendigen Ressourcen bereitzustellen für die Einsätze, die wir bereits übernommen haben?" Dennoch: Man werde dem irakischen Ministerpräsidenten nicht "die Türe vor der Nase zuschlagen." (arn)"
http://www.dw-world.de/german/0,3367,7429_A_1246435_1_A,00.html

@Gabi

...und was will uns dieser Kommentar jetzt sagen????

....Das die Europäer ihre Armeen aufbauen müssen um die von GWB angerichteten Schlammassel wieder zu ordnen?...

...das die Europäer Geld in archaisches Säbelgerassel investieren müssen, anstatt in sinnvolle friedensstiftende oder terrorbekämpfende Manßnahmen?...

...wo sind denn die lachenden Iraker, die mit Blumen in der Hand der Parade der Amerikaner zujubeln die mit ihren Trucks die Massenvernichtungsmittel zur vernichtung bringen???...

Ha! Wozu brauchen wir die UNO, wozu die NATO, sollen doch diese Old Europeans bleiben wo der Pfeffer wächst. Wir laden mal schnell den Colt durch und schauen ganz bös und dann machen WIR, Gods own Country mit Hilfe des Herrn und unseren Jungs das doch im Alleingang....oder sollte ich den Tenor falsch im Ohr haben?

Wie sagt ein deutsches Sprichwort: Hochmut kommt vor dem Fall. Und der Fall Irak ist noch lange nicht zu ende.


Kritisches Denken setzt voraus, daß man sein eigenes Handeln selbstkritisch einschätzt. Es wäre ein Fortschritt, wenn all die Ultra-Republikaner auf diesem Blog einmal zugeben könnten, daß nichts, aber auch so gar nichts von dem eingetroffen ist, was hier noch vor wenigen Monaten als absolut sicher gepriesen wurde.

Aber darauf können wir noch lange warten..

Und so wird weiterhin in einer "sichereren Welt" (Zitat GWB von heute....*hmmmmmpff*) mehr als 100 Menschen pro Tag im Irak an terroristischen Aktionen sterben (gestern).

Es ist kein Kommentar, sondern ein Zitat.

Note to the American people: Germans are not your friends. The nation of Germany is not your ally. If you doubt this, fly to Germany and enter into a conversation with any German person. Inform them you are from the USA, and then listen to the drivel, ignorance, dillusion and stupidity that pass for discussion in that country. Ask yourself why Americans are still protecting a country that will stab them in the back at the earliest opportunity. It is more than 50 years since WWII. More than 10 since the Cold War. Get out now. Let Germans sink or swim on their own.

@Eric

Have you ever been in Germany ? Have you ever spoken with any German person ? Are these biased articles of this website the reasons for prejudices ? It might be impoosible to get in conversation with you, I think. "If you are not with us, you are against us." This is ignorance and stupidity.

Oliver is right. No German will tell an American citizen what Eric in USA alleged. Straight, that is, because once the American turns his back he will be stabbed from a safe proximity, i.e. from German newspaper pages. It's called cowardice.

Actually, yes, I have been travelling to Germany for over 15 years, starting as a teenage backpacker and more recently on business. I'll tell you honestly, my last trip to Germany in October 2002 was very depressing. I have met a lot of wonderful people there over the years, and still have German friends. But a person can only hear so much rubbish and stupidity. How can I answer when Germans are so convinced that America, and Americans, are in fact responsible for all the problems of the world: war, the environment, oppression, poverty. It's a one way conversation, and Germans trumput these ignorant opinions as facts to be accepted without question. What used to be a regular annoying habit of Germans to make disparaging remarks about Americans had become an obsession. Watching how the US is portrayed on the nightly news as an out-of-control, violent, stupid, ignorant, greedy mob of evil people---well, it was all, in the end, simply too much. And this was BEFORE the Iraq war. The drumbeat and indoctronation was so constant, the images on the TV and from people mouths so insistent, that I almost began to believe it myself. I was just glad to get back home to remember that we are not the evil war-mongering dumbfucks Germans are intent on making us out to be. I was in India just after 9/11 and sat in a cafe with a very nice Indian boy listening the a German couple describe to him how Americans are all greedy, selfish, violent cowboys. And I asked myself: "These are our friends and allies?" Germans seem to need an outlet for their racism and fear. It's not publicly acceptable at the moment turn that against the darker skinned people and Muslims in your midst, so Anti-Americanism is a cheap and easy release. After all, there will be no real repurcusions except a little less military welfare. I suppose this is much easier than facing up to the true enemies. Mention dictatorship, mass murder, suicide bombing, religious fanaticism to a German. They'll nob their heads and agree that you have perfectly described the evil American president. Saddam Hussein, Palastinian suicide bombers, the Taliban, killers who cut off people's heads and proudly post the videos on the internet? Well now, they are just frustrated by American oppression. Yes, I have been to Germany. Plenty. Enough already. We get the point. Let us go our seperate ways.

Dear Erik,

notice that not everyone in Germany thinks like the typical "German" in your eyes. And there might be also be some in USA who are not with Bush.
It's right that German media shows a negative picture of your government in most cases. But dont transfer this on Germans in general. I dont know where this oppinion comes from.

P.S. Does Germany also need to ask the US how to play basketball?

Oliver, I think Eric explained himself pretty clearly. He has extensive experience in Germany and doesn't claim that all Germans think alike. But he is disheartened by the continuous anti-American drivel which is pumped out by the German media and, increasingly, by many German people. As an American who has lived for a long time in Germany, I can confirm his observations.

Especially this one: "Watching how the US is portrayed on the nightly news as an out-of-control, violent, stupid, ignorant, greedy mob of evil people---well, it was all, in the end, simply too much... The drumbeat and indoctronation was so constant, the images on the TV and from people mouths so insistent, that I almost began to believe it myself. I was just glad to get back home to remember that we are not the evil war-mongering dumbfucks Germans are intent on making us out to be."

Each time I return to the U.S. for a visit, I am surprised by what a civilized and intelligent place it is, with an overflow of information and engaged debate. Many Europeans I have talked to who have actually spent time in the U.S. have had a similar experience. As a result of the anti-American stereotypes they have been exposed to in Europe, they go expecting Americans to be obnoxious and ignorant, and are surprised by how many polite and thoughtful people they meet.

Oliver, read the Forum in the Süddeutsche about "Frieden im Irak". They are verbally hunting and killing a person "Willie" because he is NOT anti-USA and NOT full of hate like all the others. There are 3, 4 people explaining the US positions and the rest is just furious about them. It is disgusting.

Yes Oliver, it is quite true that there are many people in the US who disagree with President Bush. You can say that there is a very intense debate here regarding our role in the world, and what is going on in Iraq. Contrast that to the state of affairs in Germany. Just try to say something positive about Americans. What will be the reaction from your German friends?

By the way, I mis-spoke on my last post. I realized that my first trip to Germany was in 1985. Almost 20 years ago. Hard to believe how time flies. But this exchange has gotten me thinking about things. I was 19 years old at the time: I bought a Eurail pass and along with a friend went to discover all that Europe had to offer. We had a great time, and met many wonderful people. Just before visitng Germany, I went to Russia (Leningrad and Moscow) to see what life was life there. It was surprisingly easy to do so: I signed up with a travel agency in San Francisco who sent my paperwork off to Intourist and the Russian Embasy and obtained the necessary visa.

The trip was remarkable for a couple reasons: the fear among Russian people of their government and the deteriorating state of the country. But what struck me equally was my return to the west. I went first to Germany. It seemed that whenever someone heard I had been to Russia, their question was: Aren't you afraid your government will find out and you'll be in (some unknown) danger? After all: McCarthy, Reagan, etc. etc. There were lots of references to Orwell's "1984", Big Brother, etc. Funny thing, because based on the experience I had just had, they were perfectly describing Russia, not the US. It mattered not. This was not a debate, but a lecture. Contrast that to the reactions I got in the US. Universally, people here had one qustion: "What's it really like there?".

This was 1985 Oliver. Don't fool yourself into thinking that the current state of relations between our people is the result of George Bush, or 9/11, or Iraq. There are deep roots.

It makes me think of today's "debate". Listen to Europeans characterize Bush as an evil dictator, and Americans as religious fundamentalists, as our country as a racist, ignorant population that exports mass murder. And really, they'll be describing our common enemy: Muslim terrorism, Islamicism, religious fascism, whatever you want to call it.

But it matters not. I am not trying to lump all Germans together. I'm sure that there are some who link differently. I am just saying that unfortunately, I haven't met them. Maybe they are just being quiet, as I have learned to be in Germany. There is no room for discussion. Banging my head against a brick wall just gives me a headache.

Anyway, like I said, it matters not. The German-American alliance, in my mind, and in the minds of a growing segment of Americans, is dead. Look at the silly talk at NATO this week: Bush pretends NATO is meaningful, and the Europeans pretend to contribute. It reminds me of a joke in Eastern Germany during communism: "We pretend to work, and the government pretends to pay us". Well, it was an "agreement" that finally just disappeared, and the wall fell through sheer apathy. NATO is also a relic of the Cold War, and will soon slide off into nothingness. This time there will be no wall to tear down, and I wonder if at the end anyone will even notice or care. Germany will at last be liberated from the evil Americans who have treated them so badly these last 50 years. I try to take this in stride, but if you consider the friendship, generosity and support that Americans have shown Germans all these years, it is hard not to be more than a little discouraged by the level of hatred and accusation that flows out of Germany today.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

December 2018

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