When America Can Do No Right...

Today we received an absolutely outstanding comment that deserves to be read by our entire audience. It was composed by Ben Duffy, a good friend from Massachusetts currently living in Germany:

"Wow, this guy [Dr. Peter Gauweiler] is really outrageous. And this guy is in the CSU?

As Ray noted, "We know that some Germans are getting tired of 'feeling so thankful' [about being 'liberated'] about that, but too damn bad, we are going to remind you again."

Of course, I'm not the type of guy to bring up "die Nazizeit" in every argument I've ever had with a German (which is a lot), although I have noticed that Germans seem to bring up the sins (real or imagined) of the United States whenever they get into an argument with me. Actually, this Gauweiller buffoon is a great case in point-- he can't discuss the war in Afghanistan without drawing parallels to the Indian Wars.

It's a stupid little game that we play. Whenever an argument arises between two people from separate countries, one of them tries to argue that the other person can't possibly be right because he comes from such a rotten country that has done such horrible things in the past. The person from the country with the least sins wins. Europeans have proved themselves particularly adept at memorizing a long list of American sins (many of which are bogus), and reciting them at any particularly moment. It's a tactic called "shaming your opponent into silence".

They have also learned how to turn America's finest moments into something less virtuous--i.e.,"The United States only got into World War II for its own economic reasons, so that it wouldn't lose European markets, and so it could become a world superpower". Right, and World War II and the Cold War were such profitable ventures for us. We only spent more money than had ever been spent in all the budgets from 1776 to 1941 in the struggle to defeat Hitler.

In any case, it's kind of hard for an American such as myself to win any such argument considering the fact that so many Europeans seem to have a dossier on America that they pull out at the drop of a hat. So what does that mean? Does that mean that because I'm American that I'm responsible for enslaving Africans, or colonizing the Philipines, or herding the Cherokee tribes onto their reservations?

I guess I'm a little "tired of feeling" so guilty, just as Germans are "tired of feeling so thankful" for their liberation. I'm also tired of the notion that my ideas must be wrong because I come from such a rotten country, the idea that because the US once did wrong, that it cannot now do right.

It's sophistry anyway. When you hear this argument, you can be sure that you're talking to a hardened anti-American. That's what I would call Peter Gauweiller.

What's worse, this is just Gauweiller's attempt to explain why German troops will not be allowed to go near the more dangerous southern regions of Afghanistan. Most NATO countries (besides the English-speaking ones) have successfully managed to keep themselves away from the fighting. It's all Bush's fault, all America's fault, you see.

As Gauweiller wrote, "Ms. Merkel must make clear in America on this concrete case, that it is without question, for example, that the Bundeswehr and we will not support the confusion and catastrophic conditions that the United States has helped to create and is in part responsible for in southern Afghanistan by making Tornado-aircraft available." (Doesn't that sound like Chomsky logic?) See, we aren't going anywhere that's dangerous, and the US made Afghanistan dangerous. It's all America's fault. It's the common refrain--we totally support you, but don't expect us to do anything, because you screwed everything up.

I was in Germany on September 11, 2001, and I must say that I found the German outpouring of "solidarity" to be insincere. Sure, they flew an American flag for a few days, but they seemed more concerned with displaying the "proper" emotions than with actually defeating terrorism. While many (but not all) Americans were envisioning a long but noble struggle, most Germans were thinking "Oh this is terrible, when can life get back to normal?" I think their attitude since then has been one of "We had our candlelight vigils, what more do you want?" Actually, that's the attitude of most American liberals I know as well--they were "deeply moved" by the attacks of September 11th, and they can't believe that anyone would suggest otherwise, now why can't we just talk about healthcare and education?

Other than a candle-light vigil, what else would I like from the Germans? Well, I'd appreciate it if they'd quit paying ransoms to Iraqi terrorists, which will be converted into weapons in the blink of an eye. I wish they would actually send some troops to fight in Iraq, but that will never happen. If they can't even handle that, I'd appreciate it if they'd stop cowering in Northern Afghanistan and blaming their cowardice on the United States. I'd also like it if they actually acted like this is serious business, not just some game that George Bush made up to scare the electorate into voting for him. I'd like it if they would act as if the biggest threat to the world today is Jihadism, and not Bush-style anti-Jihadism.

But I guess that's asking too much."

