Rumsfeld Puts Germany On the Same Level as Libya und Cuba

Yahoo Germany ^ | February 6, 2003 | Reuters

[longjack]

Thursday 6. February 2003, 05:03

Rumsfeld Puts Germany On the Same Level as Libya und Cuba

Washington (Reuters) - US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld put Germany on the same level as Libya or Cuba because of it's position on the Iraq Issue.

These countries will never support a US attack on Iraq or the rebuilding of the country after the war Rumsfeld told the US Congress on Wednesday.

There are a "not-insignificant" number of countries that have already approved support to the US for a military incursion against Iraq or the use of military bases and flyover rights, added Rumsfeld. Other countries have signaled they would help with the rebuilding of Iraq if a change of regime occurs there. "Then there are still 3 or 4 countries that have told us they would do nothing at all", said Rumsfeld. "I think Libya, Cuba and Germany are those that have indicated, they wouldn't help in any way."

Last month Rumsfeld described France and Germany's opposition to a military strike against Iraq as a problem. Both countries don't represent the "New Europe", but represented the "Old Europe". A large number of European countries are on the US?s side on the Iraq issue.

German Readers: Yahoo - Germany

Translated by longjack

longjack

[An.American.Expatriate]

I agree with you about the difference between Germany and Cuba & Libya. If Finland and Belgium have made such statements, then Rumsfeld was unwise in only siting three instances, he should have sited them all (fairness!!)

I also agree that we, as a whole should tone down the rhetoric abit about Germany not bieng an ally. They are and they are supporting us in other areas as Micheal has repeatedly pointed out.

Criticism an Schröder Fischer and the rest of thier "merry men" though is highly encouraged!!!!!!!

[Michael81Dus]

Very well post. BTW, Liberal chairman Westerwelle (and a possible Foreign Minister in a conservative/liberal cabinet) has your position, too: "In Washington, nobody cares about what Schröder or Fischer say."

[Schweinhund]

imagine a politician as a person talking to a group of people who must not necessarily have the same opinion although their leader does talk for all of them. they were elected, this is called democracy if i am correct. so, when a politician speaks, he should perhaps try NOT to insult all the people behind the other man, because if he does, it might be that even MORE people will oppose him NO MATTER WHAT HE SAYS.

your government was clever during the war against terror: it told the world that it is not a war against the islam, but against single terrorists. that is what experts call politics. you use it because because hitting everybody does not work well.

and now you insult every german. like you stood for every decision that an american president made since you are able to vote.

[riri]

If your country does not want war, fine be HONEST and say that we are too cowardly to accept the outcome and we feel that living with an Iraq with WMD and is working in cahoots with terrorists IS an acceptable alternative to us. Afterall, we only have about ten more years until the Sharia comes to D-land and all of our Gausthausen are replaced with mosques anyway so what's the difference? Thanks for saving our butts from the fire and we are glad to still be speaking German and to have avoided the brot lines but we'll take it from here.

I believe in the direct approach. Tschüss

[dfc62]

Um, no it's not, by a long way.

[Ole Okie]

Its possible to bully someone into compliance, but not friendship.

Bless your heart, lucysmom.

Did World War II whistle over your head completely unnoticed?

[lucysmom]

Did World War II whistle over your head completely unnoticed?

If you would be more specific, I would appreciate it.

[Schweinhund]

of course you are right. we fear the military power of a country that has already been defeated in 1991 and still mostly consists of rubble. we simply do not have the guts to attack a gang of starved men carrying old AKs with precision guided missiles, tanks with APZ, invisible fighter jets and elite soldiers.

tell me, who will die when there is the battle in bagdad? will it be the iraqi leaders that hide in family houses and play the sniper? will those who the army kills to get to saddam be the ones responsible?

i am all for removing saddam, but even an assasination would be much better than to lead war against the people of iraq. i suppose the best thing to do would be to isolate saddam, line with the neighbouring countries of iraq, remove saddam with them and letting them organize the rebuilding of iraq. the whole middle east will see that the goal of the attack was to remove a dangerous dictator and not to build a bridgehead for oil interests.

you do not know what a war does to a victim and i hope you will never have to experience it...nobody deserves that. and i just do not see this sudden danger that makes this last resort, war, inevitable. and that is why i think WE should try to remove him by diplomatic means.

we already have our share of mosques here in germany...allah is just another word for god. and i just don't see how bombing iraq should help the fight against religious extremism all over the world, but i am sure you can explain that.

[riri]

tell me, who will die when there is the battle in bagdad

US, Americans that's who. If you think for one minute that this man does not have people and means positioned in the US you are wrong.

Absolutely, killing Hussein would be the best case scenario. Problem is we can't get to him. He never makes public appearances anymore, only a handful of loyal insiders gets close to him. Even close and trusted advisors are searched just getting close to him. He has a security system that Stalin would envy.

[Ole Okie]

Posted by lucysmom to Ole Okie

If you would be more specific, I would appreciate it.

I simply referred to the fact that Germany didn't become our friend because of our sparkling personalities.

They are our erstwhile "friends" because we beat the snot out of them in World War II, and then through the Marshall Plan, we were instrumental in rebuilding the country.

And in 1947, we supplied Berlin with food by airlift when Stalin instituted the Berlin blockade in an attempt to oust Britain, France, and the United States from joint occupation of the city.

That no longer earns us very many points at this juncture, though. I'm disappointed in Germany's stance.

[lucysmom]

That no longer earns us very many points at this juncture, though. I'm disappointed in Germany's stance.

Thank you for your reply.

Germany has been our friend until now. They certainly did and are supporting us in Afghanistan. It seems that pettiness on both sides is escalating into a real rift and I hate to see that happen.