An Unrepentant Proud American

Happy Birthday to the greatest nation on this earth. After seeing the Capitol's 4th Celebration on PBS, NASCAR on ESPN2, and watching fireworks off of my patio, I was so truly proud to be an American on this day. It also reminded me of a stunning exchange I recently had with a former co-worker of mine, which left me wondering "aren't all other people proud of their own countries?".

My company is based in Germany, and my colleague Ingrid (I'll call her), was in town here in Atlanta to do training for my department. Ingrid has been with the company since the mid 1990s, and she was an integral part of the IT team that conducted software implementations and rollouts to most of the other sites around the world when they would come online with our global platform. So she's been around the world quite a bit. I really didn't know Ingrid very well, as I had met her only a few times. However, on her last trip to Atlanta, I was in a week-long intensive training with her, and really got to spend some time talking to her.

One day in training, she came in and said the night before when she arrived back in her hotel, she tuned in to C-SPAN. That particular night, they were showing Congressional hearings about whether or not to begin impeachment proceedings on President Bush and V.P. Cheney. She said she was fascinated by it, and remarked that if he was half as guilty of things as they were saying he was, she thought they should be impeached.

Not knowing she was talking to the department's resident political person, my American colleague just shot me that look like "oh, no... please don't go there," but I just couldn't help it. I told her that even without knowing or having seen the hearings she watched, I could tell her that probably the majority of those testifying were also buying into the 9/11 truther mindset. She said she had seen Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," and believed every bit of it. Needless to say, my American colleague decided it was time for his lunch break.

Ingrid said she had a general impression that Americans didn't like to discuss politics because in the past when she's brought them up to folks in our Atlanta office, people would just not engage her, or they would give the pat response "I'm not into politics." I told her that most likely she'd encountered others who were either unarmed in terms of what's going on in the world, or those who had such a visceral response to American politics, that they could not effectively argue their points and they just refused to participate in a civil discussion.

We had to get back to our training, but we both agreed we'd like to have a further discussion later. On Friday after work, we decided to go out for a few beers and appetizers at a local Taco Mac restaurant by the office. I thought we'd be there for an hour or so, but I went home around 9 p.m.

We fully engaged in robust debate and discussion about the realities of the world today, and we both educated each other to some extent. Ingrid's main contention as to why she hates George W. Bush is because she thinks the Iraqi war was his personal choice and that he was responsible for all the deaths of the troops, as well as the suffering of military widows, parents who'd lost children, etc., and that it was all President Bush's fault. She hates war with such venom that she cannot see past that emotion. I told her that nobody likes war, and that sometimes, war is a necessary evil. I told her one of the phrases that most pisses off a lot of Americans is the phrase "this is an unpopular war." What war is popular? Even the Revolutionary War was unpopular, as were all that followed, but it didn't mean they weren't necessary or warranted. The "unpopular war" theme is just a tag to further enhance Bush Derangement Syndrome.

She said she she felt there were too many casualties in war, not just on the battlefield, but all of the families back home who suffered when their loved ones were wounded or killed. That seemed to hurt her the most. I almost wondered if she thought we DIDN'T have an all-volunteer military? Did she think that President Bush was ordering folks into war against their will? I said "Ingrid... if I'm an American wife, or if I am an American mother who had a son who enlisted, I would know that part of what that entailed was the possibility that my loved one might not come home." This seemed unrealistic to her. Did she think men and women were pulled from their homes to serve? I'll never know. But in retrospect, it makes my next point even more clear to me now.

She related a story to me that really took me aback. She moved here to Atlanta for a brief period in 2004. When she was here, she did the typical "touristy" thing and went to Stone Mountain Park to see the famous laser show. The laser shows are put on seasonally, and during certain times they are nightly, and others just on the weekend. Stone Mountain is a mountain where the granite face has been carved with the images of Confederate leaders Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson.

The carved granite surface of Stone Mountain

The laser show is conducted to the sound of different music, but one segment surprised Ingrid.

Toward the end of the show, some images were shown on the rock face of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ingrid was frightened as she witnessed everyone around her jump to their feet, cheer, clap, "woo-hoo," high-five each other, cry, hug, and chant "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" and carry on about our men & women in the U.S. Armed Forces. She was absolutely stunned about how proud we are, as Americans, of our country. She told me she could not believe it that we were so proud! Now, for one who is not easily surprised, I dropped my fork, dropped my chin, looked her in the eye and asked "are you serious?" She said "yes, I'm completely serious - I was frightened!"

For the first time that night, I was truly speechless; and incredulous. Was she really serious? She said that she later would have friends over to visit from Germany, and she would take them to Stone Mountain to see the laser show. She wanted them to witness the same thing she had. And not to her surprise, they all reacted the same way she did. They were shocked at the overwhelming pride we have for our troops and our country.

Like me, I am only one voice in America and have my opinion. So it wouldn't be appropriate to say all Germans feel the same way Ingrid does. But from what she explained to me, all of her friends and all of her visitors felt the same way. I would have thought that every person on this planet would be robust with pride of their own country. But apparently not, at least for this small group of Germans I knew. Did they have an undying shame for what Hitler did? Could they not overcome that and realize how far they'd come? Certainly America has had her flaws, and I am ashamed of slavery and other injustices of the past in America, but we have come a long way. And so has Germany. How can this shame be so ingrained and not be able to be shed?

I'm reminded of a recent book by Shelby Steele called "White Guilt." And I wonder if some Germans didn't feel some sort of "Hitler Guilt" for their past. Can't they recognize how far they and the rest of the world has come? We have to learn to forgive what has happened in the past so we can move forward, but I wonder what is the German psyche that won't allow that? Even if it's just in the persons whom I know personally?

Ingrid still has her opinions of President Bush and America, and I told her that Al Qaeda has been attacking Western interests for a long time, and that the desire for the Islamic Caliphate is something that has long been festering. She seems to have been stuck in that guilt phase, and thinks all countries just should mind their own business.

Then she talked about the lack of WMDs found in Iraq. Oh, boy, here we go. I told her that whether or not she knew it, there were WMDs in Iraq (hundreds of ricin-filled weapons heads), and that all of the other intelligence agencies (including Egyptian Pres. Hosni Mubarak) had told us that Saddam had WMDs and would use them on our troops in Afghanistan. After all, why wouldn't we believe them if he'd used them on hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Plus, I reminded her, that as the world's greatest superpower, what would have happened if Pres. Bush wouldn't have acted, and Saddam DID use WMDs on any Western country? Bush was damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

I reminded her of the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, in Kenya and Tanzania, the U.S. Marine barracks, and countless other atrocities against the West since the 70s. Clinton lobbed a few missiles at an aspirin factory, but President Bush was finally the one to do something about the problem with Islamofascist terrorism. She said she still hated war and that's why she didn't like Bush. I respect that, but it just confirms my belief that our media (as well as the International media) are wholeheartedly to blame for the world's opinion of the U.S.

I then asked her hypothetically, "who is it that the world comes to for help in times of need?" She correctly answered "America." We talked about the Tsunami in Indonesia and the U.S.S. Mercy Ship being the first there, and that politics were the last thing the U.S. considers in times of need around the world. She also was not aware of Bob Geldof's befuddlement about the world's lack of recognition of Pres. Bush and his commitment to helping with AIDS in Africa. From a Washington Times article:

Mr. Geldof praised Mr. Bush for his work in delivering billions to fight disease and poverty in Africa, and blasted the U.S. press for ignoring the achievement.
Mr. Bush, said Mr. Geldof, "has done more than any other president so far."
"This is the triumph of American policy really," he said. "It was probably unexpected of the man. It was expected of the nation, but not of the man, but both rose to the occasion."
"What's in it for [Mr. Bush]? Absolutely nothing," Mr. Geldof said.
Mr. Geldof said that the president has failed "to articulate this to Americans" but said he is also "pissed off" at the press for their failure to report on this good news story.
"You guys didn't pay attention," Geldof said to a group of reporters from all the major newspapers.

I told her that regardless of what other countries think of America, it IS America the world first looks to in times of need, and that we always come running. She acknowledged that and said the world should be grateful. However, she did say Germans were generally glad that their country refused to participate in the war in Iraq. And she railed about the U.S. not allowing the Red Cross to visit detainees in the War on Terror. Geez, what is the international media telling the rest of the world? She knew nothing of KSM, Abu Nidal, the Blind Sheikh and others. This conversation was a long one.

