Germans: U.S. More Dangerous than Iran

According to this poll, more Germans consider the U.S. to be a danger for world peace than Iran.

45 % of Germans call the U.S. a "greater threat to world peace" than Iran. 28 % think that Iran is a greater threat. For 16 %, the U.S. and Iran pose identical threats.

The results don't surprise me at all.

I mean, Iran is economically extremly promising for Germany. And Iran has made it clear what it expects in return for economic favours: "The international deputy of Iran's Chamber of Commerce, Dr. Fereidoun Entezari, believes that business relations will surely improve if the Europeans do not pollute the economic issues with the political ones."

Germany got the message...

(For more on the topic, check Ray's posting "Appeasing Oppressors: A Proud German Tradition Continues".)

Comments

[WhatDoIKnow]

US more dangerous than Iran??? Very sad numbers, but those results are not a surprise after the relentless anti-US propaganda (a.k.a. "nuanced criticism") in the German media (not only Spiegel).

Many believe that the wild US bashing in Germany comes from the ruling elites and is not shared by the common people. Right. It might have been so in the past, but years of constant indiscriminate criticism is having an effect on the German people. In Germany, again, "some" know what is best and use all the means to lead their people to a more enlightened future.

[clarsonimus]

We ARE more dangerous than Iran = everybody knows where we stand. That doesn't seem to be the case when it comes to Germany, though. They can't even seem to get it straight with their world-famous hospitality: http://hermann.blog.com/673793/

[Dave]

"45 % of Germans call the U.S. a "greater threat to world peace" than Iran"

Maybe this simply results out of the fact, that the US are operating world wide and Iran is not? Its about WORLD peace, so that might be the reason for those results.

[PacRim Jim]

Germans are correct. America is more dangerous to Germany than is Iran. After all, we killed their beloved Fuehrer, Hitler from Braunau, and destroyed their communist paradise.

[PlutosDad]

No Dave, that's not what it means.

Certainly terrorists with a small nuclear or biological device could strike anywhere, which would be the "world"

What it means, is the same thing my left-wing friends here the US mean when they say the same exact thing.

They mean US foreign policy is selfish and evil and the "root cause" of most of the violence in the world, no matter who it is committed by.

[Scott_H]

Not too many details about the survey methods in that article. It looks like it was conducted by Forsa Institut. Lacking any specifics in the news story, I poked around their web site. According to this page:

http://www.forsa.com/site/methods.htm

They may have contacted 500, 1000, or 10,000 respondents. Who knows?

What were the questions asked? Who knows.

How many answered? Who knows?

What's the margin of error? Who knows?

[Huan]

very sad

[Dan Kauffman]

Well of course the US is more dangerous.

Iran has never conquered Germany now has it? ;-)

[Joel]

"Maybe this simply results out of the fact, that the US are operating world wide and Iran is not? Its about WORLD peace, so that might be the reason for those results."

Ahem Dan, you may be interested to know about this news:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_2_iran.html

"...With the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, a British subject, Tehran extended its contempt for sovereignty to claiming jurisdiction over the nationals of foreign states, passing sentence on them, and conscripting citizens of other countries to carry it out. Iran’s supreme leader instructed Muslims around the world to serve as executioners of the Islamic Republic—and they did, killing not Rushdie himself but his Japanese translator, and stabbing the Italian translator, and shooting the Italian publisher, and killing three dozen persons with no connection to the book when a mob burned down a hotel because of the presence of the novelist’s Turkish translator"

and

"...Khomeini’s successor, Ayatollah Khamenei, has said, “It is in our revolution’s interest, and an essential principle, that when we speak of Islamic objectives, we address all the Muslims of the world.”..."

and

"...In 1994, the Argentine Israel Mutual Association was bombed in Buenos Aires. Nearly 100 people died and 250 were injured—the worst massacre of Jewish civilians since the Holocaust. An Argentine court eventually issued warrants for two Iranian diplomats plus Ali Fallahian, former intelligence minister, and Ali Akbar Parvaresh, former education minister and deputy speaker of the Majlis...the random slaughter in the Argentine has no strategic value except as a demonstration of muscle and reach."

And Iran is not operating world wide? Yeah right.

[playertwo]

there are those who know
those who don't know
and those that do not want to know.

there are those that have to know,
those that need to know
and those that don't have to know.

do germans want to know?
do germans have to know?

no.

[J.T.]

PacRim Jim wrote
"Germans are correct. America is more dangerous to Germany than is Iran. After all, we killed their beloved Fuehrer, Hitler from Braunau, and destroyed their communist paradise."

Sounds sarcastic, but I think there is some truth in it. Germany was at war with the United States two times within the past 90 years and it is just rational when people view former enemies as a bigger threat than coutries they never had any trouble with in the past like Iran.
Do a poll in Poland and you'll find out that the Poles consider Germany and also Russia to be much bigger threats to their country than Iran or North Korea.
It is however irrational that France is not viewed as a threat to Germany, that is just possible because of all the German- French friendship propaganda.

