Replies

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.