Ben's comment also reminded me of an observation made in 2003 by Ralph Peters:

"But what about the charge that Americans are the new Nazis? I think I understand the sickness that afflicts you. I received my first insight as a young Army sergeant in a not-yet-reunified Germany a quarter-century ago. Although the event was ten years past, young Germans unfailingly brought up the My Lai massacre in Vietnam during our conversations. My Lai was one of two documented American atrocities in that war. Almost two hundred villagers were murdered. It was inexcusable, and we did not try to excuse it. But those young Germans grasped at the My Lai massacre with an alacrity that astonished me. To them, the two-hundred dead at My Lai canceled Auschwitz and Treblinka, six million murdered Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and dissenters. The message was, "See! You Americans are just as bad as we Germans were--maybe worse.""

This phenomenon is something that many of us have experienced yet been unable to express as eloquently as Ben. We appreciate his insight. (Posted by Ray D.; emphasis ours throughout)

Comments

[DocJones]

Well Ben, welcome to Germany I'd say... And I also have to say sorry for my fellow citizens. I am ashamed of them a lot of times these days.

I am conservative, pro-american, anti-UN etc. Can you imagine how tough it is for me living in my own country?!

Thanks for liberating us 1944-45!

Greetings.

[RayD]

@ DocJones

No need to be ashamed Doc, it is not your fault. Think about Ben: First Massachusetts and then Germany! :) I feel sorry for both of you. Take care.

[Gunter]

Asking Germany to fight arabian fundamentalists is futile. No other industrialized country has more trade ties to the arabian world. In contrast to the USA, Germany has a reputation and many decades of good relationship to lose.

Besides: If Jihadism is the biggest threat today, then we must live in an almost perfect world. You know, a few hundred years ago, when the muslims posed a real threat, they started to invade Europe several times and our ancestors had to drive them back each time. The muslims were able to act this aggressively because they outdid Europe in science and trade, in political structure and in weaponry.

This happened before the USA were founded. Maybe that´s the reason why the Jihadist "threat" sounds so exciting to americans while europeans are relatively relaxed.

In the meantime, the muslims have fallen behind us in every regard mentioned above, they are barely able to control their own borders. Relax :)

[Amelie de Saintronges]

"We won our war, easily" (Peters in the same article).
If that's winning, I don't want to find out what losing looks like.

[Mir]

>> This happened before the USA were founded. Maybe that´s the reason why the Jihadist "threat" sounds so exciting to americans while europeans are relatively relaxed.

Right, the stupid Americans again. Just ask the Europeans, they know better. And since I'm also a strongly pro-American German, I'm probably quite dumb as well. This stupidity is then the reason that I also think that the "Jihadist threat" is not a "threat", but a threat. Oh well.. By the way: Do you even know the demographics of Europe?

[Gunter]

"Right, the stupid Americans again."

I did not intend to insult any one. I simply wanted to point out that the USA have never faced a muslim threat like Europe had to.

[Mir]

So what? They do now. And we as well. From a certain point of view we in Europe are in greater danger from the Islamists than the US. Or do you also think that the "adventure" in Iraq is the reason for their hatred against not only the US, but indeed the whole free world?

[James W.]

@Gunter

I simply wanted to point out that the USA have never faced a muslim threat like Europe had to.

Actually, I think the threat Europe is facing now... may even be larger than it was a few hundred years ago. Maybe that's why Mir asked the question about the demographics of Europe.

[Anondson]

... a muslim threat like Europe had to.

Are you asking us to look back in history at Europe's experience at handling muslim threats? Gates of Vienna? The Reconquista? Inquisition? Are these the sorts of experiences handling Muslims American should be looking towards?

Or Europe's history at handling unassimilated minorities?

You're practically begging us to leap into just the sort of tit-for-tat Ben Duffy decries. Please be a bit less opaque.
What is this successful learned experience Europe can bestow on the uncouth Americans if Americans only had the patience?

[Pamela]

@Gunter
I simply wanted to point out that the USA have never faced a muslim threat like Europe had to.

Whatever the fuck you're smoking, I want some. You don't think the US is under civilizational threat from Islam? And let's just think back to how Europe faced that Muslim threat. It fought.

Not now. Because Europe doesn't think it's threatened. But frankly, even if it did, I doubt it would fight. Europe is too caught up in its moral vanity to confront passe' ideas of good, evil, right, wrong. Europe is post-historical. Its very identity rests on a fabualistic reconstruction of reality. Europe's past sins innoculate. Europe, having wielded evil, can banish it. Begone. There is no evil, there is only social injustice. Almost all of which can be addressed by redistributive tax schemes.

And the remainder by carbon emissions trading schemes.

Islam? A rather quaint 'religion', the adherents of which currently feel humiliated by Western cultural hegemony and the existence of Israel.

Damn those Brits and their Balfour declaration.

And would someone please make the Americans understand that all those aircraft sorties over Iraq are seriously increasing the global CO2 problems?

Get green, people, the sooner the better.

Love,
Gaia

[Gunter]

@ Pamela

So how many times has the USA been invaded by muslim armies now? Which muslim fortresses have been build, and how many american people have been enslaved or forced to convert to islam? ;)

The terrorist "threat" can´t be compared to what the muslims where up to a few hundred years ago. The only time terrorism actually affected my life was when holidays in northern africa became cheaper due to a recent terror strike :)

[Pamela]

@Gunter
So how many times has the USA been invaded by muslim armies now?

We are invaded right now. The fortresses are called 'mosques'. For those of you who already know this story, forgive me for repeating it for Gunter's benefit.

A Saudi family used to live next door to us. The relationship between our families was reasonably ok in the beginning. 3 hours after the attacks on 9/11 they disappeared for weeks. (I don't know if you are aware - we are only 6 miles from the Pentagon and we all heard the strike and could see the smoke.) Every summer when school let out, the family would go back to Saudi Arabia for break. And every time they came back, the children were - 4 of them - were more and more surly (none were older than 9). Among lots of odd behavior, one beats all. I came home from the grocery store to find them returning from their summer break in the Magic Kingdom. I didn't see any of the family. There was a young man in the yard who appeared to be about 17 and was built like a fireplug. He was catching mountain bikes tossed to him from a van full of them. The people doing the tossing - there were 3 - were all over 6 feet tall and dressed in the black head to toe bags complete with gloves. They tossed back after bike to this kid - with one arm.

They were not women.

Scenes like this are repeated over and over here in Northern Virginia. We are literally infested with this. I won't bore you with the incident when a Muslim man deliberately and maliciously ran his cart into me in the grocery store and I decked him.

how many american people have been enslaved or forced to convert to islam?

You don't want to ask how many Americans have been deliberately slaughtered? Which is what they have to do, as we won't be enslaved.

The only time terrorism actually affected my life was when holidays in northern africa became cheaper due to a recent terror strike :)

Oh, how terribly - um - sophisticated of you! Imagine! I hear Cairo can be exquisite, the Luxor massacres notwithstanding. Oh, I have an idea! If you really want to hoard those euros by vacationing in terrorist-threat cheapened vacation spots, our friend, Herr Gedmin, says the beaches in Tel Aviv are among the best in the world!

Bon Voyage!

Bestest,

Pamela

[Buckeye Abroad]

Ben is from MA? I thought they exiled all conservatives from the People's Republic of MA after Ted Kennedy was acquited for man slaughter. Who knew?!

@Günter

"Which muslim fortresses have been build, and how many american people have been enslaved or forced to convert to islam? ;)"

Umm..they didn't convert us, but they did kill about 3,000 of us in a matter of minutes. Like Ben, I was in Germany on 9-11. Let's say it was a real eye-opener.

"The only time terrorism actually affected my life was when holidays in northern africa became cheaper due to a recent terror strike :)"

It's all about you Gunter. Glad you cashed in on the cheap rates. You got kids? Fab!

@Pamela

I am coming up on personal sabitcal this spring and plan to visit Israel. Any suggestions?

[Pamela]

Buckeye Abroad

I have not been - yet. But for me - Jerusalem. And when I go - and I will - on my list is Petra. Not Israel, I know. The Tomb of the Patriarchs is probably not doable. But do something as an American. Get up to that Al Aqsa mosque piece of shit and pray (you're not even supposed to move your lips). In Hebrew. Let me think about an appropriate prayer. It will probably have something to do with Purim - when we dress up in costumes and get drunk.

And I bet Gunter doesn't have kids. They're so inconvenient. Lifestyle and all that. Not to mention having to worry about something other than yourself. That would be such a bore.