[Jabberwockey]

I am a German. And yes, I do think that the US pose a bigger threat to this world than Iran. And I do so because of a couple of reasons:

Reason 1: WMDs!

So the Iran is working on it's nuclear arsenal. Yepp. Frightening.
So the Iran could eventually produce an atomic bomb in five years. Oh boy.

You know which country has a nuclear arsenal too? Not only that, but also the biggest nuclear arsenal on this planet? And who are currently upgrading and renewing that?
THE US! The US could start a nuclear war right away if they like and noone could stop them! Iran may have a bomb in five years? Gosh, the US have (or had) 101 atomic bombs stored away in Germany alone!

But wait, it's not about the weapons, it's about the responsible use of weapons. Right?

Reason 2: War-mongering

I hope that so far it should be obvious, that

- Saddam Hussein didn't have anything to do with 9/11 and
- Saddam Hussein didn't have any WMDs

If not, please do read up on the news. It is out of the question that Saddam is (or was) "the bad guy" - even the most favourite bad guy in the US, that's why they helped him come to power. The thing is that a war is an awful thing. It risks human life, both military and civilian, so you have to have a pretty good reason to go for one.

Did the US have such a reason for invading Iraq? No. Their arguments beforehand were paper-thin. Literally. And the report on said paper was postponed for two weeks, enough time even for a five years old to forge it.

Oh, but wait, this is about defending the US, isn't it? The US is at war. Isn't it?

Reason 3: Incredible use of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Disinformation)

George Orwell would have loved the US media these days. YOU ARE AT WAR!

No. You're not! You experienced a terrorist attack, something almost every European country has experienced in the past (including Germany). Granted, the attack on you was devilishly planned and it involved an awful lot of people. But it's still an act of terror, not of war! So PLEASE stop talking about a war as if there's one single country behind all this and you will make a lot of Germans relax more.

WHO'S NOT WITH US IS AGAINST US! Great Scott! You're really pulling this off? Do you even realise that the very rights you are so proud of and you want to fight for are being stripped of you AS WE SPEAK and all for the (alleged) sake of your own security?

You're talking about Nazigermany as if it was yesterday. It wasn't. It was over 60 years ago and there are only very few Germans who are in any way proud of what happened. But when I look at the propaganda used back then and compare it to the propaganda used by your current administration right now, it sends a chill down my spine!

People like to see the transition to Nazigermany as a sudden blow. From one day to the next we all were merciless and antisemitic bastards. But no, the transition was slow and gradually, step by step. And that's a slope YOU are currently on. You are turning into a dictatorship that is threatening the world with war.

And no, being German doesn't deprive me of the right to say this. Actually, being German gives me EVERY right, because I know what happened in this country and I can see that it's happening in yours right now. To quote a famous German writer: "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

So the Iran's president says that Israel should be wiped off the map. Do I agree? No. Absolutely not. But I'm so incredibly grateful that we live in a world dominated by the human rights. And one of the human rights has something to do with freedom of opinion. I'm not glad that he says stuff like that. But I'm glad that he's allowed to!

Yes, he's a man of power. That's worrying. But until he really does something to wipe anything off the map, let the diplomates earn their money.

[Jabberwockey]

Sorry, the comment got clipped, here's the rest

WHO'S NOT WITH US IS AGAINST US! Great Scott! You're really pulling this off? Do you even realise that the very rights you are so proud of and you want to fight for are being stripped of you AS WE SPEAK and all for the (alleged) sake of your own security?

You're talking about Nazigermany as if it was yesterday. It wasn't. It was over 60 years ago and there are only very few Germans who are in any way proud of what happened. But when I look at the propaganda used back then and compare it to the propaganda used by your current administration right now, it sends a chill down my spine!

People like to see the transition to Nazigermany as a sudden blow. From one day to the next we all were merciless and antisemitic bastards. But no, the transition was slow and gradually, step by step. And that's a slope YOU are currently on. You are turning into a dictatorship that is threatening the world with war.

And no, being German doesn't deprive me of the right to say this. Actually, being German gives me EVERY right, because I know what happened in this country and I can see that it's happening in yours right now. To quote a famous German writer: "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

So the Iran's president says that Israel should be wiped off the map. Do I agree? No. Absolutely not. But I'm so incredibly grateful that we live in a world dominated by the human rights. And one of the human rights has something to do with freedom of opinion. I'm not glad that he says stuff like that. But I'm glad that he's allowed to!

Yes, he's a man of power. That's worrying. But until he really does something to wipe anything off the map, let the diplomates earn their money.

[Scott_H]

Hey! The Koolaid pitcher is empty...

What? Jabberwockey drank it all? Oh.

Let's see, I think he hit all the memes:

All the ills of the world are Bush's/the US's fault

Bush = Hitler = Bad Dictator

Saddam did nothing wrong (well, at least not to us) = Good Dictator

No WMD = Bush Lied

State-sponsored Terrorism = criminal act

US threatening others = war-mongering

Iran threatening others = free speech

Patriotism = lack of human rights

US media = propaganda, FUD

Our propaganda/media = "facts"

German history is irrelevant

That is such a load of crap, I literally do not know where to begin. I'm sure before I collect my thoughts, the rest of you will chime in and fisk the heck out of his post.

I look forward to your thoughts.

[Scott_H]

Oh, I forgot another meme Jabberwockey hit:

Diplomacy is the only way to go.

[Merion]

The Iran is the greater possible threat for the future. At the moment the US has a greater capacity to attack other states on a military base than the Iran.
For Germany the Iran is the bigger threat because Germany and the US have worked together and are in the NATO together. Therefore the chance that the US will attack Germany is very low, provided there isn't a big change in politics which I don't see coming.
The Iran doesn't really have a cause to attack Germany, on the other hand the country is unpredictable in its actions and may see Germany as a legitimate aim because Germany is part of the western world. Nobody in Germany wishes to test that theory.

Is the US the greater thread to world peace? Depends on the definition. Is it possible that the US attacks a country because it presents a possible threat to its neighbouring countries or the world as a whole? Yes, that is possible. Is that implicitly bad? No.
Is it possible that the US attacks a country which doesn't pose any threat to its neighbouring countries? I'd like to think no.

To be a danger to world peace isn't necessarily a bad thing. It depends on why the country is deciding on desturbing this peace.

[Jabba the Tutt]

Jabberwockey: "So the Iran's president says that Israel should be wiped off the map. Do I agree? No. Absolutely not."

Gee, that's White of you. You don't agree to murder 4 million Jews.

Here's the thing, Germany wouldn't and couldn't do anything about it. Israel, the US, Britain can and will. So, stand on the sidelines and through trash at the adults, Jabberwockey. That's all you're good for.

[J.T.]

Jabberwockey wrote

"You are turning into a dictatorship that is threatening the world with war."

Now look I'm really not pro-american, but to claim that the US is turning into a dictatorship right now is absurd. It is still the same two party democracy it always was and it is a country that respects the freedom of speech and expression much more than most of Europe.
George Bush has no intention to become a dictator, the man is a democracy freak, who does not understand that muslims don't share his ideas of democracy and freedom and never will as long as they are muslims. The concept of islamism is as undemocratic as communism or fascism and can only work under a dictatorship. Giving these people free elections is the stupidest thing one can do, cause they will use this as a legitimate way to turn secular dictatorships into islamic theocracies. They don't need an islamic revolution anymore, they just go and vote .
Your claim that the United States is threatening the world with war is also wrong, they're threatening the world with their degenerated culture with McDonalds, Pornography and Rap music , but not with war. Maybe they're threatening Iran right now , but Iran is not " the world" and nuclear weapons in the hands of radical islamists are a grave threat too and a threat to more than just one country.

[James W.]

@Jabberwockey

But wait, it's not about the weapons, it's about the responsible use of weapons. Right?

Oh damn! There was actually a milligram of sense in that rant!

Let me put it this way. Allow me a hypothetical, if you will. Iran and the U.S. are both nuclear powers and both are capable of striking Germany with nuclear warheads at will. Everything else is as it is today--culture, leadership, comments from the leadership, terrorism, economy, etc...

Who do you honestly think is the larger threat to Germany? Your answer will tell me a lot about you (as if your rant already hasn't).

[garydausz]

@jabberwockey
There is so much BS in your few lines that it is hard to decide with what to start.
Lets see.

"- Saddam Hussein didn't have anything to do with 9/11 and"
Yeah possible, but who claimed that or ever used it as an argument for going to war with him?

"- Saddam Hussein didn't have any WMDs"
Thats an outright lie. There is enough evidence (just read the UN reports) to proof that he had WMDs the only question left is if he still had some when he claimed he didn't. But so much to seeing things in Black&White.

Your ridiculous tries to compare the political situation in the US right now with the situation of germany before or at 1933 shows that you have absolutely no idea of the US and are a proof of the unreality that the german media has already created in the minds of too many germans.
You are the reason why a Blog like this exists.
The only thing about your post that I find positive is that at least you have tried to look at some other point of views just by visiting this site.
Thats something the majority of all you "hyperintelligent" germans have completely "forgotten" in the last 10-20 years.

[Don]

@Dan Kaufmann

"Iran has never conquered Germany now has it? ;-)"

Actually it has conquered Germany. Where do you suppose the 'Aryans' came from?

[Joel]

Jabberwockey, thanks for the ridbit mate. What you have written can land you in scriptwriter roles for comedies that utilise absurdities LOL.

[chris]

The US more dangerous than Iran? Well, let's see....

