Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

This may be the first time that I have seen the New York Times write an editorial favorable to Germany, however oblique, since the Times wrote an editorial piece to entice West Germany to join the UN as a way to improve member funding.

Although there are meritorious strategic reasons for repositioning troops closer to areas of potential conflict, in my judgment as one who served three years with the US Army in Germany, such moves will have depressant effect on the morale of military families, absent soldier-family separation as a consequence of deployment. A similarity of cultures and values as well as the availability of English make Germany more hospitable than locations further east. (See Letter below, which encapsulates several of my experiences).

Moreover, if you thought the media demonized conservatives, it is not unlike the coverage Germany gets. However, conflicting images of what the press writes versus one's in-country knowledge creates a cognitive dissonance that is just as real. The stationing of troops in Germany is an effective antidote to unfair media treatment. That is, it is my observation that the antiwar sentiment and desire for friendship with France is grounded more in WWII devastation and postwar pacification/education programs than in anti-American bias. And it looks like, based on recent EU elections, their voters have lost confidence in Chancellor Schroeder, the Howard Dean of German politics.

* * *

To the Editor, New York Times, June 13, 2004:

Visiting Germany in 1963, my friends and I were eating at a restaurant in Munich when a group of Germans approached to ask if we were Americans. When we acknowledged that we were, they insisted on paying for our dinners because, they said, they had been German war prisoners in American custody and, unlike the Soviet captors, the American soldiers had treated them so well that they wanted to express their gratitude in this gesture.

It was a moving moment; the men and their wives stood around four young Americans, all weeping. And at that moment, we were proud to be American.

BARBARA A. CLEARY Dayton, Ohio, June 10, 2004

1 posted on 06/14/2004 6:34:32 AM PDT by OESY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last
To: OESY
The Pentagon is proposing sharp cuts in U.S. forces in Germany, which for more than half a century has been America's biggest military outpost in Europe. It's a bad idea, particularly at a time when the United States is struggling to rebuild its relations with its NATO allies.

Wrong, NY Slimes. We protected that nation for 50+ years from invasion by a Soviet SuperPower. We spent billions to keep her West free. Let them pay their own bills for a while.

We at least have a right to consider cutting out on these ungrateful jackasses. Maybe some of the newly freed Eastern European nations want some cooperative alliances with America.

Leave it to the Slimes in New York to all of a sudden become concerned abou the military. Hypocrites.

2 posted on 06/14/2004 6:39:04 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

Having also spent a great deal of time in Germany, I find the Germans to be an often-unpleasant mix of rabid, wild-eyed socialist/environmentalists (with the emphasis on "mental"), and unrepentant Nazi sympathisers of the "well at least the streets were clean and the trains ran on time" variety.

If we can't spend our money on people who share our values, let's at least spend it where it'll do some good.


3 posted on 06/14/2004 6:41:18 AM PDT by Redbob (we're going to miss you, Ronnie!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

I do think we need more welfare reform in Europe. There are places in this world that are in far greater need of our military services. Europe must find ways to shoulder the cost of their own defense. Like spoiled teenagers, they bite the hand that feeds them and resent their own lack of independence. I think that "old Europe" remembers the cost of appeasement. I think it is a lesson that adolescent Europe needs to learn anew.


5 posted on 06/14/2004 6:48:10 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
Instead of maintaining troops and their families in Germany, I'd heard that the plan was to relocate our troops into smaller bases in the Balkans and nearer to the new flashpoints in the Middle East. We will have a large garrison in Iraq for many years to come, and from there we are in a superb position to respond to problems in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Pakistan, etc.

Hummm, pretty smart play to have troops there in the middle of this viper's nest.

8 posted on 06/14/2004 6:51:49 AM PDT by DJtex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
Recent history has only reinforced how important that relationship is to the United States. NATO is the only alliance capable of sharing some of the global military burdens that have now overstretched America's ground forces.

And exactly how many troops have the Germans committed to NATO operations outside the borders of NATO? As far as I can tell, the Polish contribute far more, and so it would appear to be more important to keep better relations with them than with the Germans.

9 posted on 06/14/2004 6:51:58 AM PDT by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
Visiting Germany in 1963

That's a long time ago. Unfortunately, Germany has changed quite a bit since that those days.

10 posted on 06/14/2004 6:58:18 AM PDT by Seeking the truth ( www.0cents.com - Ronald Reagan Commemorative Stamp Coming Soon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

The plan, to move all families, and half
of US Army forces, out of Germany, is a start.
You have to start somewhere.


11 posted on 06/14/2004 6:58:25 AM PDT by greasepaint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

Extraordinary how they manage to paint this as "more costly". We will be closing extremely expensive bases in Germany and units will now be stationed for shorter periods of time in cheaper locations like Eastern Europe where there will be no need for costly family support systems.

This plan has been in the works for quite some time actually. In fact it was already being talked about in the mid-90's when we acquired so much Eastern European real estate (in the Clinton days).


12 posted on 06/14/2004 7:03:14 AM PDT by 12B
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cannoneer No. 4; SLB

Ping.


15 posted on 06/14/2004 7:08:19 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (hoplophobia is a mental aberration rather than a mere attitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

This article mixes half-truths, untruths, a mushy sentimentality and a stark refusal to face reality. In other words, the Times is living up to current expectations.

The Pentagon has said repeatedly that Ramstein is NOT going to be closed! Nobody with any knowledge of European deployments expects that it would be closed in the foreseeable future.

The military capabilities of NATO outside of the USA and Britain are suspect anyway. We really don't need their help, although it would be useful. If the Germans and French continue to think they can veto our national security needs and global responsibilities to stroke the egos of their leaders, though, they aren't worth the trouble.