[Gunter]

@ Pamela

You know, they once controlled the mediterranean sea. Today, they have to buy all their technologically advanced ships from western manufacturers. At which beach in the USA do you expect them to land an army consisting out of several hundred thousand troops? This is what vienna had to face several times, and the part of europe on the way to the city..

Can a few strange and unfriendly neighbours be compared to squadrons that are searching nearby settlements for all the food they have to supply the muslim army, killing any men of military age while raping the women?

And there is quite a difference between modern mosques and medieval fortresses, this is too obvious.

@ Buckeye Abroad

"Umm..they didn't convert us, but they did kill about 3,000 of us in a matter of minutes"

And how many times did this happen? The fundamentalists had to rely on the most unexpected amateur tactic available since they have no other option available. Once the surprise effect is over, so is their advantage. Doesn´t that prove their total tactical inferiority?

Now compare this to times when they actually outdid us in science. Realize it, the developemnt of the muslim world has arrived at the bottom compared to their former stage. Have you ever been to one?

[amiexpat]

@Gunter
You said:
And how many times did this happen? The fundamentalists had to rely on the most unexpected amateur tactic available since they have no other option available. Once the surprise effect is over, so is their advantage. Doesn´t that prove their total tactical inferiority?

Perhaps they have 'total tactical inferiority' at the moment. But what if they gained access to WMD?
Doesn't 9/11 show that they would use whatever weapon they have at their disposal?
If so, Bush's so called 'paranoia' over WMDs would seem to be justified, oder?
and lend just a little more credence to 'preventive war' than the Europeans grant?

@Gunter
You said:

Asking Germany to fight arabian fundamentalists is futile. No other industrialized country has more trade ties to the arabian world. In contrast to the USA, Germany has a reputation and many decades of good relationship to lose.

Hmmm... a 'reputation'..yes, killing six million Jews would gain you alot of good will in the Arab/Muslim world.. is that the 'reputation' you are talking about? sorry for the cheap shot, but you had it coming (just like the Amis had 9/11 coming ;))

[Paul]

@ Gunter

I'm not sure whether to take you seriously, or whether, for your amusement, you're just poking a stick in what you assume to be a nest of right-wing vipers.

Regarding the presumed harmlessness of the current Jihad: first, you haven't noticed that history's stack of cards has been recently reshuffled and a Joker introduced: weapons of mass destruction. Among others, a bioengineered strain of the Ebola virus could wipe out most of the continent's population. Second, it is racist, though you may not have consciously meant it that way, to assume that Muslims are inferior to Westerners. Third, as pointed out in this thread, the Europeans may face a more imminent threat than North Americans, whether through demographics or increased range of nuclear-armed missiles.

"Asking Germany to fight arabian fundamentalists is futile. No other industrialized country has more trade ties to the arabian world. In contrast to the USA, Germany has a reputation and many decades of good relationship to lose."

That important German trade. That wonderful reputation in the Muslim world. Those magnificent products: the Libyan chemical weapons plant. Saddam's hardened bunkers. The botulin toxin A production facilities. And so on.

But now I'm beginning to play Ben Duffy's "stupid little game." Can somebody step in here and save this thread?

[Gunter]

@ amiexpat

Of course everything needs to be done to prevent terrorists from gaining access to nuclear materials. It is a major task for our secret services, who seem to work together a lot more efficient than our governments sometimes do. Right now, it would be a lot easier for terrorists to gain radioactive materials from rotten soviet submarines than to take over Iran after they enriched considerable amounts. Those waste materials won´t fit for nuclear strikes, but entire cities could be radiated for years. Who "cleans" these submarines because of this obvious threat?

In case Iran would finish the development of nuclear weapons, there is little reason to worry. Iran like every other country wants to become the primary power in its region, and this is an important step. It is the most developed of all countries in the muslim world, despite the anachronistic political leadership. It also is Germany´s economical stronghold in the muslim world, so you may forget about german support for serious sanctions there.

To start an invasion would not only cost enormous ressources and waste the german-iranian relations for decades, but it would also endanger the state of the world economy seriously. This won´t be supported by Germany as our national economy is just getting back on track.

"Hmmm... a 'reputation'..yes, killing six million Jews would gain you alot of good will in the Arab/Muslim world.. is that the 'reputation' you are talking about?"

