« Michael Naumann: A German Journalist's Dialog of Arrogance | Main | Politically Incorrect has Moved »

Comments

Am I the only German who felt not gratification, but sorrow over the election disaster? Am I the only one who thinks the American people punished themselves primarily? Oh, and I even like Rumsfeld. Maybe I'm just not a good European.

Mir, you are not even a good human being. People like you and me can be best described as revolting fascist scum.

At least we can feel gratification that the saintly smart people have beaten out the loathsome stupid people. At last....

Where's the disaster? The Republicans have had solid control of all elements of the U.S. government for four years. The Democrates picked up a few seats this election cycle and now have a small slice of power in Washington. Note to our German friends: This is called democracy; maybe you have never really grasped the concept. Whatever the course of American policy in Iraq over the next two years, it will be the will of the American people. The opinion of German Leftists is, as it should be, irrelevant.

I am sure Mr. Heuken would believe Germany in 1939 to be a paradise for certain segments of the population. He like many Germans feel stability is more important than anything. One surely could say in 1939 Germany was a very stable nation.]

"And for many Europeans that was worth a good glass of red wine."

That line right there tells me everything I need to know about this worthless POS.

"Many Europeans are feeling a deep sense of gratification over the election disaster of George W. Bush..."

Many? How many? One? Two? Ten? Most? Btw, "Europeans," did you know that this guy seems to think he is *your* spokesman?

@beimami
The Democrates picked up a few seats this election cycle and now have a small slice of power in Washington.

And fewer seats than one would expect, given the history of mid-terms during a 2nd presidential term.

BUT - this election is different. The committee chairs will not be moderate democrats - they are left wing zealots, and frankly some of them are absolutely the dumbest people you'll ever meet (John Conyers comes to mind).

One thing is for certain, and that is, if we leave Iraq it will settle down into a peaceful and stable country. Somewhat on the order of, say, Cambodia after we left Vietnam and no reporting was done in indochina.

I'm sorry, I forgot the closing tag. /modus operandi

I think it is good to see checks and balances being put into working order again; having a single party dominate all three branches of power is unhealthy for any country. Although from what I read about Pelosi over here, I think there could have been a better choice for her position.

Heuken is not a spokesman, but summarizes a widely felt, yet stupid satisfaction in the left circles in Europe. Please keep in mind, that the whole of the European political spectrum is shifted with respect to the American. Both Republicans and Democrats are considered to be on the conservative end of the European spectrum.

I would have liked to see you quote President Köhler in fuller context:

It seems important to me, that the Europeans take up again talks with the Americans and the States in the region about Iraq. There is no simple solution and in any case all the participants need to reconsider their present positions. However I fail to see the Europeans putting effort into thinking about their contribution [...] The war has lead to a disaster. However we must not lay back and say: That is the problem of the Americans. That would be stupid, short-sighted and arrogant.

[...]

Q: Do you feel that there even remains a common understanding on European and American side, how to peacefully solve such conflicts?

Köhler: This common understanding was too small prior to the War of Iraq - and after the War of Iraq it is still not big enough. However there is one conclusion to be drawn from the development in Iraq: We Europeans should approach the USA on how the transatlantic relation can be revived. It is about shared responsibility, but also about responsibility on eye level - and about the awareness that responsibility comes at a cost. Europeans have often skillfully shied away from the latter.

Q: You mean: We offer shared responsibility and money, the Americans have to offer equal standing?

Köhler: In the US a growing number of people knows: even America will be unable to put everything into order in a solo attempt.

@blue: Kohler's statements are interesting, but he himself states what the fundemental flaw in his line of reasoning is. That flaw is: Europe has nothing to offer. The key is in the "responsibility comes at a cost" statement. Since about 1970 at least, all of European politics and sociology has revolved around one organizing philosophy -- avoidance of responsibility. Think about it: what is the whole purpose of socialism? To relive the individual of responsibility for his own well-being. Of course, the tradeoff is loss of freedom and purpose in life, but European society agreed to make that trade decades ago.

This has extended from invidual to national to pan-European: Avoidance of responsibility is the Continent's primary goal. It has led to the near-total disbanding of European military, as European nations rejected their responsibility for self-defense. Similarly, European economies have deteriorated as Europeans have rejected responsibility for self-sustainment. The result is that Europe has nothing to bring to Afghanistan or Iraq or the GWOT. If you can't help yourself, then you are certainly in no position to help anyone else.

What few military assets Europe had that could actually be effective and inter-operate with U.S. forces in the Mideast are already there. And economically, Europe cannot sustain the cost of a prolonged war at any non-trivial level. So negotiating an expanded role for Europe is a non-starter -- regardless of whether the two sides are inclined to cooperate or not, it just won't work.

It has led to the near-total disbanding of European military, as European nations rejected their responsibility for self-defense.

Hmm...which might increase the chances of a "no" vote from these countries on any Security Council Resolutions allowing the US to intervene militarily, anywhere. If they vote "yes", then they would likely be expected to contribute militarily--which would show the world just how uncapable they are. A way of saving face? Just speculating.

First the GOP loses control of Capitol Hill, and now Wal-Mart is pulling out of Germany.

The lefties here must be beside themselves with joy.

Warlord Bush and Henchman Rumsfeld?
I like it. It’s snappy, yet sinister. I’m bringing up a motion for title changes at the next full moon meeting of the Overlords of World Domination, (L.L.C).

p.s.
Anyone want OWD mouse pads, pens, fridge magnets let me know. I get tote bags of the stuff.

@Pamela

I agree in principle, but we survived Carter with a Democratic Congress (yes, I know we are still cleaning up the mess), and we will survive the current situation. As long as the American People are free to make bad decisions at the polls, they are also free to correct those decisions.