The Times admits that moving two divisions is not a big deal. So what's their real beef? They don't like Dubya or Rummy, so they publish this piece of garbage.

I do business in Germany and France and there are many Germans and Frenchmen who appreciate D-Day and the Marshall Plan. Unfortunately, they are in the minority and many of them are passing on. The governments of these countries have far greater control over the media than in Britain or the USA, so naturally their populations are inundated with anti-American crap.

Rummy is right. Old Europe just isn't that important anymore. Ramstein is a perfect logistical base, but we don't need active troops in Germany.


16 posted on 06/14/2004 7:09:54 AM PDT by You Dirty Rats (WE WILL WIN WITH W - Isara)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

If we can have base closures here at home, we can damned sure close them overseas. Due to the socialist politics of the lefty, california, congressional delegation many military bases were closed here that were relied upon by retired military families. I say close all of the bases overseas, except for the most strategic of them.


17 posted on 06/14/2004 7:11:33 AM PDT by old school
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
You letter to the editor about ex-German POWs buying your dinner to express gratitude for their past American treatment as POWs evokes several memories.

As a young boy, on Saturday mornings toward the end of WW-II, I would go to a Virginia naval base with my dad and spend the day roaming the base -- pistol range, exhibition baseball, chow hall, officers club, etc. -- and I was able to interface with German POWs a few times (as they worked under guard trimming roses). It was a good experience for me and them, and I can vouch that those I met were treated well.

Whne the war was over, German POWs were repatriated, but many of them quickly returned to settle in the United States.

One such German couple opened a carry-out hamburger place in my home town and the place was packed every day -- hard work, good quality, good service, and good prices.

Later in life, I told those stories to a young German national, born around 1965, and she told me that she'd been taught in Germany that WW-II German POWs were mistreated in America.

Personal stories like yours and mine are what put the lie to propaganda. Thank you.

22 posted on 06/14/2004 7:28:20 AM PDT by Stagerite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
It's a bad idea, particularly at a time when the United States is struggling to rebuild its relations with its NATO allies.

NYT again confirms Rumsfeld is doing the right thing

23 posted on 06/14/2004 7:29:32 AM PDT by Timocrat (I Emanate on your Auras and Penumbras Mr Blackmun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

YEAH! There is NOTHING worth protecting in Eurotard land. It is just a sinkhole of wasted funds. Indeed, NATO is an obsolete organization that has LONG been surpassed. Let the Eurotrash police themselves.


24 posted on 06/14/2004 7:29:50 AM PDT by gunnygail (Klintoon's, Arkansas' FIRST family of the trailer park!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

Our troops are not there for the convenience of the Germans but for ours.

Some facts the NYT leaves out: The Clinton administration, just like Truman and Carter before them, gutted our military leaving us with far fewer forces to face just as great dangers. Therefore, we must make more judicious use of what we have.

The French, though part of NATO, provide no military assistance to NATO, troops or otherwise. They only obstruct. Let them replace our troops with theirs.


No matter what we do, other than capitulate, the NYT will criticize us.


31 posted on 06/14/2004 8:16:01 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all things that need to be done need to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
Our military is NOT a social program to benefit other countries economies. The purpose of having our military stationed outside the US is to insure our strategic interests. Germany has interferred with our training based on "environmental" factors, they have a higher cost of living than some of the other countries, and they have to be located where they can do us the most good MILITARILY!

These things were in the works LONG before the Iraq war. It's time the europeans developed their own militaries, and it's time we stopped exposing our people to the virulant Anti-Americanism rampant in Germany.

37 posted on 06/14/2004 8:40:00 AM PDT by McGavin999 (If Kerry can't deal with the "Republican Attack Machine" how is he going to deal with Al Qaeda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
It's a bad idea, particularly at a time when the United States is struggling to rebuild its relations with its NATO allies.

Without noting the source, I got as far as the second sentence before my conservative antennae signaled "leftist hit piece."

Why was I not surprised to find it was a NYT Editorial.

40 posted on 06/14/2004 9:16:56 AM PDT by RottiBiz (Help end Freepathons -- become a Monthly Donor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
Personally, if the NY Times thinks it's a bad idea - that's enough to convince me it's a great one. Once again they leap to the conclusion that it is we who need to improve our relationships with Old Europe. I suggest the onus is on them. They're the ones with limping economies, rampant unemployment and schizophrenia about the E.U.

Allied are countries that stand by you even when it's not in their obvious & immediate interest. They do so to preserve and enhance the long-term relationship. Germany and France have failed the test. They are no longer allies.

We need to reward our allies and penalize those who oppose us. Other countries will understand that and think twice about comparing us to Hitler or abusing an undeserved seat on the UNSC to thwart us.

41 posted on 06/14/2004 9:27:34 AM PDT by Dilbert56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY

Germany needs an Ambassador that speaks only english and french, not troops especially armored troops.


42 posted on 06/14/2004 9:34:35 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: OESY
The large American military presence in Germany has long symbolized the understanding at the heart of NATO — Washington's commitment to remain permanently engaged in Europe's security and to integrate its military operations with those of its major European allies. Recent history has only reinforced how important that relationship is to the United States. NATO is the only alliance capable of sharing some of the global military burdens that have now overstretched America's ground forces.

NATO was created to "Keep the Russians out and the Germans down". Hence the continued occupation of Germany and the lack of a peace treaty 60 years after the end of WWII. The Bundesrepublik government is an instrument of the four occupying powers, not the actual German government in the sense of a constitutional authority with powers from the nation.

48 posted on 06/14/2004 11:09:30 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson