Posted on 10/02/2011 11:18:39 PM PDT by Olog-hai
A conspiratorially minded observer would be hard pressed not to conclude that the European financial crisis is a German plot. Southern Europe, indebted beyond its means and facing impoverishment as the bond-trading vultures detect easy prey, is now looking to Germany as its savior. The financial mess has completed Germany's redemption from pariah to the leader of Europe. …
The capstone to Germany's reemergence came in the Bundestag vote on Thursday approving a massive increase in the European Stability Fund to €440 billion. A few parliamentarians protested the bailout, but most docilely approved it. …
… It would be no small irony if this woman from the East (Angela Merkel) ends up creating the united Europe originally espoused by the ardent Rhinelander Konrad Adenauer, who had his sights set firmly westward. …
It is certainly possible that Merkel may have to move to a two-tiered Europe, one in which a core zone pursues more rapid political integration while southern Europe revamps its economies. But for now, the clear winner is Merkel and the newly emboldened Germany she is leading. Yes, Germans will grumble about being on the financial hook for their profligate cousins down south, and Slovakia will have to be muscled over as one of the remaining seventeen countries to approve the bailout package. But Berlin will ensure that it happens. With great financial responsibility comes even greater power. Merkel now has the opportunity to recreate Europe in Germany's image.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
It should be built by the English. If the Russians built it, there would be communism and squalor; if the Germans built it, there would be tyranny and brute force.Don't dismiss Churchill's viewpoint out of hand, is all I can advise. (TNI's choice of an article title is certainly more than interesting.)
Oh, but history repeats itself... not unexpectedly... The predicted end will be Germany in charge, with France and Italy tagging along behind, holding up her train. The dog returns to it's vomit.
Churchill was right.
It was inevitable that Germany would take a leading role in Europe. It’s the largest economy and it has the highest population. The Germany Churchill warned of is not the Germany of today. Let them have their time in the sun.
You mean the Germany of today that has a majority of its population believing that Israel's conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians . . . ? and whose elites are talking about dismantling democracy and flirting with dictatorship?
The Germany Churchill warned of is not the Germany of today
Sources? I can’t just believe that on hearsay.
I’m not sure which portion you want sources for, but Nigel Farage has been sounding the alarm about the “suspending democracy” for some time. For instance, suspending the Irish national elections because the economy is not falling into line with what the lenders (Germans) are wanting. That was just within the last year.
I agree 100% Germany will turn against Israel.
“The financial mess has completed Germany’s redemption from pariah to the leader of Europe. …”
That is the plan?
For decades Germany was the number three economy in the world, that is hardly a “pariah”.
In Germany there is an opposite view about the bailouts that I think is more fitting: Germany has become the slave of Europe.
How else do you describe handing over your wealth to other people?
Could you imagine if it were the other way around?...
Europeans handing over their wealth to Germany....?
Let’s try that and see how it goes. LoL!
Germany as created in 1870 was truly speaking the Prussian Empire extended over Germany.
It imposed the Prussian tyranny and brute force over lands that had not known it -- indeed the differences between the Prussians and say the Bavarians still exist and the western Germans were different. The Germans of pre-Prussian era (before the 30-years war) were cultured, scholarly etc., quite unlike our image of Germans which is really the Prussian image
Germans of today are also quite removed from both the Prussians and the previous Germanics.
Similarly the English of today are unlike the English of Churchill's day. IMHO, if the English of today were to build Europe it would be squalor and communism-lite (English socialism). The Russians would impost tyranny and brute force. The Germans would just be obnoxious boors.
Europe united as a federacy that does not fight each other makes sense, but it should not be led by any one country.
Olog-hai: "You mean the Germany of today that has a majority of its population believing that Israel's conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians . . . ?"
Those are two different points.
you are wrong. the Germans since the 50s have mostly bent over backwards to re-accomodate Jews in their country -- and so they SHOULD have. However,by the 80s and 90s it was reverse-discrimination in many ways. But now Germany and Israel treat each other as partners in the larger scheme and they have no common foes.
the German protestors against Israel are just as silly as those in other countries outside the ARab world.
true in many ways. Unfortunately the image of Germans in many English/American eyes is still framed by WWII.
i still think German tourists are boors and rude, but I see that there are lots of regional variances.
Don't just say so. Please reveal how. Unproven statements are mere opinions.
Those are two different points.
Hughesian: "The germany Churchill warned of is not the Germany of today"
Olog-hai: "You mean the Germany of today that has a majority of its population believing that Israel's conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians . . . ?"
I see you don't know the European Union. It's a product of Churchill's time. It's not a "federacy" at all—it's an empire, and a highly oligarchic one at that, that's been out to destroy basic rights (such as habeas corpus for example). Europe united means a war footing, and always has.
To be fair Churchill was speaking of his own time.
Germany as created in 1870 was truly speaking the Prussian Empire extended over Germany.
It imposed the Prussian tyranny and brute force over lands that had not known it -- indeed the differences between the Prussians and say the Bavarians still exist and the western Germans were different. The Germans of pre-Prussian era (before the 30-years war) were cultured, scholarly etc., quite unlike our image of Germans which is really the Prussian image.
Germans of today are also quite removed from both the Prussians and the previous Germanics.
Similarly the English of today are unlike the English of Churchill's day. IMHO, if the English of today were to build Europe it would be squalor and communism-lite (English socialism). The Russians would impost tyranny and brute force. The Germans would just be obnoxious boors.
Europe united as a federacy that does not fight each other makes sense, but it should not be led by any one country.
There was a 2004 poll conducted by the University of Bielefeld, which revealed the attitudes of the majority of Germans in that respect—it puts the number at 68 percent. The same poll had 50 percent of Germans equating the IDF with the Nazi Wehrmacht. (A more recent European Jewish Congress put the number at 47 percent, but it's less likely they'll be as forthcoming to Jews as others; yet look at the numbers for other European countries.)
Sources? I can’t just believe that on hearsay
Yes, that's the view that the elites want the people in Germany to hold. But have you read the treaties of the European Union at all? The Lisbon Treaty, as have other earlier treaties, impose the Soziale Marktwirtschaft on all of the EU nations—doesn't sound too much like Germany being Europe's slave, but its master. The bailouts weren't wanted—Germany actually forced the nations to take them (why do you think it caused so many national governments to collapse?)
In Germany there is an opposite view about the bailouts that I think is more fitting: Germany has become the slave of Europe
- “The Lisbon Treaty, as have other earlier treaties, impose the Soziale Marktwirtschaft on all of the EU nations—doesn’t sound too much like Germany being Europe’s slave, but its master.”
Germany was not holding a gun to anyone’s head to join.
- “The bailouts weren’t wanted—Germany actually forced the nations to take them (why do you think it caused so many national governments to collapse?)”
Uh-huh, Germany forced them to take bailouts?
The bailouts were very much wanted. What is not wanted are the conditions of austerity that the Germans rightfully demand. Otherwise the Germans are paying for a lifestyle that the bailout members can’t afford themselves.
The main argument presented here by you was that simply by being a large part of the bailouts of some others - Germany was positioning itself as an acceptable leader. That is as ridiculous as it is childish.
Now you compare apples to oranges for some new argument. The German GDP is much more than that of any other EU member and smaller states have disproportional (more) representation compared to their population.
If you are paranoid about “German Masters” then you should be tickled pink about having a hand in their pocket because that is taking them down, not lifting them up.
Like I said, imagine if it were others paying to bailout Germany... your hysterics don’t pass the giggle test.
The EU is not an Empire by any terms.
Europe united does not mean a war footing -- you want to compare the 18th century or earlier to today? That's insane logic
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.