No that was not what I was talking about. Of course I have heard the stories of sympathies in the muslim that are based on this. Other events are more important though:
Germany built the first railroad connection from Istanbul to Baghdad for example, which was the first major step. We were also allied with the Osmanian Empire in the first world war and with muslim freedom fighters in the second world war. Germany has never invaded muslim countries. Instead, it always relied on gaining influence and income by economical investments and partnership.

Asking Germany to cut down it´s economical ties to the muslim world would be like asking the USA to sink it´s warships in the region :)

@ Paul

"Second, it is racist, though you may not have consciously meant it that way, to assume that Muslims are inferior to Westerners."

That´s why I wrote "tactical inferiority". It has nothing to do with the people in the muslim world. Their whole development has simply fallen behind our´s. This might change again in a few centuries or not - my description of the current state is a matter of fact and not of racism.

[WhatDoIKnow]

In case Iran would finish the development of nuclear weapons, there is little reason to worry.

Wow, that's a good one! A religious fundamentalist government obtains nuclear weapons, but don't worry, once they have it they will suddently become civilized. Gunter does what every other denier of reality does: he ignores Ahmadinejad's repeated threats against Israel. Why? Well, why not? Who the hell paid attention to "Mein Kampf" in the '20s? Who cared about that Adolf nut? Same thing today with Iran. And if God forbid anything happens, it will be "oops, they did it". And life will go on, without Israel.

[Pogue Mahone]

"Of course everything needs to be done to prevent terrorists from gaining access to nuclear materials"

Everything?

Well - thats a tall order

It seems the doing some very basic thing - like toppling Saddam - who list of qualifications is extensive - fell outside of the "everything" that we should do to prevent the terrorists from gaining nuclear or other WMD materials

If a rogue dictator refuses to come clean - and is immune from such treatment - then "everything" has become very very little

No - I don't imagine for a millisecond that most europeans mean for one moment that they believe we should do "everything" to prevent a nuclear or other WMD 9/11 event

Quite the opposite really - most europeans believe either

A) it won't happen or B) its bound to happen and when it does it will be our fault

They used to say the fastest thing in the universe was a subatomic particle in a black hole

The new measure is the time between a terrorist attack and the euro response that blames this event on ourselves

[OMMAG]

Unbelievable that people like Peter Gauweiller have the hate on for the US like this.

Unbelievable unless you consider that he is really an opportunist looking for support from a specific audience.

Maybe we'd all be better off if Joe Stalin had been allowed to take over all of Germany...he and his successors would have sucked it as dry as they did the eastern regions. I wonder what the world would look like if that had happened?

[Buckeye Abroad]

@Günter

"And how many times did this happen?" ... "Once the surprise effect is over, so is their advantage."

Top of my head, 9-11, USS Cole, Khobar Towers, Marine Barracks in Lebanon and the 1993 attack on the World Trade center.

See a pattern yet Günter?

"The fundamentalists had to rely on the most unexpected amateur tactic available since they have no other option available."

You're beginning to sound like an arab apologist. You and Jimmy Carter should write a book together.

"Doesn´t that prove their total tactical inferiority?"

The ongoing attempts to obtain WMD should make you feel more secure that the "fundamentalist" are doing their best to upgrade their means and tactics.

"Now compare this to times when they actually outdid us in science. Realize it, the developemnt of the muslim world has arrived at the bottom compared to their former stage."

Yes, but European demographics will give them the means to achieve which they have not been able to obtain in the past. In passing, I just read in the local paper that the Darmstadt-Diesburg local govt. want to encourage couples to have more children, from their current 1.2 ratio to 2.1, by making the local community "more child friendly." I really got a great laugh out of that.

"Realize it, the developemnt of the muslim world has arrived at the bottom compared to their former stage. Have you ever been to one?"

Several.

[joe]

Gunter seems to suffer a bit of a historical lapse which seems not to be too uncommon with many Germans. There is a void.

Gunter most of the world considers the nations of Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt to be muslin nations. They were all occupied by your ancestors some of whom might still be living.

Gunter does raise an interesting historical point for comparison. Which was the greater threat in European history, the muslins or the Germans? Which caused the most deaths?

Gunter is probably correct in Americans are making too big of an issue out of the current situation with the muslins. Germans have become both sophisticated and enlightened in time. Gunter wants us to believe so will muslins. What Gunter omits is how the Germans got from point A to point B. The question I have will the muslins have to travel the same road the Germans did to arrive at both sophistication and enlightenment.