The United States has a long and indisputable record of attacking other countries: Mexico(1848), Soviet Union (1919), Haiti(1915), Nicaragua (1927), Panama (1989), Vietnam (1962), Cambodia(1969), Laos(1962), Libya(1988), Lebanon(1958), Dominican Republic (1965), Iraq (2003), and of subverting or overthrowing the governments of many others: Guatemala (1956), Chile (1973), Brazil (1962), Cuba (1961), Nicaragua (1980s), Congo (1960), Angola (1976), etc... The United States has the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons, has used nuclear weapons in the past and has not renounced the use of nuclear weapons. It has the largest military machine in the world, which is engaged in an occupation of Iran's neighbor at this time. The United States has military bases on all parts of the globe, and has used them for agressive operations against other countries. It has explicitly denied being bound by international law and Geneva Conventions in its conduct, and has violated both of these, most recently in its invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Against this, we must balance Iran's support for terrorist movements in Lebanon and Palestine, and a government that shoots off its mouth about possibly building nuclear weapons.

I think that in view of both past performance and future potential, it is very clear that the United States is indeed more dangerous than Iran.

-

[Spacksack]

Because a Germany bashing thread without german responses is kind of boring, i like to add some thoughts.

First of all, most of you got confused (maybe intensionally) about what the poll question was.

It was not about the greatest thread to Germany. Noone here thinks of the US as a potential immediate thread to Germany. There is only wide disapproval with US governments course of action in forreign affairs in the recent years and the sad realisation that this as dangerous for world peace as the stupid propaganda of Amadinedschad.

The thread for world peace. Thats what the poll was all about. I would have voted "equally threatening", because both sides are heating the conflict.

And i like to point out some other misconceptions about 1st Germany:

Most of the Germans (those who know something about History) are still gratefull that you helped ending the Third Reich and appreciate all the US did to bring Germany on its feet again and establish a good relationship. Some posters in this blog try to reduce Germany to what ist was over 60 years ago. But we hav changed a long time ago and most of you know that.

There will always be some fans of Adolf Hitler, but these are tiny minorities and they exist in the US as well and even in Russia. So you can not conclude anything about Germany by the occurence of some extremist groups.

Then second thing i like to address is the misconception why you think you go to war.

I hate war, but i see it sometimes as last resort (meaning self defense).

Yes there have been some wars where the US acted in self defense, and i a, actually glad about some interventions the US did in the last century including WWI WWII and the Korean War and Afganistan (2002).

But even those were not fought only for noble reasons like self defense or support of an ally. Nevertheless they were justified.

Even the Operation Desert Storm was a good thing when you defeated the unprovoked attack on Kuwait. Although i am convinced you would have looked the other way if kuwait weren't one of you major oil suppliers.

Now about the war you are currently in (iraq) and the war you are approaching (iran).

You think you went there because of a thread to national security, don't you?
I can understand that you might have been tricked into believing that in the aftermath of 9/11.

But the sole purpose of this war was commercial profits and geo strategical calculations.
Saddam Hussein was no thread to the US nor to Isreal nor any other country by 2003. Yes he was a dictator, as if that would concern you. You supported him with weapons in the 80s and you didn't remove him in desert storm 1991. If you had, he wouldn't have gased the Kurds and massacred the shiites of basra who supported desert storm and hoped they could overthrow the sadam regime. You did't help them because your oil ports were secure.

The present iraq war is even worse. You are there for the wrong reasons and conduct it carelessly. I am not talking about the conduct of the military personal, i am sure they do what they can. But from a top view this war is a mess.

Yes you have removed Sadam (that was just a bonus) an now you are sitting on some very large oil depots. I am not sure where exactly the benefits are for the american voter (have your energy prices decreased?) but I only disadvantages on a global scale. Your attack gave rise to islamic fundamentalists all over the world. We have an higher frequency of terrorist attacks and threads than before.

You have failed to stabilize that iraq after you dismantled its government structures. Now there is a civil war, although not declared officially. The iraqis have certainly gone from bad condions to worse conditions. At least 100000 Iraqis have been killed in the course of this war most of the civilians. And you know your own casualty numbers are.

And now tell me that this all was worth it.
After all america is weaker than before, and i am no fan of a weak america. I don't envy your super power status. A status you are going to lose if you make more mistakes like confronting Iran without european support in this aggressive manner. And don't think you are doing this because Amadinedschad is a second Hitler.

I am not thinking that Bush is a second Hitler either. I think we gain nothing by calling names.
So i won't tell you what i think of your President. What i can't understand is that he is so untouchable. I know that his approvalratings are low. But considered what he has done to your country. How often he has lied to you. One of such obvious lies of this magnitude, when commited by the german chancelor would relief him of his duties immediatly.

I will stop know. I wrote this to perhaps solve some misunderstandings.

You can now go on and rant on about nazi germany.
Remember not everyone who is critizising american politics ist either a nazi, a communist or a french madman.

[James]

@Spacksack

Even the Operation Desert Storm was a good thing when you defeated the unprovoked attack on Kuwait. Although i am convinced you would have looked the other way if kuwait weren't one of you major oil suppliers.

Kuwait isn't a major supplier of oil to America. Kuwait is a major supplier of oil to Europe and Japan. If fact, most of Europe and Japan are far more dependant on oil from the persian gulf than North America. But since oil is a fungible commodity, the point is rather irrelavent.

By the way, how much oil was there in Vietnam, West Berlin, Korea or Bosnia?

You supported him with weapons in the 80s and you didn't remove him in desert storm 1991.

Another myth. Uh, get yourself informed?

Iraq got: guns tanks, bombs, missles from Russia - their largest weapons supplier. France supplied plances, radar systems and even built a nuclear reactor Osirak. Germany supplied bunkers and 2/3rds of the chemical weapons Saddam used. Who does Iraq owe the most money to? Answer: Russia, for all those weapons Saddam bought back in the 1980s. US provided intel when it looked like they were going to loose in the war Saddam started with Iran.

You did't help them because your oil ports were secure.

Wrong. We didn't remove him from office in 1991 because Bush Sr. asked the coalition, inlcuding Geramany, what should be done. The resounding answer was that Saddam was going to fall on his own anyways, why loose more American lives in a senseless effort to "finish the job."

At least 100000 Iraqis have been killed in the course of this war most of the civilians

Complete fiction. It's common for people like you to just pull numbers out of your ass like that. Try, http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ they estimate 38,0000 civilians. Than again, I'd like to know what is a civilian when you're fighting against insurgents who don't wear uniforms. Double counting?

if you make more mistakes like confronting Iran without european support in this aggressive manner. And don't think you are doing this because Amadinedschad is a second Hitler.

"Precious Europe." Useless really, except England. What good was Germany when 300.000 Bosnians were being killed? A war that sat by and did NOTHING to correct. A German foreign minister that recognised the successsion of Slovenia and Croatia from Yogoslovia and precipitated the civil war.

By the way, "WHAT [American] Agression" are you talking about? We haven't threatened anyone. The US has done nothing for the last 3 years with Iran while Germany, France and the UK waisted their diplomatic time with Iran, trying to get promises from them. Didn't work. Diplomacy has already failed. And history has demonstrated that sanctions against Iraq only benefited Saddam, France and Russia. So. What do you suggest that the US do? I already know that Germany has given up...

Seems to me that people like you:

1) Don't have the facts straight. I've already debunked your facts on "who built saddam" and civilian body counts.
2) Like to assume that what the US is doing is wrong, there must be a better way.
3) Insinuate that there is a 3rd way.

commited by the german chancellor would relief him of his duties immediatly.

Thanks, I'm a patriot too. The US wrote your constitution, I'm glad you hold it so tightly. We're trying to do the same in Iraq at the moment. There is the point thought, that once you remove a Chancellor (which takes approxamatly 6 months in Germany), how do you prevent him/now her, from corruption like Schröder has with his new KGB employer Putin?

[Tman]

I was hoping that the poll that David has linked to wasn't indicative of the true sentiment of the German people. However, reading the comments in this thread gives me little doubt that the poll is quite accurate.

Some of these comments have been so unbelievably uninformed is it downright depressing.

Saddam was never a threat to Israel or the US?

I suggest those who believe that visit the following site and then tell me he wasn't a threat.

www.husseinandterror.com/

happy reading..

[flux]

@James

The US wrote the German constitution? And they're trying to do the same in Iraq? I agree with some of your points, but that's just flat out wrong.

[atmx]

Spacksack,

But the sole purpose of this war was commercial profits and geo strategical calculations. Saddam Hussein was no thread to the US nor to Isreal nor any other country by 2003.

No, the purpose of the war was to end a containment policy that while made the rest of the world safe from Saddam, put the US in harms way for over a decade, by making it a target for terrorists who (very conveniently for Saddam, one must wonder about that) make demands that would essentially the end of containment of Saddam. The US is faced with the catch-22 of enduring more attacks for perpetuity, or resolving the primary reason for being in harms way, or walking away and letting Saddam rebuild.

Yes he was a dictator, as if that would concern you. You supported him with weapons in the 80s and you didn't remove him in desert storm 1991. If you had, he wouldn't have gased the Kurds and massacred the shiites of basra who supported desert storm and hoped they could overthrow the sadam regime. You did't help them because your oil ports were secure

The US did not support him with weapons, the most they provided him with was transport helicopters near the end of the war. Europeans and Russians were Saddam's biggest arms suppliers. Germans built Saddam's chemical weapons plants. The French supplier his nuclear reactor. What Saddam did manage to get from the US companies and organizations were dual-use chemicals from US companies and bacterial samples from an American biological research sample clearinghouse.

The gassing of the Kurds occurred during the Iran-Iraq war.

And Kuwait was not and still is not a significant supplier of oil to the US. There was an argument that the US should not fight or at least contribute much towards the original Gulf War because the US was not supplied by Kuwait.