Lastly, she knew nothing of Gen. Petraeus, the counter-insurgency, what's truly happening in Iraq, but was completely enamored with Barack Obama and his "change" mantra. That's when I decided Ingrid needed one more gift to go back home with. I gave her my copy of Michael Yon's "Moment of Truth In Iraq," and told her if she was as hungry for knowledge as she said she was, she should read the book. I told her it was not all rosy about the war, but it was a first-hand account of what's really happening in Iraq. She promised to read it, and before she left, she said she was learning a lot from it. But in the end, she said she still detested war.

I reminded her that we do, too.

But I love my country so much I can never understand her bewilderment in that pride.

Danke!!!

:)

"But I love my country so much I can never understand her bewilderment in that pride."

Is it that Germans are not so proud of their country, the reason you suggest, or that THEIR opinion of the U.S. is so low, the Germans couldn't imagine that our opinion of America would be any different and certainly not so different that we would have such pride in our country and our troops?

I live in the Memphis, Tenn. area. Everyday, I hear people say that they are ashamed of our country. Most are angry at President Bush, and can't see they the Dems are the source of their problems. They just vomit out what they have heard from the MSM.

I guess it's mainly that most Germans' opinion of 'the troops' and 'our country' is influenced by the history of our troops and our country. Most of them just did their duty, and we all know where that went. Obviously doing your duty isn't enough then, and nothing to cheer about.

Also, Nazi Germany was pretty big on military marches, parades and 'Deutschland über alles'. That is why most Germans like to keep a distance to stuff like that and tend to be a little frightened or bewildered about that kind of mass displays of Patriotism, Nationalism and Chauvinism.

"I guess it's mainly that most Germans' opinion of 'the troops' and 'our country' is influenced by the history of our troops and our country."

Do you mean, "is influenced by history of THEIR troops and THEIR country?"

Good explanation that makes a lot of sense. Such American displays are Patriotic and Nationalistic, but I disagree with the use of the term Chauvinisitc to describe them.

Well, I'm German, so I guess 'our' is the operative term :)

And while I think I understand that phrases like: "The best country in the world." are not meant derogatory to other countries, they can easily come across like that. But I'm totally aware that while most Americans view their way of life as the best one, they do not want to force their way onto other countries and view their way of life as less worthy.

Well, we don't want to force anything on anyone, unless their attempting to force something on us or others. After disposing of Saddam Hussein, there is a few more evil, threatening dictators, I'd like to see us depose. : )

I studied German in high school and college and always got all A's. : ) I love the language and much of the culture, and would love to visit Germany someday. It is first on the list of countries in Europe or anywhere in the world I'd like to travel to, and yes even ahead of France and Italy. : )

Yeah, Mugabe's really begging for it, I suppose.

I tend to perfer sunny places with a good ratio of old stuff and young women myself :D

I don't quite get the gist of your comment. : )

BTW, I'm a woman and unlikely to pick a travel destination based on the number of young women who may or may not be present at a particular location.

Someone just smuggled a video of the voting conditions out of Zimbabwe. In case you didn't see it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/04/zimbabwe1

And you probably don't even choose locations according to young male tourists. Something my inferior male brain will never be able to comprehend :)

O Bull Shit-

That's simply a convenient argument to use, like the BS argument years ago that Germany could do much in Desert Storm because their Constitution prevented them.

Bottom line, your people and the political establishment likes the position they're in. They enjoy not being the target of drug cartels, Islamic radicals, communist or rouge despots. It's nice only spending 1.5% of GDP on defense, while the US and other spend double or more. Germany is in a position where she can suck on the teat of free trade, where her people can move around freely, where she has complete and unlimited access to the worlds resources, where a world order exists that protects intellectual property, allows for the open use of water ways, where her people can fly safely over the Mediterranean and vacation in Egypt, Israel, but Germany is simply a nation that does not want to move a finger to do anything for it.

The arguments of some historic hang up, the Constitution preventing it, bla bla bla, are facade arguments, crap pulled straight from the ass to make oneself feel good. ***Germany today is simply a nation that does not want to pay the price economically, politically, or in blood/security for taking action.*** If S. Korea were invaded tomorrow, what would your people and government do? What exactly is your excuse in Afghanistan again? Uneingeschraengte solidaritaet, right? How long did that last?

***The German way is to redefine their inaction through Heuchelei and schadenfreude as some great act of strength, intellectual superiority, courage, or even moral superiority.*** Look at Iraq, the war on drugs, Libya.... as examples.

Hm, we're still in Afghanistan. We, like many others, paid for the US' first Gulf War. And I fail to see how the constitution is convenient. You wrote it, after all. And regarding the safe intellectual property: After the Anthrax attacks in the USA, German medical companies were forced to hand over the patent for a drug helping against Anthrax. If we were always so determined, Africa would properly be free of AIDS.

Also, while I always enjoy fighting your straw men, your main point obviously has nothing to do with what I said in the post you quoted. German animosity towards military marches, patriotism and supporting the troops is an entirely different topic, isn't it?

Seven years later, and no German Tornado can drop a bomb. Within three months of beginning the Afghan campaign YOUR people tried to backpedal and “Uneingeschraengte Solidaritaet” became a few troops in the North, restricted from engaging in direct combat, watching poppy fields grow right under their nose and not doing a damn thing about it. Tell your little Maerschenstunde to someone else. What are you doing in Columbia where most of the cocaine even on German streets comes from? What are you doing in Sinai? Boy, I’m glad two German ships are sitting and doing nothing off the coast of Israel. Your help reference Libya is well noted and please don’t try to take credit for that either, because it wasn’t your big German intellectualism that changed Kaddafi’s course. So how are your great negotiations with Iran, how did those go? Who will eventually take action if it is taken, and who will sit on the side lines giving us “Ratschlaege.” I’m sure we’ll get lots of great suggestions on how we can wage that campaign too if it were to happen, and at every missed bomb I’m sure you’ll have a story of how you would have done it different. You always have an excuse for why you should not, could not and would not do anything. When you do something, as post 2006 or Afghanistan you do as little as possible, as late as possible, from as far away as possible.

There is only one constant with you Germans. You see yourselves as the perpetual victim. May it be the Jew in the past, or today the Ami who is behind your self created socialist misery. The wall dividing your own country didn’t fall because of anything YOUR people did. The Cold War didn’t end because of YOUR people and those like Fischer, Brandt, Lafontaine, Ditfurth. Along the entire Cold War from Berlin Airlift until the wall fell in 1989, even though like Korea and Vietnam your own country was divided and part of the battle between the Western Free world and communism, your own people shouted statements like “Lieber Rot wie Tot,” and were to eager to jump on the anti-Vietnam bandwagon. How many German troops were in Vietnam? Who was on the East side of that iron curtain and where did those West Germans sit? It is your country that could not deal with reality in the Cold War and sat in the background while others did its bidding in places like Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, Grenada, Angola, and even in your own country. While others were fighting a war your people were protesting the stationing of the Persching, GLCM, and air launched nuclear weapons; weapons which saved your ass and helped bring an end to the Cold War. Today the same intellectual arguments with a slight twist are the ones you hear reference a missile defense shield, which your government made big statements about (Schroeder/Fischer), but behind closed doors within NATO wanted assurances that Germany too be under the Interceptor umbrella. To cowardly to even stand up and present the official position of that administration, through ministerial channels bilaterally and through NATO, your government bought SM3, Patriot PAC3, joined in on MEADS, and wanted assured that it be under Interceptor (All intended for TBM defense). Of course while this was happening, we dumb Ami’s heard your great intellectual pontification on how we are starting a new arms race, destabilizing the world, and how of course this is not even technically possible and just a big American ploy of sorts. Yes yes, Bush oil cowboy, got it.

It’s a mooching relationship, where certain nations carry a disproportionate burden may that be financially since we pay proportionally two to three **TIMES** what Germany does on defense, in blood like those Americans that died in YOUR country at the hands of YOUR own people that belonged to such organizations as the RAF, in security since the bad guys go after the leader of the pact (There is a reason why Islamic terrorists will throw an American in a wheelchair over board the Achila Laura but leave the Germans alone, why the WTC were their prized target…etc), and politically since someone like Schroeder doesn’t need worry about dealing with the media and opposition politics unlike a Reagan or Bush that take action. While you talk of multilateralism, you’re willing to sacrifice anything and everyone in order to stay in the background, in order to keep your status as a moocher. Throwing you out of the security nest would mean we would have to sacrifice NATO, and cutting you out of the picture economically in places like Iraq where you did nothing, once again, would cause a chain of events that take us back to an era where certain nations ruled over certain areas and the resources found there, de facto colonialism. In the end, Germany has the option of not helping, and it is beneficial not too, because it’s safer, cleaner, and cheaper’; but don’t tell us how you’re intellectually superior or that your past is somehow holding you back, or that the war in Iraq is illegitimate and that’s why your not there, or how you would have not done this or that. Nonsense, that’s heuschelei.