There is a mistake in believing that Bush was "defeated" in this midterm election. The mistake is that conservatism won...because the democrats who won appeared, correctly or incorrectly, were perceived to be more conservative than the Republicans who were defeated. Rahm Immanuel correctly took the proverbial temperature of American voters, and concluded that we are a conservative populace. His astute vision, and the GOP's lack thereof, won the election. The Republicans lost...the Democrats did NOT win! Bush is not a Reagan conservative, and that has been his downfall. The liberal move in Washington will be their downfall in 2008. In the meantime, Americans need to be activists in keeping them from undermining our success in the war on mufsidun fighting hirabah.

BUT - this election is different. The committee chairs will not be moderate democrats - they are left wing zealots, and frankly some of them are absolutely the dumbest people you'll ever meet (John Conyers comes to mind).
***************************************************
It seems like a lot of conservatives stayed away from the polls and as a result the Democrats picked up the normal amount of Seats in the House and Senate for a 6 year bi-election by a lot of very slim vote tallies. So what may happen in 2008 if the Republican Base gets galvanised by the actions of moonbats in Congress? Oh and can they do more damage in 2 years than they did in the 8 years before Bush?
****************************************************
First the GOP loses control of Capitol Hill, and now Wal-Mart is pulling out of Germany.

The lefties here must be beside themselves with joy.
***************************************************
Heh I have a surprise for them. ;-))

The Great Brand Space Race

The Great Wall of China has for some 600 years reigned alone as the solitary example of Human Endeavor visible from outer space.

Recently it was joined in the Terrestrial Pantheon by the Col Sanders KFC logo

The Race is ON! The Die is cast I would expect McDonalds to make their move in the near future.

Now that should make some Progressive Liberal cringe and turn green. rotflamo

@Cousin Dave:

"@blue: Kohler's statements are interesting, but he himself states what the fundemental flaw in his line of reasoning is. That flaw is: Europe has nothing to offer."

I think Kohler himself realises that on some level. He at least seems to understand that things cannot go on as they have been. NATO will come apart like a cheap suit on this issue, I think, if things do not change.

I cant' agree with the statement that "Europe has nothing to offer". But I would agree that what Europe has to offer (and it's willingness to do so) are both - not enough. Not nearly enough.


"The key is in the "responsibility comes at a cost" statement. Since about 1970 at least, all of European politics and sociology has revolved around one organizing philosophy -- avoidance of responsibility."

Sometimes it seems so. Another core principle seems (at times) to be that all responsibility for bad things falls squarely on the US. If the US doesn't intervene in Rwanda or Darfur then the genocide is the US fault. If the US intervenes in Iraq, that is the US fault also.

But saying this 'always' happens is an overstatement, because there are honorable exceptions. Thing of Tony Blair or Jose Aznar.

I mostly agree with President Kohler on this:

"Q: You mean: We offer shared responsibility and money, the Americans have to offer equal standing?

Köhler: In the US a growing number of people knows: even America will be unable to put everything into order in a solo attempt."

What this means to me is that either Europe has to accept much more of the burden of global peacekeeping - or the US has to cut bait on NATO sooner or later. There are far more urgent places for our limited resources than defending an exceedingly rich EU for free. In turn the more that Europe brings to the table the more authority it can command. Of course. If Europe continues to refuse to develop effective power this will not happen - and should not.

Right now Europe appears to believe that the US role is to provide the 'foot soldiers' while Europe gves the commands and sets the policy. Nope - won't work.

@beimami
The Democrates picked up a few seats this election cycle and now have a small slice of power in Washington. And fewer seats than one would expect, given the history of mid-terms during a 2nd presidential term. BUT - this election is different. The committee chairs will not be moderate democrats - they are left wing zealots, and frankly some of them are absolutely the dumbest people you'll ever meet (John Conyers comes to mind).

@Pamela
I agree in principle, but we survived Carter with a Democratic Congress (yes, I know we are still cleaning up the mess), and we will survive the current situation. As long as the American People are free to make bad decisions at the polls, they are also free to correct those decisions.

Bemami & Pam,
The points the Republicans were unable to articulate were plentiful. The main point for me being that the dems may well give us "victory" now, by their leftist definition, but that only guarantees that we will be fighting the same "insurgents" again, in Iraq and elsewhere in the future and at a much greater cost of life and national treasures.
Their pitiful whiney mantra of "stay the course or else we will be fighting them here!!!" sounded sophormoric and desperate to the average American on the way to meet their friends at Starbucks.
With all the information available to them, including the intelligence reports that we mortals can not see, that trite and unconvincing little bumpersticker was the best and only point they seemed capable of making?
Add that to their inability to get much done on Social Security and immigration ... add that to their inability to sell a galloping economy, historically low unemployment, and a skyrocketing stockmarket, and the reason for the losses becomes obvious.

I have always made the point in my arguments that ~ the easiest way to defeat a progressive/liberal/democrat is with the truth; that "something always beats nothing!" Well, the current crop of Republican "leaders" with their cramped vision of nothing more than retaining their offices proved me wrong.
On the positive side they have flagrantly outed themselves and underscored the difference between real conservatives and career Republican politicos.
Now let's see if the Republican party has the character and spine to change out their feckless
"leaders" and replace them with thoughtful conservative men and women of vision, or whether they are stilled mired in the "Bob Dole" era of sterile seniority over political effectiveness.
I think we are living in uniquely dangerous times and the consequences of their decisions will be tremendous, perhaps historic for the West.


Tyranno

The comments to this entry are closed.

Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

February 2021

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