So i won't tell you what i think of your President. What i can't understand is that he is so untouchable. I know that his approvalratings are low. But considered what he has done to your country. How often he has lied to you. One of such obvious lies of this magnitude, when commited by the german chancelor would relief him of his duties immediatly.

What lies of what magnitide? You are aware that the Clinton administration made the same claims regarding Iraq and acted upon them?

[James]

@flux

The US wrote the German constitution? And they're trying to do the same in Iraq? I agree with some of your points, but that's just flat out wrong.

Really? Than debunk me. Here's some suggested reading:

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

The Basic Law was adopted in the aftermath of World War II while West Germany was still under allied occupation. The first state of the creation of a democracy in the western areas of Germany was that the individual West German states, or Länder, were given constitutions. The new constitution for West Germany was originally to be drafted by a constituent assembly and submitted to a plebiscite for ratification. However, for the same reasons that the document was ultimately called a 'basic law' and not a 'constitution', the leaders of the Länder insisted that the drafting body be called the 'Parliamentary Council' and that plans for a referendum be abandoned.

When it met the Parliamentary Council consisted of delegates elected by the parliaments of each Land. After being passed by the council and approved by the occupying powers the Basic Law was submitted to the governments of the Länder for ratification, it having been provided that the document would not come into effect until it had been ratified by at least two-thirds of the states. After meeting these requirements the enactment of the Basic Law was proclaimed on May 23, 1949.

So. No German ever voted for the Grundgesetz in the planned referendum. Ironic, considering Iraqis recently (6+ months ago) voted for in a referendum for their constitution - a luxury the Germans never had. Furthermore, it took Germany 4 years to get to the same point that Iraq got to in two years.

[offended_german]

Several things that come to my mind:

One side tries to reason wheras the other side uses insults "idiot, nazi,...." and short statements like "Bush = Hitler = Bad Dictator" which don't help anyone.

If I understand the "pro-US" side correctly there is NO flaw in the american system and there will never be one.

You are talking about WAR here, lots of innocent people die and are being raped!! This should be the very last option one draws and not just another possibility of reacting. Because of the lack of experience (and because you ignore our common history) no one here seems to realize that...

Before the last election in Iran, they had a phase of democratic development. Mohammad Khatami was a close friend to all western countries in the world. Iran was the prototype of a middle-east democracy. But then the election came. It was close but at the end the more conservative man won (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) because he was supported by the countryside population (farmers) and by the religious part of society. (see any similarities?)
Unfortunately this man has opinions which are not tolerable for lots of people (40% of irans population for instance).
Should we try to restrain this man and hope for the next elections (perhaps try to help the opposition) or should we attack iran now (with nuclear weapons) and ruin all the democratic structures there, kill thousands of innocents.

If the US throw a nuclear weapon on Iran (so that they can't do it first) the end of the world will be very near!

[J.T.]

I agree the US wrote the German constitution or at least they installed and supported the puppet government that wrote the German constition.

But wait a minute, there is no German constitution, there is just a Grundgesetz, a basic law. That is not a constitution. They always planed to write a constitution someday, but never did it. Instead of this the puppet government ( no longer the puppets of America, now France and the EU bureaucats are their masters) signed a European constitution.

[flux]

James, you said that the US wrote the German constitution. That is not true. The constitution was drafted by the "Parlamentarischer Rat", all members of which were Germans. The very wikipedia article you quoted says as much. I did not say anything about votes or referenda.

[James]

You are talking about WAR here, lots of innocent people die and are being raped!!

Hopefully mostly the bad people die. But what was your suggestion before 2003 with Iraq? Do nothing?

Before the last election in Iran, they had a phase of democratic development. Mohammad Khatami was a close friend to all western countries in the world.

Maybe he was a true friend to Germany. Germany is Iran's largest trading partner.

You reall think that Iran had a democratic election? They cut out most of the potential candidates from the race! The recent election was anything but democratic...

Should we try to restrain this man and hope for the next elections (perhaps try to help the opposition) or should we attack iran now (with nuclear weapons) and ruin all the democratic structures there, kill thousands of innocents.

If the US throw a nuclear weapon on Iran (so that they can't do it first) the end of the world will be very near!

Which we are you talking about? You mean the American we? Sind wir alle (heute) Amerikanner, Hr. Schröder? Germany is out of the Iran problem, and because it hasn't the political will to suffer sanctions (Germany is trying to 1990s Japan-like export itself out of it's current economic problems), they will do nothing. A lot of talk of diplomacy, flying around and acheiving precious little.

There is NO democratic structure in Iran!

[James]

@JT

Thanks, I think that flux doesn't get the "puppet" reference though.

@flux

You think that the Americans, French and UK were going to let such an important document be written without their approval? Especially, since the US was starting the Truman doctrine, forming NATO and starting the Marshall plan? Gimme a break!