As I said, the German arguments are always the same, and what they really boil down to is schadenfreude and heuschelei. The German people don’t want to do anything, nor do the politicians and you use your past as a facade when convenient. When you have 250,000 Bosnian refugees sitting in your country, then of course you do appreciate marching music, then you do support the troops (even ours) and you have no problems with our bombs either, even those that miss their target. I’m glad you’re at least in the Balkans, your own back yard, a war you were the political engine of, a war that you stood to gain from, that at least there you have a major role, hurra Deutschland!

Do you know what hollow words are worth? Do you know what petitions saying how terrible 911 signed by your countrymen are worth? Where are the actions? What is your excuse in Afghanistan again? It is my country that has bled even on your land, and your people are the ones with a big mouth, that do nothing but give us lots of advice.

Germany: 1.5% GDP on defense.

UK: 2.4%

France: 2.6%

US: 4.06%

S. Korea: 2.7%

…See a trend?

US dead in Desert Storm: 368 KIA, 776 WIA, cost in addition to operational budgets (Not counting long term costs either, such as fatigue on airframes of C-5s, C-141’s (Which had to be retired earlier than planned because of all the hours racked up on them), helicopters, wear and tear on the fleet of tanks, VA system etc.: 62 Billion 1990 USD, German contribution 5.7 billion or 9% of only the additional costs not counting long term added costs. But you are right; you did pay something so I guess you carry your weight as a nation./sarc

What did your people do when Libyan agents blew up a disko in Berlin “La Belle” (1986) and killed GIs and several Germans? I’ll tell you what your people did, because I persoanlly saw it! You hung on the fences of our instalations protesting when we bombed Libya! Pretty sad statement, but what German is going to remeber that, right?

You lost your perspective. As if someone had wanted Germany on board in Korea. We weren't even rearmed when Korea took place, no one would have trusted Germany with an army then. And you should realize how long that lasted. Our cold war army was purely defensive. I also fail to see what Vietnam is doing on the list, because they sure as hell wouldn't trust China or Russia to Axis-of-Evil with them. I mean they had their own small war with China not 10 years after your war ended. And they threw out Pol Pot. Some reluctant domino. And for most conflicts, at least the legal, official ones, we paid via NATO.

The Ostverträge under Brandt were probably as important as tough stances. But we're still in somewhat of a cold war with Poland here, even if Brandt started the communication with East Germany, Poland and Russia in '63. We should probably show a tough stance there and shoot down some of their fighters or show our teeth during border incidents, that would probably be a brilliant example of war as diplomacy with other means.

I have no idea about the War on Drugs. I assume it's a feel good war, and I assume we're on board. But I could be wrong.

MEADS and PACs are offensive missile defense. They are mobile and short to medium range. We need them to protect troops.

The idea that Germany should heavily involve herself in international politics is fairly new. Since the political landscape changed in '89, or at least since the aftershock of that settled, Germany is trying to find her new direction, restructuring their army, heavily involving themselves in Europe. And as our international influence is limited and our map of Africa has France on the left and Russia on the right (to paraphrase Bismarck), we concentrate on our core business and enjoy the advantages of living under whoever's in charge.

And that stuff about protesters and so on is also totally misguided. In democratic countries, you will have protesters against military action. Same in the USA. If you show the world a democratic Endlösung for dissenters, I’m pretty convinced we’ll get China, Russia, Iran and N. Korea to be fine Democracies in no time.

With a German all you need do is scream “Kein Blut fuer Oel,” and they will immediately understand your deep intellectual understanding of the situation. Then follow it up with a quick “Bush Oel Cowboy,” and most Germans will see that you're well read and understand the situation thoroughly.

Ask Ingrid when the Pipeline running through Afghanistan will be finished that her people talked about already in 2001? Ask her when we will start drilling in Somalia that her people also talked about in 1993? What people fail to see is that these stories of pipelines and oil contracts and “vast unexplored oil reserves under the ground in Somalia” (Talked about in the German media the SAME DAY US Marines arrived) are nothing but excuses to delegitimize the action we're taking. That's why she harps on WMD and will claim Iraq was about oil too. It's the German way to rationalize inaction and take some moral high ground for doing nothing. The German word for this is heuchelei:ein moralisch negativ besetztes Verhalten. Sie äußert sich im Gegensatz zwischen dem von einer Person zur Schau getragenen Bild ihrer selbst und der Realität.

And this is typically then mixed with a good dose of Schadenfreude, as Ingrid did when she talks of dead US troops, or the Iraqi's plight, bla bla bla. Schadenfreude: wird die Freude über das Missgeschick oder Unglück anderer bezeichnet. Sie kann versteckt als heimliche Schadenfreude empfunden werden oder sich als offene Schadenfreude (Hohn, Spott, Ironie, Häme, Sarkasmus) zeigen. Bei der offenen Schadenfreude wird diese Emotion dem “Verursacher” direkt mitgeteilt.

Just tell Ingrid that her Germany has changed and learned a lot since the 30s and 40s. Back then they pushed people into ovens, today they just sit and watch as others do it. Think about this. After WWII the Germans out of guilt said “Nie wieder!” What happened 100 miles from their Southern boarder just 40 years later and why did they sit on their hands and do nothing UNTIL 250,000 refugees sat in their country? Germany went from Unmoral to Amoral, and they will even push responsibility of Rwanda on us, saying that we should have done something to stop the genocide and claim that we didn't do anything one year after Somalia because there was no oil there, but do they ever look in the mirror and ask themselves “Warum machen wir nichts?” What German do you hear saying that they should help Israel in it's struggle, a free republic, ruled by law, a nation they do trade with? All you'll hear from these proud and highly intellectual Germans are excuses for why they could not, should not, and did not. You'll hear grand theories of the "real" reasons we went to war, a lot of advice, and lots of talk about our casualties and those of the civilians etc. You will hear them talk about how we deserved it, as after 911; for sure every misstep along the way they will be there to talk about. Sad Volk.

My best friend was born in Holland in 1940 as was her husband. Their very earliest memories are of the German invasion of their country. They are pacifist and they hate war so badly that they can't even discuss it. The woman is so afraid of guns, she can't even look at an unloaded gun laying on a table.

What you said about the international media being responsible for the dislike of American around the world is true. In 2001 we went hunting in New Zealand. when we arrived at the lodge the first thing our host said to me was, “how could you elected such a stupid man as Bush?”.

He told me he was a news junkie and later I found him glued to the TV watching CNN International. By this time I was so fed up with his arrogance that I barley spoke to him but it was obvious his mind was made up about President Bush.
I wasn't going to change it no matter what I said so I just stayed as far away from him as I could.

Looks like nothing much has changed in the past 30 years, give or take a few. I was in the fourth year of my tour in Germany during the 1980 elections. In the town I lived in, my neighbors were pleading with me to vote for Carter, because Reagan was a cowboy that was going to start WWIII. Fortunately, my German was sufficiently advanced that I was able to explain that Reagan would be far better for the US, and the world, than Jimmy Carter.

My efforts resulted in being asked to sit at the stammtisch of my neighborhood gasthaus.

I've grown weary of "guilt trips": white guilt, male guilt, American guilt. Frankly, I've never had "American guilt". I don't flinch from the wrongs we've committed in our past, but I challenge anyone to show me a country that has done more to right itself.

I challenge anyone to show me a people that has done more for other countries than the US.

One final comment: don't come to Texas and bad-mouth the USA (or Texas). You'll get your a$$ kicked.

“And that stuff about protesters and so on is also totally misguided. In democratic countries, you will have protesters against military action.”

If we operated with the modus operandi of your nation, Berlin would have fallen, and so would have W. Germany. And that’s no over exaggeration.

You might want to learn a bit more about the domino theory and what happened in Vietnam and its aftermath before you make half baked connections. Your “Der Spiegel” world isn’t the way it worked. Actually China helped Vietnam during the war as did the Soviets and hardware found in Vietnam came from places as far away as the DDR (parts for missiles) and Romania (RPGs). You might want to read up a bit on Pol Pot and who backed him, and why, and why his rampage was made possible and why he was stopped on the boarders of Thailand and who helped back Thailand so that they would stand (Another place you weren’t but where you today see fat Germans vacationing). You’re a typical German, and you’re just smart enough to scream things like “Irak wird wie Vietnam,” while smirking and hoping this becomes the case to justify your inaction.

But when the dust settles, your type will have no problem taking credit for Afghanistan, the Balkans, etc etc etc. With your big German foreheads and “dialog,” you solved the real world’s problems, I know.