[Don Miguel]

"In case Iran would finish the development of nuclear weapons, there is little reason to worry. Iran like every other country wants to become the primary power in its region, and this is an important step. It is the most developed of all countries in the muslim world, despite the anachronistic political leadership."

Gunter, you're applying "Western thinking" to Islamists. That might have worked with the USSR (i.e. Russians), but I wouldn't bet the farm that Persian Mullahs think like that. And it's quite obvious that Ahmadinejad doesn't think in what we would call a "rational" way.

[redfern8]

@ Gunter:

Those who rely solely on strong economic ties to guarantee the peace might do well to recall that Germany's number one trading partner in 1938 was France.

[Gunter]

@ Pogue Mahone

"No - I don't imagine for a millisecond that most europeans mean for one moment that they believe we should do "everything" to prevent a nuclear or other WMD 9/11 event"

Interesting, your statement proves that there are different interpretations in our continents. I was trying to explain the german policy in the war on terror. So the "Everything" I was talking about does not mean "Everything" literally, it rather means "Everything responsible in foreign politics".

And since different countries have different interests that have to be evaluated, the range of responsible efforts can also be different.

@ Buckeye Abroad

"See a pattern yet Günter?"

Of course there is one. Good point. But what percentage of the western world´s population is actually affected by those events? This is what I mean when I consider the muslim threat to be widely exaggerated.

"You're beginning to sound like an arab apologist"

This was not my intention. I´m not going to justify their behavior. I was simply offering an objective description of their current military possibilities, which are very limited.

"but European demographics will give them the means to achieve which they have not been able to obtain in the past."

You almost sound like the racial "scientists" in the 19th century. They also warned that our societies will be doomed if we don´t deal with a certain part of our people in time. Only they didn´t talk about the muslims but about the jews. Do you suggest this kind of "solution" to the muslim minorities in Europe?

European cultures have evolved in thousands of years, and many immigrations and emigrations have taken place. Each event has left its traces on our culture, but none has destroyed it. It would be very naive to assume that the current development is going to make an end to Europe, since there have been many events in european history that were far more important :)

"I just read in the local paper that the Darmstadt-Diesburg local govt. want to encourage couples to have more children, from their current 1.2 ratio to 2.1, by making the local community "more child friendly." I really got a great laugh out of that."

And why does this amuse you? Obviously our governments now have recognized the lack of a child friendly environment in our society and are now trying to correct this. Many measures are being taken right now in Germany regarding this problem. It is an important step for the future.

@ Joe

"Gunter most of the world considers the nations of Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt to be muslin nations. They were all occupied by your ancestors some of whom might still be living."

They certainly were occupied by the british before. Judging from the positive reactions by population after the german army arrived, they rather felt liberated than occupied afterwards.

@ Don Miguel

"Gunter, you're applying "Western thinking" to Islamists."

Interesting point. I actually do to some extend. The iranian president sounds very irrational at times, of course. But I believe this to be the case throughout the muslim world: They like tough talking, but when it comes to acting, they are always a lot more rational than they sounded before.

@ redfern8

I did not say that economical ties can garantee peace. I simply pointed out that they are and always have been the preferred way Germany gains income and influence in the muslim realm.

[James W.]

@Buckeye

I just read in the local paper that the Darmstadt-Diesburg local govt. want to encourage couples to have more children, from their current 1.2 ratio to 2.1, by making the local community "more child friendly." I really got a great laugh out of that.

Mark Steyn goes in depth in his new book, "America Alone", about the demographics of the Western families compared to Muslim families. Europe has a ratio of 1.38 compared to about 3 or 4 (don't recall exact number) for Muslim families in Europe--in some Muslim countries it's over 6. Italy, Spain, Germany fall below the European average. Russia is at 1.1! They say you need 2.1 just to break even--America is at about 2.1. Interestingly, Red states are at about 2.3-2.4, while Blue states are at a 1.8 ratio (why could that be? socialists deleting themselves?). At current rates, some Western countries will half their population every 35 years while another culture takes over (if they don't assimilate) without firing a shot.

Just do the math. It's only a matter of time.

@Gunter

I don't know if I'd include increasing taxes to 19% as one of the "many" measures to make Germany more child friendly.