[flux]

@James

Well, J.T. also compared denying the holocaust to having a "controversial opinion" about "some historical event", I'm glad he's approving your theory. Of course, the allied powers had to approve the constitution. But they did not write it. That's all I am saying, nothing else. The US did not write the German constitution. How is that statement wrong?

Btw, Italy is Iran's largest trading partner. That is at least what Condoleeza Rice is saying.

[George M]

You would think that that the American public would turn on Germany. Especially considering the attitude expressed in this poll and the pathetic ignorance expressed by some of our German readers.

Apparently the American public has turned on Volkswagen. Their sales are not doing very well.

So what do our friends in Germany do? They came up with a new marketing plan for the U.S. From now on, the venerable Volkswagen Golf is going to be renamed "The Rabbit" for the U.S. market. (Deja vu all over again)

http://focus.msn.de/auto/autoaktuell/vw-golf_nid_27574.html

Not only that, the Rabbit is going to be sold in television commercials by the hot "Miss Helga."

http://focus.msn.de/auto/autoaktuell/peinliche-panne_aid_20539.html?interface=galerie

We have already met her. She is the Teutonic techno babe that Medienkritik discovered when they posted the thread about new Volkswagen commercials several weeks ago.

Do you think that Germany...or at least Germany Inc....realizes that their image is deteriorating? What a better way to redefine your image when you bring up the happy recent past....Sprockets and Rabbits.

[Grant]

1. Iran's stated purpose for developing an A-Bomb is to finish the job Der Fuhrer started by "whiping Israel off the map."

2. The only country that is willing to DO something to stop the Mad Mullahs is judged "most dangerous" by the Krauts.

3. The Krauts were very upset when the U.S. executed Nazi war criminals after the war. http://www.deathcamps.org/occupation/einsatztrial.html

4. In 1986 it came out that the German government had provided export permission for German chemical companies to build poison gas factories in Libya. Guess who Khadafy planned on using that gas on.

5. Read about Einsatzgruppen Egypt here: http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/23708.html

6. Today the Germans, French and Russians will enable the Arabs and Persians to do the dirty work for them.

7. The German people have learnt nothing, they are still a bunch of liberty hating collectivists, impervious to reason and willing to believe any Big Lie especially about the Jews.

[George M]

@ Chris

"The United States has a long and indisputable record of attacking other countries: Mexico(1848), Soviet Union (1919), Haiti(1915), Nicaragua (1927), Panama (1989), Vietnam (1962), Cambodia(1969), Laos(1962), Libya(1988), Lebanon(1958), Dominican Republic (1965), Iraq (2003), and of subverting or overthrowing the governments of many others: Guatemala (1956), Chile (1973), Brazil (1962), Cuba (1961), Nicaragua (1980s), Congo (1960), Angola (1976), etc...

We went over this with Flux several weeks ago. Since you started with the war with Mexico (1848), let's start there:

Germany invaded Denmark twice (1868, 1940), France three times(1876, 1914, 1940), Belgium and Russia twice (1914 and 1940 and 1941), Norway, Poland, Yugoslavia, Italy, Holland once, 1941 - 1945, and Kosovo once, (1996).

Germany murdered 100,000 Hero tribesmen in what is now Namibia in the late 1800s.

Germany has interferred in insurrections in Cuba, (1898) South Africa, (1898), Ireland (1916) and Russia (1918).

Germany's Friends, the French, invaded the Crimean in 1848, Mexico (1861), North Africa during the 1800s, Vietnam (1956) Eygpt (1958) Lebanon (1918) and Kosovo, (1996).

Germany's other friend, Russia, has attacked Turkey, (1848), Japan (1906), Finland (1939), the Baltic States (1939), Czechloslavakia, (1967), Hungary (1956) and Afghanistan, (1987).

Seems to me that the world is a very violent place. The U.S. does not have a monopoly on attacking other countries. I would even say that the champion in this area is.....Germany.

[George M]

This guy had a big role in writing the German Grundgesetz:

http://www.gpaulbishop.com/GPB%20History/GPB%20Archive/Section%20-%203/J.%20Conant/j__conant.htm

[flux]

@George M

You did go over what with me several weeks ago? Did I ever claim anything about the wars you listed? You must confuse me with someone else.
Conant was good friends with Adenauer, and certainly discussed the Grundgesetz with him. That hardly is proof for "the US wrote the German constitution". Advising or supervising doesn't equal writing. Isn't that the whole point in Iraq as well? In both instances, the US wanted to help the people establish a democracy and a constitution, but not impose one.

[garydausz]

@Spacksack
"One of such obvious lies of this magnitude, when commited by the german chancelor would relief him of his duties immediatly."
I am laughing my ass off. As if germany any politician ever had to take consequence when he lied or mislead. You are pointing your finger at someone else while your "high morale" chancelor had quite obviously misused his power to get himself a nice job after office (where is the consequence?).

By the way, the old "don't-call-us-nazis-its-50-year-ago" crying is getting lame. No one in this blog has ever used nazism as an argument for german behaviour.