***The Soviets were brought to their knees with dollars and bullets,*** not the sweet words of Brandt. It was in places like Grenada (Operation Urgent Furry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Grenada ) where the Cold War was really fought and where another 19 stupid Ami’s fighting for the wrong cause according to you Germans died. An Island with no industry, little tourism, where armed Cuban construction workers, engineers from the DDR (Whom we sent back home after the invasion), and Russian financing piped through Nicaragua was paying for a runway long enough to land strategic bombers, and of course all this was possible after a tin pot dictatorship (Maurice Austin and his Peoples Revolutionary Government) assumed power after a little coupe sponsored by you take a guess who? Who was on the other side of the iron curtain and threatening you?

You have a lot to be proud of, but not for what you have contributed over the last 60 years in terms of our collective security and interests. In security matters, Germany has done little and often nothing, even when she could have done something, even when she was asked to contribute, even when the legitimacy is beyond reproach as in Afghanistan.

I have a theory. The German only has courage with those whom he knows won’t bomb him. After Pan Am 103 and La Belle, your politicians were silent and no action was taken. Even today with Iran, you’re not going to do anything, and the Iranians know it. They know that your negotiations are demonstrations of appeasement intended for the masses back home but they have not and will not give you anything other than lip service. You’ll have courage to protest the Ami, you’ll sit in front of our bases and light things on fire, throw rocks and even make claims that your paying for our bases and installations there (The self victimization you love to do) while it costs the American tax payer roughly 10B a year to operate in Germany years past. But when faced with a Kadaffi you crawl into a corner and piss all over yourself, knowing that guy might light a bomb somewhere in your country if you were to do something about his line of death drawn through the Mediterranean ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Sidra_incident_(1981) ). Germany has been trying to “figure out it role” for a long time, and in reality it has nothing to do with what you claim, and everything to do with sucking on the teat of a global free world where others pay the price for our security and collective interests.

I find it funny that as condescending as your posts sound, you always assume I deem myself something better. Umgekehrt wird ein Schuh draus.

I'm also not in the least interested in answering to your insulting assumptions. Been there, done that. Doesn't work. Your whole show is a broken record. You don't answer to what I say, there is no arguing with you. I don't feel I'm even being noticed when I answer. In this part you even quoted one sentence, without then answering to it in the least.

Also, that is what I said. We suck on the teat of free trade and whatnot. Maximum gain for minimum investment. We didn't order it, we won't pay it. Try not protecting us.

***”We didn't order it, we won't pay it. Try not protecting us.”*** LOL

Wrong answer, you did order it for 50 years during the Cold War, you did order it with missile defense even now; and yes, you do suck on globalization and the global economy while doing little to nothing for it and bad mouthing it the entire time.

Your economy will end if it's not fed gold, cesium, platinum, oil and other strategic resources required for an industrial and technological based economy. These are resources you buy in a global market place, one you do nothing for other than consume.

Your cars, industrial machinery, chemicals and other major goods are shipped around the world on open free water ways; water ways that take you through places like the Mediterranean (Libya), off the Coast of Somalia (Pirates), through the straight of Hormuz (Iran) or Malacca (Pirates). Your people do travel on open airways around the world, you do want regional stability in the Balkans, a war you ASKED for and were the political instruments behind. But no worry, the Schmarotzer usually has selective memory.

As an information based society you do need intellectual property rights enforced (patent, trademark, and copyrights), you do require the free flow of people and ideas on open channels of communication.

Yes, your people do have an unsatisfiable apatite for goods and services that have names like LG, Samsung, Hitachi, Kia, Daewoo, Hyundai, Hankook, and others, but you would do nothing if this trading partner, another free republic ruled by law were invaded by a despot regime from the North. It’s become EXPECTED that you’re useless, look at Israel and your two ships there.

Yes, you are exactly that which you can't accept, a Schmarotzervolk. Ask any kid sucking off his parents at 30 something if he's a moocher and you'll get the same sort of responses one sees from you and your people at large. Could you imagine the outcry by your people if we abandoned your people in a Noncombatant Evacuation Operation (NEO) in Africa somewhere (And we have done them, picking up your citizens as well)? Several times even! People like you and in fact most your countrymen take it for granted, even expect and demand that when they call upon NATO it answers the call as in the Balkans, and seven years later when 2,800 Americans die in an unprecedented attack, you do what? As little as possible. Yes, you do order it, but there is no reciprocation.

You ride in our shadow, and like Switzerland in the Cold War not flinching twice about taking Nazi and drug cartel money even stand to benefit by not helping and standing on the sidelines when doing business in places like Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Syria……... Do you know who the major trading partner in Europe is for Iran? There are benefits to being a weasel that go beyond not paying for defense, lower threat levels, and less political pressure. But nonetheless, you’re still just a weasel. It’s not the weasel part that bothers many, it’s the fact that as a weasel you actually try to lecture us, or even put yourself on a pedestal declaring yourself moral and smarter for having done nothing, once again. I guess that best defines the difference between your people and mine (The conservative camp in our respective nations). We feel remorse, regret and guilt because of Vietnam; not because we fought there, but because of the outcome of the war, the people we abandoned when we left, the veterans returning home to an ungrateful nation…. You on the other hand also see Vietnam as a negative experience, but your argument would be that we should have never tried to contain communism, should have just left those people to be condemned like in Rwanda, and today people like you actually try to use Vietnam as a rhetorical club not even realizing that it’s a self defeating argument.

The reason why you get away with this behavior is because damage caused by sacrificing NATO or cutting you out of the economic benefits of certain areas even though you didn’t do anything there is even worse. The alternatives are worse and something even if disproportionately little is still better than nothing. So yes, do you do “something” and do did you pay some money on occasion. But it would be as if I put a band aid on a gushing head wound and then washed my hands free of any more work and responsibility. Imagine a scenario where Berlin is blockaded and we gave you three DC-3s and said, “There you go, we did our part.”

Think of it this way, what would be the consequence if we said Germany was not covered by Interceptor? What would happen if we began cutting out nations from partaking in the economic fruits of labor in areas where we and our allies bled? If we cut you (or others) off or cut you out of the picture we damage security institutions and/or cause a reverting to a near colonial era where certain nations control the economic output and resources within these regions, a horrible precedent with really bad outcomes for sure. You’re tucked away within the EU and NATO and no one can really force you to help, that has to come from you, and what we’ve seen over the last years is unimpressive. The US on the other hand is in a peculiar situation where she can’t shrink from her obligations. We are the leader within NATO, and ANZUS (The Pacific version of NATO), we are in a leading position even outside these security institutions when it comes to a broad range of Western security concerns. We can’t pick and choose when we will play, we can’t even really change our mind without causing a disaster, or decide to only help a little, and the consequences of our refusal to help would doom security institutions and in many cases change the outcome of war all together. If S. Korea is attacked tomorrow, we will fight, just like we would have defended Germany had it been invaded, but when we are attacked, you might help us a little, or maybe not.

The arguments used to prove and self rationalize amoral, apathetic behavior and spin it as some sort of superiority are ALWAYS based in Heuchelei und Schadenfreude. Example: http://www.dmko.info/coffinposter.jpg (Schadenfreude)

Let me give you concrete examples beyond Afghanistan which I have made my point with. When the international community and even within Germany voices screamed for help in Somalia Germany DID respond and send some troops. But where were they? In the North, far away from the hot spots, and that was by design! Did they ever attempt to engage in any operations to take warlords off the streets? Nope. In fact the Germans spent much of their time on very well protected and bunkered up bases but accomplished very little. So why were they there? Because when the voices screamed for intervention politicians wanted to reap the benefits, but NO ONE wants to be the one with their name associated with casualties. Look at what happened after the 2006 Lebanon War. Same deal. What the fu%& are two German warships going to do? The weapons come in over land, and so do the Hezbollah fighters. Your politicians once again offered their help, which really meant nothing other than they got their Kodak moment in the MSM. UNIFIL has about 27 nations playing in it, and Italy has the ground component commander with about 21 nations having troops on the ground, and the Germans have their ships patrolling, glad you haven’t suffered any casualties or that this hasn’t cost you much, very “intellectual.” What will you accomplish there? http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil

A long time ago I use to rationalize the Germans and why they are the way they are. Then I just gave up on that. My words probably do sound spiteful, but that’s not even the intent. It’s just the truth, and I am part German, speak the language, and grew up there. I stopped trying to put a “positive spin” on why the Germans would want to see lots of GIs die in Iraq. I stopped trying to explain why Germans would laugh when US jets get shot down in the Balkans, in a war the Germans pushed for and stood to gain from! I just quit pretending as if the Germans don’t wish us harm, because after a while I understood. There are in Germany deep ideological differences because of the socialist and secular society it’s become, and we're a largely religious nation and symbolically and literally a very open and free economy (capitalist). Maybe not for you, but for many we epitomize the antithesis of the big socialist nanny state; think about how a Gregor Gysi thinks of us. I realized that within the German psyche, even in the conservative camps there is envy; a pure envy because we are the leader, we are the biggest economy, we are the most powerful militarily, we do have more patents than anyone else, we will bring home more medals than anyone, we do lead the way in security establishments, we set the trends, we are nearly culturally dominant in the West ……….. Why do the French spit on Lance Armstrong, a cancer patient who won the tour de France more than anyone else? It's the same thing. There is a desire to see oneself in pole position and we do identify ourselves with our nationality. There is also human nature that likes seeing the big man fall, even if this means damage to oneself by him falling on top of you. The German deep down inside cheers if we have bad economic news, even if this will mean they will follow suit, because guess where ½ of all Porsches are sold? Guess what bad economic news in the US means for Mercedes, BMW, Audi…..? I realized that there are even still some hard feelings from WWII, despite the fact that the US is the most benevolent nation on earth. Why do you think German troops wanted taken prisoner by the US? The French had very different occupation plans in 1945………. What nation has ever been conquered by another, and then had the victor turn around and rebuild governmental services, prop up the economy with an artificial exchange rate intended to stimulate growth and a Marshal plan?????? But even there the German won’t talk about what WAS (The Marshall Plan); he’ll talk about some hypothetical nonsense like the Morgenthau Plan, which did NOT happen, and he will claim that the only reason why we did this is to build a “Bollwerk” against the East. Our benevolence is turned into selfish behavior, according to the Germans. But why, why would people be like that? Because the German DOES live in a world where even though they sit in the same boat with us in security and economic terms, where there are some cultural and genealogical ties, they have an animosity towards us and want to minimize us whenever possible. Ever notice the near obsession German papers have with the US?

Is this fiction or real? http://www.dmko.info/covers1.JPG You don't need to answer.

Obviously we do not only consume, we process. That is why we are in this economy, and that is why we are fed these strategic resources. Countries don't get stuff because they are irrelevant. And countries are not denied stuff because they are militarily irrelevant. We get these resources, because a lot of what we do with it can't be done anywhere else.

Yes, Germany is militarily irrelevant. I'd like that to be different. But that won't happen today, and it probably won't happen tomorrow. And even if we weren't, I wouldn't be in favour of projecting influence the way the USA deem it right. And I find it cute that if we play by the rules of the game, maximum gain for minimum investment, we are now a Schmarotzervolk.

I accept that Balkan thing as one situation where the USA really helped Germany and Europe without being strategically involved anyways. So thanks. But the USA didn't win the cold war for us. They won it for themselves. They did not choose to control Middle and South America for us. They did not involve themselves in the Middle East for us (except if us maybe means the British). They did not even protect Germany after the 2nd World War for us. These were strategic decisions, and while I am thankful for the protection after WW2 and the help on the Balkans, let's not pretend the USA don't have their own agenda. Gladio for example made clear that Europe can not choose to be protected. They WILL be protected.

Your ideas about Israel are even more unrealistic. Do you really believe Israel would tolerate a robust German task force really able to do things? The idea was funny if the reality wasn't so sad. We're still barely on speaking terms with Israel. I'm fairly clear about what the ships do down there, we sent em down there as a feel good mission. We sent em down there so Israel could have a reason to stop the war, which they wanted because they had no concept beyond destroying some of Hezbollah's military equipment, and they had already done that.

Haha, die Vietnamkeule. Ja, ihr wisst sichert wie das ist, wenn ein Krieg im Argument immer gegen das eigene Land verwendet wird. Niedlich.

I am not here to belittle Americans or because I wish to see US soldiers die. Yes, I think the Iraq war was a mistake, although I hope I am wrong. In my opinion, Iraq was morsch even before the USA went there. In much the same way as the KuK monarchy was morsch before WW1. I see no exit that leads to a stable Iraq, as it was before. I think in the long term Iran will profit from this. It's in no way the same as it was in Vietnam. There were some parallels in how parts of the war were conducted, but all in all it's a totally different scenario.

And honestly, I don't envy you for your position. All the poison you are spitting at me is coming from exactly this position. I envy Switzerland.

And if you care for my assumptions about the aftermath of WW2: If you had decided to dissolve Germany, or let it starve, or really any other option than that which you picked, the whole of Europe would now either be communist satellites, a nuclear wasteland, or a mixture of both.

I admit that these are just speculations, and that I maybe unconsciously exaggerate the importance of Germany in Europe, because I love my country and that might distort my perspective on what my volk is capable of.

It’s simple to understand:

Pre 1989 Germany’s back was to the wall. There was no playing around with national security because the threat was real, direct, large, imminent, and perceived by the people. Even the left leaning SPD would not dare play games with security issues, and the “necessary” decisions for self preservation were made. Schmidt took a black eye because of the Pershing. But think about that for a second, an SPD politician took the stage and argued FOR nuclear missiles to be stationed in Germany.

Post 1989: The threat is real, but more abstract, further away, not quite as large but more unpredictable and irrational, and the Volk has no threat perception. The problems are distant, the average person can’t really understand the threat posed by Islamists, and likewise the political landscape as well as demographics in Germany has shifted even further left after the Wende. The Germany post unification is one where games are played, where security issues are of low importance (Except when needed as in the Balkans)....... Today security issues are on the table to be played with.

Germany post 1989 is not only not carrying it’s own weight, but playing political games with issues of international security, as witnessed with missile defense, Iraq, Iran, Bad Ailbling, logistical flights from US governmental planes (non-DoD)............. Think about this, the Greens were talking about denying over flight rights for the DoD in 2003...... Germany today is a place where imaginary threats of Global Warming, and imaginary solutions like Kyoto, dominate the political stage. Every antenna is a secret NSA eavesdropping facility according to the layperson, even TACAN navigation, and older VHF communication antenna is spying on the Germans. Any noise is too loud, a piece of chaff (plastic and aluminum strips) left on an airbase sends off alarm bells, an M-8 chemical alarm system causes a major media incident (Think about that one! A smoke Detector was a story in Der Spiegel for an entire week), every ammunition bunker suddenly becomes a secret US chemical weapons storage facility years past...... it’s comical. Game playing, what am I talking about? When Germany is heavily involved politically in instigating a war she will benefit from, but then years later politicians play with the issue of Depleted Uranium which our A-10s fired in the Balkans. Bottom line, the German no longer feels he needs the Ami, and national security is a low priority, there is a deep rooted animosity towards the US, and the German wants to do as little as possible on the world stage.

So from our perspective, while you are an ally, we can’t depend or trust you and even have to mitigate risk because of that. Why do you think the US reshuffled everything through Europe the way we did? Because it’s cheaper to build new installations, because it’s easier on command and control or logistics to be spread out all over the place? No, we reshuffled our forces and even other governmental agencies in Europe (particularly out of Germany) so that we are less susceptible to damage when some Schroeder/Fischer decides to play games. When the wall fell we had roughly 280,000 troops in Germany, and after the drawdown we had massive infrastructure (even excess capacity), so it was easy and cheap to consolidate everything in Germany. Germany for the US was like an aircraft carrier in the middle of Europe from not only where the USAF and Army operated from, but all governmental agencies to include FDA, FAA, CIA, NSA, FBI, Department of State………. Intelligence collected in other places was processed there; field offices for the FAA and FDA were based in Germany that did their business all over Europe……. Germany was the hub for US governmental, intelligence, and defense organizations from which we would reach into North Africa, the Caucasus, and Middle East. It is actually quite unfortunate, because what happened under the Schroeder/Fischer years amounted to a breach in trust and confidence. It went beyond not doing anything and just mooching; it went into the realm of sabotaging the US and Coalition effort within NATO, the UN, and Europe. Threats were made to EU states volunteering help, nations were paid off not to assist us, an additional resolution within the UN was blocked, any NATO involvement was blocked…….. If you’re not going to do anything, it you’re not the one paying, shut up and stay in the background (That’s not meant personal, I’m talking abstract). Germany wasn’t in Desert Shield/Storm, she hadn’t been part of the containment over 11 years (And no, you didn’t pay for that either)…….. It was our pilots getting shot at on a weekly basis. It was us that had to mobilize forces and build up in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait two times, it was our Special Forces dying in North Iraq and working with the Kurds, and it would be us fighting this war too, just like the last one. But Schroeder seized the opportunity in 2002 to turn this into a German “Wahlkampf” theme and took the issue Iraq into every living room. You see a problem here? This would have NEVER happened pre 1989.