[amiexpat]

@Gunter
They certainly were occupied by the british before. Judging from the positive reactions by population after the german army arrived, they rather felt liberated than occupied afterwards.

SOOOOO... It is OK to attack/invade another country, as long as the population
views it as a liberation - is that what you are saying...
Well, well, welll. The Kurds are the most fanatically pro-US people on the face of the earth by and large.. I wonder why?!?! They were liberated.. ergo the invasion of Iraq must be OK, then, right?

[joe]

Gunter

There are times when it is best to quite while you are ahead. It is obvious you do not abide by this saying.

Libya – was an Italian colony. I do believe Italy was an ally of Germany.

Tunisia – was a french colony. I believe france did become an ally of Germany. The Vicky government actually turned control over to the Germans.

Algeria – was also a french colony. It was the same for Algeria as it was for Tunisia.

Egypt – now this is going to go back a bit but your history books might actually address this. Egypt was part of the Ottoman Empire, an ally of Germany during the first World War. The British took control of the government in 1882 to protect their investment in the Suez Canal. After the defeat of your nation the Ottoman Empire lost the remaining control and influence it had in Egypt.

The British granted Egypt their independence in February 1922.

As your ancestors never did capture Egypt, I think it is a bit of a stretch to say you liberated them. Don’t you?

Of course you did liberate Czechoslovakia which had gained its independence when another first World War ally of Germany’s was defeated, the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

So it is reasonable for you to take credit for the liberation of Czechoslovakia. I am not however sure if the people of that nation considered themselves to have been liberated. You might have a different point of view on that.

Having read all of this, it does raise a couple of other interesting points to ponder over your evening beer. The first it would seem being an ally with Germany is not the way to win. Secondly is when will Germany find itself on the right side of history.

[Buckeye Abroad]

@Günter
"but what percentage of the western world´s population is actually affected by those events?"

I would say 9-11 has "affected" the US has impacted our population in affinty of ways-- foreign policy, world perception, realignment of defence strategy, etc... or do you simply mean the dead? Glad to know you have a finite number of victims of terror you are ready to accept before you act.

"This is what I mean when I consider the muslim threat to be widely exaggerated."

Thats a funy statement. Ahmadinejad pubicly announces his intentions to "wipe Israel off the map" and his obvious intentions of building the means to carry-out the threat. Threats like that are hard to ignore. Not to mention that there are Europeans who had to go into hiding or exile because they dare criticize islam in their own country.

"I was simply offering an objective description of their current military possibilities, which are very limited."

You're unfortunately focusing in a one dementional construct that doesn't reflect where the wests vulnerabilities lie (eg. internal demographics and policies, dependency on foreign energy resources, legal hamperings of terrorist activities, etc...).

"You almost sound like the racial "scientists" in the 19th century. They also warned that our societies will be doomed if we don´t deal with a certain part of our people in time."

Nice strawman you propped up there.

"Only they didn´t talk about the muslims but about the jews. Do you suggest this kind of "solution" to the muslim minorities in Europe?"

Nice try at trying to stuff words into my mouth, but you should lay off the "solution" schtick-- thats your legacy. Jews never advocated violence, over-throw of the nations laws with their own theocratical ones or imployed terrorists acts, but yet somehow you are trying to equate them to muslims in today's Europe. How intellectually dishonest of you.

"European cultures have evolved in thousands of years, and many immigrations and emigrations have taken place. Each event has left its traces on our culture, but none has destroyed it."

I see. Its just a multi-culti melting pot the "evolves" through a bloodless growing process.

"It would be very naive to assume that the current development is going to make an end to Europe, since there have been many events in european history that were far more important :)"

To what end is Europe going find itself is something you have yet to contemplate. I think you, and many like you, ignore the evidence of the problems facing the EU socially, economically and politically and still have not yet understood the implications.

"And why does this amuse you? Obviously our governments now have recognized the lack of a child friendly environment in our society and are now trying to correct this. Many measures are being taken right now in Germany regarding this problem. It is an important step for the future."

If you are looking to your government for answers to address the local demographic problem, I think then you already have one foot in the grave as a society. Building more Spielplatzs isn't going to coax more children out of the womb nor will paying women to have more children.

[FranzisM]

Gunter, while I understand your intention to counter the demographic doomsayers, one question remains: What will you do if Persia enacts sanctions against Germany?

[Gunter]

@ FranzisM

What do you mean by Persia - Iran? Why would they want to enact sanctions against their most important industrial trading partner?

[FranzisM]

@Gunter - Why is that country is still called by that silly name? Last time I checked they wanted it to be called the Persian Gulf, not Aryan Gulf or something. Why should we recognize an ideology-based renaming of Persia, while we do not recognize that of Burma?

During the cold war it was carefully looked at that no West German big business, or entire industry sector, let off the overall growth in exports would be dependent on key customers from the Eastern bloc - because it was thought they might cause a lot of unrest by surprisingly chancelling orders that our economy had come to live from. Where is this caution gone these days?

One possible pretext for punitive tariff duties or even sanctions could be found in the Kopftuchdebatte (veil controversy). In the interpretation of the current rulers in Tehran the human right is not the right of the individual to chose her or his own Entfaltung der Persönlichkeit (development of personality)but the right of the mullah to prescribe the public dresscode of gender apartheid.

PS: For our American readers - this is the official prototype for how a passport photograph in Germany may or may not look like. I find it interesting that the model with the veil and the model with the ear-piercing are the same person. For how long could that stand?

[Gunter]

@ FranzismM

Personally I would say that the iranian government cares as much about our Kopftücher as the german government cares about human rights in Iran ;)
It is always a nice opportunity to gain support of populistic voters by complaining about such things, but in the end it doesn´t matter at all.

[Pamela]

I think I 'get' Gunter.

The cosmopolitan cynic.

[Pogue Mahone]

Pogue Mahone wrote:

"No - I don't imagine for a millisecond that most europeans mean for one moment that they believe we should do "everything" to prevent a nuclear or other WMD 9/11 event"

Gunter responded:

Interesting, your statement proves that there are different interpretations in our continents. I was trying to explain the german policy in the war on terror. So the "Everything" I was talking about does not mean "Everything" literally, it rather means "Everything responsible in foreign politics".

And since different countries have different interests that have to be evaluated, the range of responsible efforts can also be different.

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

And so we have a perfect example of european nuance on display

He didn't mean "everything" - in fact he meant just about nothing

Because to a European, responsible in foriegn politics has only one meaning - sanctioned by the UN

So as long as France and Russia were opposed to removing such a good customer - and China was opposed to progress toward freedom and generally eager to stick it to Uncle Sam - then there would never be any action taken

Action will never be in the range of options under this "responsible politics" definition

So the Saddams of the world are perfectly safe - as was Milosovic, as is Kim

[Gunter]

Personally I believe that "UN" is just the part of responsible foreign policy here which is considered to sound most positive towards foreign nations.
The enactment of the latest "white book" (geostrategical and military plan) tells a different story: There it is stated officially that the protection of german trade routes and the uninterrupted delivery of raw materials important for Germany are at least as important.
So "responsible foreign policy" has more nuances here than "UN":

"Action will never be in the range of options under this "responsible politics" definition"

Since Iran is the economical stronghold for german companies in the region, "action" or any other aggressive stance is out of the question. Would american "action" be imaginable against a country like Saudi-Arabia?
As we say in Germany, "nobody is going to shoot into his own foot".

[joe]

Gunter,

While I would not disagree with the statement . . ."the protection of german trade routes and the uninterrupted delivery of raw materials important for Germany "

Just how does Germany do that?

[Mir]

@ joe

>> Just how does Germany do that?

Simple: By constantly "criticizing" the US, while at the same time (and without even talking about it) relying on the US to do the work and pay the bills.

PS: It's very obvious that Gunter thinks that either the Iranian threat is once again nothing more than "Bush propaganda" or that he isn't very well informed about what a terrorist act with WMDs would do to our precious economy regardless of where it happens. Not to speak of the fact that our business relations with Iran will go down the drain drain anyway if we let the Iranian regime proceed with its plans.

[FranzisM]

Gunter - You do not make sense. While you admit how difficult it is to distinguish between what is shallow populism and what is principled intention in the policies of the current regime of Persia, you do not seem to understand the underlying risk assessment for such a situation. In Persia a generation of rulers that had personally experienced Europe was replaced with another one which does not, and you are saying in the end it wouldn´t matter at all?

If you can make this kind of predictions about financial streams of that bandwith, why don´t you sell insurances against Persian missiles in the region? You could make a lot of money that way.