[Improbulus Maximus]

This from the nation and culture that gave us the two worst wars in human history and introduced chemical warfare, concentration camps, and ethnic cleansing, and blighted civilization with the likes of Marx, Engles, and Hitler, and gave us the gift of socialism as law and religion. I guess if that's where they're coming from, their idea of "peace" is much like that held by islam; so yes, the US is the greatest threat to world peace.

[Jörg Brörmöller]

Posted by: garydausz | April 14, 2006 at 01:33 PM

Open mouth, insert foot:

>By the way, the old "don't-call-us-nazis-its-50-year-ago"
>crying is getting lame. No one in this blog has ever used
>nazism as an argument for german behaviour.

One posting after this:
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus | April 14, 2006 at 01:50 PM

>This from the nation and culture that gave us the
>two worst wars in human history and introduced
>chemical warfare, concentration camps, and ethnic
>cleansing, and blighted civilization with the likes
>of Marx, Engles, and Hitler, and gave us the gift of
>socialism as law and religion. I guess if that's where
>they're coming from, their idea of "peace" is much
>like that held by islam; so yes, the US is the
>greatest threat to world peace.

Four postings before that:
Posted by: Grant | April 14, 2006 at 01:18 AM
>7. The German people have learnt nothing, they are
>still a bunch of liberty hating collectivists,
>impervious to reason and willing to believe any
>Big Lie especially about the Jews.

In almost any thread in this blog you find a sufficiency of Wichsbuben, who put your assertion to shame.

Jörg

[joe]

I always like it when Germans start talking about morality, the killing of innocents, etc. It just proves they really do not spend enough time studying their own history.

[chris]

to Grant:

I thought we were discussing the relative dangerousness of the United States and Iran, not Germany.

By the way, "Germany" invaded France in 1871, not 1876. The French had declared war on Prussia, but we all know how that turned out. Germany became a unified state at the end of the war.

No doubt, the world is a dangerous place, but as an American citizen, it is my responsability to look after the misdeeds of my own country first of all. That is one of the burdens of living in a free country. I repeat: given past performance and future potential, America is indeed more dangerous than Iran.

As far as present-day Germans are concerned, the main objection that many people seem to have these days is that they are not war-like enough, as evidenced by their reluctance to join the US agression against Iraq. War seems to have been beaten out of them. This is a good thing.

[garydausz]

@Jörg
How convinient. just when you needed it a guy (Maximus) shows up that never posted her before. Strange as well.
Anyways, the idea of this blog is to criticise german media because they are completely biased in their coverage about everything that has to do with the USA. The argument is not that they should shut up because germany has piled up so much shit in their history but that they should be more realistic and try to be at least neutral (as news medias should be anyways).

[Jörg Brörmöller]

Posted by: garydausz | April 14, 2006 at 07:38 PM

>How convinient. just when you needed it
>a guy (Maximus) shows up that never posted
>her before. Strange as well.

As I pointed out, there were just two instances of idiots belying your assertion in the space of just 5-6 postings in this thread alone. And, as I stated, this instance is not isolated at all but part and parcel of the usages in this blog. Which is ok, that is part of the the ecological niche of a blog.

>Anyways, the idea of this blog is to
>criticise german media because they are
>completely biased in their coverage about
>everything that has to do with the USA.

Yes, fine. Be my guest. Of course a number of correspondents, including the authors of this blog, assuage their wounded egoes by piling on sly assertions, innuendo and disparaging remarks which range from mild mumblings to outright nazi-fingerpointing. Fine, par for the course for a blog in which most of the respondents on either side of the mudwall have chips on their shoulders the size of the "Missouri".

> The
>argument is not that they should shut up
>because germany has piled up so much shit
>in their history but that they should be
>more realistic and try to be at least neutral
>(as news medias should be anyways).

Yes. No. Maybe. Neutral as judged by you, perchance? With your point of view, political coordinate system and lines of argument as neutral and impartial as Torquemada? Naaaw, that dawg won't hunt, nohow!

Howerver, if you need to piss on Germany, the Germans and the German media, do feel free. Be my guest. It and they are certainly is deserving of it, just don't avail yourself to the mantle of avenging angel for your bellyventing. Ah, and don't expect to be taken too seriously.

Jörg

[Grant]

Actually, we were discussing the moral imbecility of the German people and America haters in general. I hope Ahmadinejad enjoys the soccer game.

[Jörg Brörmöller]

Posted by: Grant | April 14, 2006 at 08:58 PM

>Actually, we were discussing the moral
>imbecility of the German people and America haters
>in general. I hope Ahmadinejad enjoys the soccer
>game.

Ah, that's more like it! Yes, the Germans are morally imbecilic, you are quite right. So now that you`ve had your littel "moment", why don't you go and play in heavy traffic, hmm?

Jörg

[Improbulus Maximus]

Where is the idiot who dismisses my comments without addressing them? Refute one thing I wrote or STFU, moron.