What exactly was “Der Deutsche Weg” Schroeder talked about? It was EXACTLY that which you deny. Defining strength through inaction and standing up to the US, never mind the despot in Libya, Saddam, or Iran, no strength is when a German chancellor defines strength as saying “Nein” to the US and playing games as he did, and yes, it did have positive feedback from the Volk, and that tells me a lot.

The incredible thing about Germans is that they don’t believe in the Domino theory, or do they?

“And if you care for my assumptions about the aftermath of WW2: If you had decided to dissolve Germany, or let it starve, or really any other option than that which you picked, the whole of Europe would now either be communist satellites, a nuclear wasteland, or a mixture of both. “ ***When it’s one self, then of course different standards apply as with others.***

The irony with Vietnam and a German using that war in his half baked anti-war arguments is that the divided Germany was facing the same threat, and was essentially in the same situation. The problem is that when the typical German leftist uses this war in his argument, he doesn’t realize that all the reasons for the war were proven right after we withdrew and the armistice was broken and the South fell, as the entire region fell apart with Laos and Cambodia following suit and Thailand being attacked (Which we propped up and began poring massive resources into as soon as the withdraw from Vietnam was politically inevitable). I wonder, where do most Germans talking about Vietnam suppose those MIG21s, SA2 SAMs, and PRGs our guys were dealing with came from? Was it the massive industrial and technologically advanced economy Vietnam had?/sarc When a German uses the Vietnam War in some example, he usually is constructing a self defeating argument, which is if he knew better wouldn’t use, but he doesn’t know better, and that’s why he uses it. All the German knows is that Vietnam “feels bad” and so the association is there based on a “feeling” not anything substantive and factual. It’s an appeal to emotions essentially. The Vietnam argument from a German is usually as shallow as some statement like, “Kein Blut fuer Oel.”

As too Israel, you do exactly what I stated, rationalize doing nothing. The UN requested help, the Israeli’s would LOVE involvement, and like in the Balkans, a place occupied by German troops in WWII and some did make the historical hang up argument there too, it’s a “non-issue,” except when it’s a convenient excuse. In fact, I would argue 180 degree the opposite! BECAUSE it is Israel, this was an opportunity lost to do the right thing and to mend the past. But instead what the word saw was a Germany that sat on their hands and sent two ships. Your historical argument is exactly the same sort of BS that has been floated for years and applied elsewhere. If German troops stood in Lebanon and stopped the flow of arms across the boarder, the firing of rockets into Israel, or the kidnapping and murder of people, do you think the Israeli’s are going to complain?

Unfortunately this is too often the reality: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/09/pirates-free-german-ship-off-somalia

Germany today is a nation that doesn’t carry its weight and will play games, a nation that will pay ransom to drug cartels, pirates, and will gladly do business with the pariah’s out there and when people like you try to spin this somehow as noble, honest, moral, and intellectual, even as an act of strength, some people, especially those paying for our collective security and interests might not be so appreciative. Those who remember Germany asking for help in the Cold War and seeing GIs killed at the hands of RAF terrorists, those remembering Germany asking for help in the Balkans, they don’t see your minimalist and do nothing stance post 911 as noble, strong, intellectual, or moral.

The world is upside down too many Germans. When you stand to an allies side it’s portrayed as weakness, even after 911; but saying “Nein” to the US and making big shows of Bad Ailbling or Iraq, that is seen as some great German demonstration of sovereign power. “Wir sind wieder jemand!”

As to your beliefs about Iraq, this will entirely depend on the next elections. The fate of 26 million people more or less depend on the outcome in November. As with most of these missions, “they take time.” There is a reason why we are still in the Sinai 26 years later, why nearly 10 years later we are still in the Balkans (But since you gain from that intervention and support it, that timeline does not seem extraordinary to you)……… Iraq is simply a war where a line was drawn in the sand between the liberals and conservative camps; it’s a political battle ground for people with names like Kerry, Obama, Schroeder, or Chirac. It’s a place that has become a reality TV show for the “Spanner.” People in general know little about the war, and even the cause for war today has been narrowed down to a single slogan, WMD. People know little about the threat, our organization, the geography, the people of Iraq, the task at hand or what is needed to get to the finish line with a positive outcome. It’s all about where people see themselves and Iraq is essentially a sounding board for their greater ideological convictions. Seriously, listen to people talk about Iraq, few have any clue what they are talking about, most don’t even remotely make sense, but they do tell a lot about themselves when they speak.

There is a dichotomy between what people think and what is in Iraq, since it’s become a political and media orgy. What I can say for sure, is that there was a plan, things like this take a long time, and that the basic nature of people is that they do choose freedom when given a choice regardless of where they are and what religion they have. Even a people that voted for a Hitler, who voluntarily raised their right arms and before that obeyed their Kaiser, even they with no real democratic traditions to speak of (Weimar was too short to even count), chose freedom and a republic when afforded the option; and even they took years before they were self sustaining. It took Germany ten years before their Bundeswehr stood up in 1955, it took three years before their currency came around (Deutsche Mark), and the first parliamentary elections weren’t until 4 years after wars end. It took longer to have a Constitution than in Iraq, and contrary to the German fairytale, there were both Nazi and Communist terrorist groups active in Germany for years after WWII with the sole objective of resisting the Allied powers and/or over throwing the FRG’s government. In fact, the US Constabulary basically was the law of the land all the way into 1952 when this police function was handed over to the Germans. ***It takes time***

However, we have already accomplished a lot, and at this point, believe it or not, Iraq is damn near safer than Afghanistan! No kidding, casualties are down, attacks are down, some of the militias have laid down arms……. (Der Durchbruch gelang dieses Jahr)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/01/terror/main4221986.shtml?source=RSSattr=World_4221986

At this point it’s about reconstruction and nation building and it is likely that combat troops begin returning home, not because of politics, but because the situation on the ground allows it. It is not just possible, it is likely that even a McCain will begin withdrawing troops within his first term, and no, I don’t expect Iraq to implode after that. However, a premature withdraw, hastily and politically motivated, fixed to a rigid timeline like Obama wants can turn back the clock.

Failure isn’t defined by meandering through a minefield of cliché and contemporary argument picking out a new one by the day to pin some idea of failure on. ***As you rightfully stated, failure will be defined when we leave and if Iraq stands or falls.*** However, the media has created a perception of failure by throwing mass quantities of garbage out there, most with high gloss pictures in magazines with names like Der Spiegel. Ever so often they have a new angle, a new theme (the mobs raiding, electrical power, election dates that can’t be kept, oil production, fuel rationing, etc.). Ironically few go back and check or report on the fact that Baghdad today has BETTER than pre war power, and that much of the fuel shortages were because more people could travel and move about than ever before, which BTW, the fuel rationing is over too. Few look back and say, “So what do you have to say for yourself since oil production is near pre-war level?” Nope, all the media and doom sayers do is move on to a new topic, a new theme. What is it now in Der Spiegel I wonder? I don’t read that trash, so I don’t really know. Der Spiegel only interests me when I want to feel the “Zeitgeist” of the German left. The fact that Iraq has satellite TVs, internet, and cell phone access (not allowed under Saddam), a growing economy, increasing oil production which is near or at pre-war levels doesn’t seem to matter. Is it entire regions that are self governing and where US troops are not even in the lead anymore that will convince people of success? Were the elections which had a higher voter turn out than most Western nations convincing that the people do buy into democracy? Is it their schools, universities, courts, police that are doing their jobs that will change the mind of the doom and gloom pundit? Maybe it’s the streets packed full of cars like never before because people can move about freely and have the money to do so? Maybe it’s the per-capita income which was $600 per year in 2003 and is around $3,700 today (2008)?

http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/PAPRPIQ.gif

While some talk of doom and gloom:

http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/04/08/provincial_control.jpg

“Failure, quagmire, another Vietnam!!!!!!”…… and yet things are moving foreword quite well.

While I understand why you think the way you do, I assure you, things are very different than the media portrays. Already in 2003-2004 when I was there, things were hardly as bad as portrayed and some areas were actually safe, believe it or not. You need to realize, most of the deaths and the bombings etc. occur in specific areas that are hot spots. Even Baghdad has large areas where you “could” walk unarmed without body armor and nothing will happen. But then there are areas where it might be smart to only drive in with an armored vehicle with lots of firepower etc. The pictures you get on your news, come from specific places and they always tend to be the “same” places. Hell, if you really wanted too, you could vacation in Iraq, Kurdistan. But this is so far out of the “Weltanschauung” you have that it’s beyond your ability to accept it, at least from me.

If Obama wins, you might be right, Iraq may fail as a unified state and we’ll resort to a divided Iraq where places like Kurdistan are still in our court. Yes, that would mean a power expansion for Iran, and it would be bad. If McCain wins, Iraq will succeed as a nation, it’s not far out of reach at this point. If we fail in Iraq, that will be a real disgrace, it’s like running a marathon and being in a leading position and quitting at mile 25.

Damn nice novel your writing here.

Minimization: These are real arguments!

• We only invaded Somalia for the untapped vast oil reserves.

• We only invaded Afghanistan to build a pipeline through it.

• We’re invading Panama to hold onto the canal past its return date.

• We only helped Germany so for our own self interest (The Bollwerk) in the fight against the Soviets. Ironically, we were helping “Before” relations deteriorated, but that’s lost in the German revisionist history also.

• We were in Vietnam for the vast tin (Zinn) reserves, according to some experts of the time. Like there isn’t enough tin in the world./sarc

• Haiti, Liberia, Libya, Iraq, Balkans.............. It does not matter, as soon as US boots touch the ground, oil just magically bubbles out of the ground and spills all over the German newspapers.

• Hell, even our aid to the victims after the Tsunami was just to “buy the favor” of the Muslim world.

Tell me, at what point does the German feel like an idiot when beating his “Kein Blut fuer Oel” drum and blaming the Tsunami on the US and global warming?

And of course these are things said by a people that like to quote DeGaule (A French Nationalist) when convenient, “Nations have no friends, only interests.” Ever hear a US politician or the US people say this to you?

But no worries, like the Cold War, as with the Balkans, we’ll forget and forgive Shroeder’s and Fischer’s words and actions, your Greens, PDS, WASG and others screaming about missile defense when that Iranian ugly head starts to pop up. ***There is a big difference between people demonstrating and when politicians and local leaders play games using the powers of their offices to damage our collective interests, that’s something you want to ignore.*** There will always be those who scream this or that, but when the leaders of a free nation like Germany, sitting in the same boat with us, make statements to the effect that Iran is no threat, that the war on terror is all but George Bush’s imagination, that missile defense will start a new arms race and destabilize the world; and when they take ***actions*** that damage progress in security developments, all to pander to leftist and anti-American sentiments and save their hide politically, that’s irresponsible and goes far beyond just not doing anything. Sure we also have anti-nuke demonstrations, we also have anti-war demonstrations……… But what are our political and national security “actions.” What are the official positions of our government and what are our intelligence, security, and defense apparatuses doing?

Deeds, not words.

“In my opinion, Iraq was morsch even before the USA went there. In much the same way as the KuK monarchy was morsch before WW1. I see no exit that leads to a stable Iraq, as it was before. I think in the long term Iran will profit from this. “

If we succeed and Iraq remains a viable nation after we leave, it will be a complete success, even if bombs go off here and there, which will of course be the new argument for failure by the MSM at that point. A republic of Iraq will be a real problem for Iran. Iran is internally not as stable, peaceful, and unified as most think. Like the Cold War where West Germany was a powerful and damaging influence for the DDR, Iraq will affect Iran. Iraq as it struggles to survive will expend resources fighting the same bad guys we are. They will essentially do some of the work for us and we have to expend less. The war in Iraq has created a giant $hit magnet in the Middle East, and while the self proclaimed intellectual will use this as some argument of failure, it’s actually exactly what you want. It takes the fight to them, and out of the streets of NY, London, Madrid...... Hell, Coalition forces have actually captured and killed European Islamists, as in Muslims with a passport from a European nation that traveled to Iraq to fight or blow something up. It’s a fight that is more on “our terms.” An Islamist caught in Iraq fighting us does not fall under US or some European countries laws, we can operate using tools and techniques that would be forbidden elsewhere. It’s a sandbox, where we set up a big meat-grinder, and they keep coming, and that’s OK.

Iraq is a great location, it’s the “highground” from where we want to fight. There’s the holy shrines at Karbala where Mohamed’s sons are buried (Helps make blue light to attract the $hit flies into the zapper: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26296-2004May14.html That was the unit I was in), and it’s located between our friends Syria AND Iran. We would be “Insane” to give up this place, but as you rightfully and probably know, Obama is political enough to do just that. Do you really think Iran isn’t expending its resources in fighting us and Iraqi’s in Iraq? Do you really think we’re not pushing back on them? Do you really think we didn’t expect Iran to be a player in this even before we went in? Do you think we’re going to advertise everything we’re doing?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4180087.stm

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/us__israel_operate_in_iran.html

Who do we have to answer too when launching a U2 in Iraq? If Iran fires anything heading Westward, where will it fly over or across? If we want to put several divisions on the boarder to Iran, who other than ourselves will question this? I could be wrong, but I think it’s a pretty permissive environment for the military and intelligence organizations to operate from.

This is a war, a concept the Germans still deny. It is fought on many levels: militarily, politically, economically, with intelligence, in the media………. Iran is one of the bad players and they’re in the mix, but don’t think all is lost with Iraq, or that we even got bogged down and are stuck with no way out (The opinion you have). Maybe we like the place, and maybe many in the security and defense establishment would like to stick around for a while because we’re so close to our friends the Syrians and Iranians, and are finding a lot of nice AQ, Ansar al-Islam, etc types there that we’d like to talk to a bit. We even have Iranian “guests” who we hold onto for a while: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/25/africa/web.1225iraq.php

Just realize while you buy the media horse $hit of doom and gloom, last year in Germany you had 2347 murders, we took 900 (for all reasons, 1/3 being NONcombat related and 2007 was the worst year) casualties in Iraq. Actual combat casualties was about 600, and that was “the worst” year. As a soldier and a motorcycle owner, I was more likely to die on the road with my motorbike, than in Iraq, but that’s not a “shocking doom” story, right? Just some weird statistic for you, LOL. But I would be the first to admit that casualties are no metric of success. As politically incorrect this sounds, the casualty only has a political value and is a metric politician’s worry about because they talk in terms of feelings and emotions, and worry about pictures etc. Often such as in 2007 when our casualties were highest of any year, we were actually setting the stage for the success we enjoy today. The surge, which pushed hard, brought results, but also casualties. An Army bunkered up on a FOB and doing nothing might not suffer any casualties, but they’re not accomplishing much either. It’s a paradox that a military finds itself in, since achieving results almost always increases the exposure to risk factors and inevitably brings more casualties even in peacekeeping or humanitarian missions. It’s that simple, if you want to accomplish something, the risk goes up.

http://www.bka.de/pks/pks2007/index.html

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/RadControls/Chart/Image.aspx?UseSession=true&ChartID=5fb2aff8-4cce-3444-a7bb-4823a1986bc8_chart_ctl00$Main$RadChart1&imageFormat=Png&random=0.751803477644829

What will likely happen if Obama gets elected and Iraq declines? We will probably resort to a divided Iraq, where those easy to maintain and hold areas will remain and continue to have some US presence, though more in the background. It would still not be a complete failure, but it would definitely not be the overwhelming success we want to achieve.

—

While your people still smirk about the invasion of Poland and dream about what a great success that was, we invaded a country that knew we were coming (No surprise attack like Poland), they had years to prepare, they knew us fairly well and how we operate, we had to deal with temperatures that go up to 122F (50C) in the shade! Dust storms and sand, open terrain that allows us to be fired upon at long ranges (Little cover and concealment), limited roads that can support our advancement, cities the size of Baghdad with 5.6 million (bigger than Warsaw) inhabitants, in a country larger than Poland by nearly 1/3, and our national industrial base and senior leaders were on the other side of the PLANET (Think logistics and communications)! Now we did this in 21 days, or three weeks, Germany took nearly six weeks, and suffered 16,343 KIA (About 40 TIMES our casualties), but you’d consider the invasion of Poland a complete success. Please fact-check me. LOL

What we pulled off in Iraq, is without precedent. Never, has a country attacked another country this size, fighting in larger cities, with so few casualties and so quickly. It’s never been done. And that was “failure.”

How does one create the illusion of failure? You have Der Spiegel write about how we are “bogged down.” Stories about how we are running out of batteries. How we are running out of food. How we are running out of fuel. How casualties are mounting, the bloodiest battle will soon start, Baghdad…………. Before long, someone with no perspective, no understanding or context, would have to believe that it’s all over for us! It would be the reasonable thing to believe! But things moved forward quiet well, as they are now.

My argument is that the Kurds will destabilize the region. They want their own country, and if they get it, this will be bad for Iraq, there will also be war with Turkey who will not stand for a Kurd Nation. The divide between Iraqi power groups is secondary to this. I never thought the USA would lose this war militarily. They could stay there indefinitely. I just doubt that the shift in power in Iraq will work in the West's favour. As I said, I hope I'm wrong.

Also, I know that the operation in Iraq was a tremendous success for the USA, and I'm certain it was very well executed. But the whole fight was like putting Mike Tyson against a 4 year old and now you tell me: "That babe had a mean left hook."

"And of course these are things said by a people that like to quote DeGaule (A French Nationalist) when convenient, “Nations have no friends, only interests.” Ever hear a US politician or the US people say this to you?"

So you'd say the USA does not lead war out of interest, but out of friendship? Wars are not strategic decisions? Is that what you're trying to say?

I admit that the problem of the homo oeconomicus, the profit-maximizing actor, is often questionable on the personal level, for example because explaining selfless deeds with the gain of self esteem is not exactly useful. But on a larger scale, and especially in international relations, the homo oeconomicus model is almost never wrong.

"When it’s one self, then of course different standards apply as with others"

Heh, touché.

But let me repeat: Israel and especially the IDF would not stand for a large amount of German troops sent under UN mandate. The idea that we can help pacify the Middle East is nice in theory, because that would of course be a very good way to repay a debt. But the UN is incapable of doing this. We wouldn't even want a UN capable of doing this, at least I'm not too keen on a world army restructuring the world as the UN sees fit.

And the Vietnam conflict was a colonial one: The people of the Far East had already tried to negotiate their independence from the West, and France had denied them that. So obviously the only place they could turn to for support was the Commies. In my eyes that is the problem with Domino: In a bipolar system, if you are unhappy under the rule of one side, you always have to choose the other side for support, because if you want to fightr a war with Russia or the USA, national power does rarely cut it. But that does not necessarily prove you want to be ruled by that other side, as demonstrated by Vietnam.

"Germany wasn’t in Desert Shield/Storm, she hadn’t been part of the containment over 11 years (And no, you didn’t pay for that either)"

Als Kosten des Krieges für die Vereinigten Staaten wurden vom Kongress etwa 61,1 Milliarden US-Dollar errechnet; 52 Milliarden von diesen Kosten wurden von verschiedenen anderen Staaten bezahlt: 36 Milliarden wurden von Kuwait, Saudi-Arabien und anderen Golfstaaten bezahlt. 16 Milliarden wurden von Deutschland und Japan bezahlt. (genannt: „Scheckbuchdiplomatie”, da sich die Länder nicht aktiv mit ihren Soldaten am Krieg beteiligten).

Believe it or not, yes. Many of our operations, like in Somalia, or Haiti, had absolutely NO economic or security benefit to us. The DoD falls under civilian authority. The People in the US do believe in using their forces for humanitarian, peacekeeping, or even peace enforcement operations that have absolutely no benefit to them. What did we get from the Balkans? What do they have there for us? Rocks? We have those in the US too. You’re the ones dealing with refugees, you were the ones threatened by the regional instability, and you’re the ones that even have economic interests in Croatia, NOT us. Why did we go to war? And even here it’s possible to create a self interest and minimize, which indeed was done.

Applying your reasoning I could say Mother Theresa was a heartless selfish bitch just trying to “buy her ticket” to heaven. You can take anything and minimize it. But at some point you have to ask yourself if you’re just being an idiot and @sshole for doing so.

If we wanted the fastest, cheapest, and easiest answer in Iraq, we would have chopped off the monsters head, left the IIS and Iraqi Army in tacked, and said we’re the new sheriff in town. That would have worked too. And even there you see the German minimizing us and even attacking an effort to democratize and pacify a nation, a route that isn’t the easiest. Think about that one! You might not perceive it as such, but your Volk is more or less hoping for failure, stood in opposition too liberation, and does nothing for a process to bring Iraq up as a republic, a free nation, und man ist man noch Stolz mit diese Haltung.

Wars, how they are fought, what the desired end states are, are largely influenced by the ideology, morals, and prevailing attitudes and values of the society fighting them. I don’t think the Wehrmacht had the same approach we do. I don’t think the Russians have the same approach or end state in mind in Chechnya. I don’t think it was a good thing to be conquered by the Ottomans or Persian empires years past....... ***Yes, the US has a commitment to certain principals when it goes to war, and HAVE (as in I can give examples) fought numerous wars that have had no benefit to us as a nation whatsoever, other than appease a society that has deep rooted Christian and democratic values.***

As I said, you give a lot of insight into yourself with your statements, and there is a reason why Germany can’t be expected to be dependable when we’re attacked. You have no friends, only interests, as in Iran or Russia…….. Who does Schroeder work for today? It’s only “interests” my friend. If I were you, I’d be demanding he’d get hung!

I'll start the post with an aphorism about the German media landscape a friend of mine came up to my amusement:

"Sundays, one's tenderized by Maischberger (influential ARD political talkshow anchor) and Mondays, one gets crumbed by the SPIEGEL."

I know that while all information provided by FR are excessively positive, often to a degree where objectivity is lost, the SPIEGEL's just doing the opposite. The SPIEGEL has once been a comparably objective and investigative magazine, even if it has always been leftist in its paradigma to some degree. This objectivity and quality is rarely the case anymore, and you don't need to convince me of that, I found that out years ago when SPIEGEL changed its direction after Augstein died.

But even the SPIEGEL (and various other rather leftist magazines and newspapers, for example the TAZ) have argumented with the Allies' perception of World War 2: If the World does not stand up against agressors, how is our way of life to prevail?

Where you are wrong IMO is that Germans want to see the US fail. It is simply that Germans see the US fail, which is caused by facts, but also caused by the prediominant media bias in Germany. You from your standpoint are convinced that the bias is playing a much bigger part than the actual facts. I think both are pretty even, because I don't see myself influenced by the German bias a lot ( yeh I know, different standards) and I still think that many of the main problems like the Kurd question have not yet been solved, have barely been touched up to now. However, most Germans are convinced that the conflict in Iraq is bound to fail, and they condemn the US for destroying the lives of Iraqi civilians. But while many of them, as you pointed out, think that the ruling class of the USA is 'evil' and greedy and whatnot (which is the same they think of their own ruling class), they actually have a pretty high opinion of US democracy and the US people. Apart from that there's the fact that the USA rule the world nowadays, and of course a special set of rules applies for our rulers. These are the reasons why they consistently hold all of what the US are doing to such a high standard.

These people would like to believe in cutting out the cancer, but due to German history they judge everything that's happening to such a ridiculously high standard that everybody, even the USA, is bound to fail. They do not want the omelette without breaking the eggs, they just can't stomach breaking the eggs and they would rather starve, because Germany's identity crisis is so deep that it has clouded people's judgement regarding the world they want for a long time. There are Germans who question Germany's right to exist after what happened in World War 2. While they are a radical minority, the question whether we can somehow assume a position of judgement toward anyone is burned deep into every German's mind. That is probably the most important reason why many Germans almost enjoy wailing over US decisions and their bad sides: Because it justifies staying in Limbo, because it eases the pain of considering yourself not worthy of judgement and responsibility if you realize that no one is. Funny how the lesson learned from one conflict can be so different depending what side you're on.

The situation that a major part of the German population will support ANY war that is not obviously defensive (in the sense that we are attacked - militarily - directly) will not happen soon. Germans are fed up with projecting military influence and they are convinced that no good can come out of it. How do you imagine an administration to rule against that? How do you expect them to justify a higher military budget? Even then it is changing, in small steps. It has already started with restructuring the military from a defensive to a mobile force against the will of a majority of the population. It could only be done in the context of the European Union, in that "wasn't our decision" kind of way. I just hope that you understand how few options any German administration actually has in this regard, if it wants to stay in power for some time.

In the interest of my own country, I would really like to see us ready and willing to project military force. The UN is mostly just a tool to delay decisions of people who matter, which is as useful as it is problematic, like it or not. And no one wants the UN as a political player on its own.

Europe may one day be able to decide on military issues, which is something that Germany definitely hoped for, so we could play with the big boys again. No one likes a military that doesn't do anything. No one likes a military that is not allowed to fight. But chances for that happening any time soon are looking increasingly dark.

Germany, on its own, will still need a long time to get to a point where conscious and decisive projection of power can happen outside of an international defensive context. However you judge that, it's a political reality, and for it to change it is not necessary that people listen to reason. It is necessary that people act according to reason, and that they face the consequences of that, which would very probably be their political downfall.