03-24-2003, 02:17 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-24-2003, 04:08 PM by Occhidiangela.)
Go ahead.
Having operated at a level with which you are completely unfamiliar, I do not expect you to be able to see what I saw from your little spot on the ground, and how it played out from levels that the average citizen of any country simply never gets to see.
1. First of all, you completely missed the reference to "nice neighborhoods," as it is an American phrase related to urban 'white flight' in the 1950's and 1960's. I know full and well where the Gast Arbeiter live, and in West Berlin in the early 1970's, it was not in Dahlem, but in Moabit, a bit rougher part of town back then. I doubt much has changed in that regard in any country, regarding where immigrants/refugees get stuck. It was Western Europe as a whole that is the 'Nice Neighborhood' and that these desparate folks were intruding upon, and putting strain on, the social welfare systems in countries with 8-12% or so unemployment in the mid 90's was not a tirvial policy matter.
You make me laugh with your naivete, but really, you make me want to weep. How old are you?
2. I am fully aware of the tension between acting in a support role and acting with troops. Japan acted in 1991 by opening thei rcheckbook for billions of dollars. Ireland acts still in many places as a peacekeeper, so too the Nordic nations, and many African nations. I am also keenly aware of why German Ground Troops were not in Yugoslavia, generally. (Some German folks were about in various HQ's and support organs, as well as non military German's in many international NGO's, or charitable organizations.) Too much bad history. However, I see the choice of Germans to contribute with limitation as a case much like the Japanese: afraid of their own shadow, when in fact Germany is a stalwart representative government. That is for the Germans, of course, to sort out in time as their sovreign interests, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, is shaped by German considerations.
But acting on 1441, which is what I was referring to as action, the resolution that threatened 'serious consequences' if Saddam did not quit his evasion, non cooperation and non compliance, has NOT been done by the German Government, other than to TALK. Hell, The Arab Leage took more action than Germany, as they asked Saddam to abdicate for the good of his country. That is more than Germany or many others even attempted other than TALK. Nothing new, no harsher measures, just TALK.
TALK is NOT ACTION.
Now, is war the only possible action? No. In that you and I most likely agree.
The problem remains, given that actions in place for 12 years -- embargo, trade restrictions on certain materials under UN ruling -- that nothing has changed other than life continuing to suck for a lot of Iraqis. What action would Germany, who SIGNED 1441 and supported it, suggest? More inspectors to be obstructed? Actually enforcing trade sanctions, which a few governments have been most vocal about trying to take down even without Iraqi compliance with the UN mandates (See Russia and France for the past few years in lobbying to lift the embargo even in a state of non compliance). What real and EFFECTIVE action to imlement the alleged will of the UN Security Council in 1441 has been proposed that is not just more of the same ineffective INACTION.
3. FYI, read your history, not the crap on the Internet. US was not the major source of defense materials to Saddam Hussein 1980-1990. Try France and USSR, and please remember who built the Iraqi Nuclear Facility that Israel bombed. France. The fact that he received some assistance vs Iran was realipolitick in action. History moves forward, or do you forget who else we allied with for a time: Stalin's USSR, our political, ideological and economic enemy in the 1930's, versus Hitler's Germany, for good reasons: USSR then became our enemy for 50 years, since they did not like us all that much, and we did not like them all that much once our common opponent was gone. And please do your homework about the German companies who supplied Khadafi with the technical capability to build his gas works. The German corporations have been at this for quite a while, and not just in Iraq. Ask the former minister of Education of Iran, his country also worked with German firms in that regard. Germany and Iran have been trading partners for a long time. Such business and sales represent profit, though the German government may have been kept in the dark on some detail, though I suspect that practicl myopia was the policy. They would not be the only government to practice in such a way . . . see the U.S. and some Latin American leadership for the past 50 years.
4. Every government has to listen to its native businesses, but to a certain extent, not as much anymore due to so much multinationalism in corporate structures. The simple reason is that business is the engine that drives tax revenue, which is what makes governments able to function. Without resources, no government education, not health care, no pensions, no social services. If you think that German based businesses do not interact with your government on a variety of levels for lucrative contracts, you are dreaming, and grossly misinformed. Suffice to say that big ticket, high tech items like the Euro FIghter, the Horizon Frigate, and the ACCS European anti air network are all rife with business and govt relationships of the most incestuous sort, in multiple nations.
5. You can pretend that Germany welcomed the refugees with open arms. The Germans I know personally were not keen to see the large volume in that short a time. Big picture wise, Germany as a nation did extend an open hand, which is why the Slavs and others went there: nicest social welfare system in Europe. :)
The Italians lived with the fact that they could not control the flow along their coastline of illegal refugees, not to mention the legal ones. The burden placed on their governments was real, and there were very clear signals that they wanted it to stop. I won't go into the special relationship between Croats and Germans, because that gets us back into Genocide versus Serbs 1941-1945, and because this post is not about Yugoslavia.
6. Where you sit determine what you see.
I do not believe that Chancellor Kohl would have responded as Herr Schroeder did, but neither am I sure that he would have participated militarily in Iraq, nor that he would not have driven harder for a different sort of effective solution. Too bad he was not in office for us to find out, but the German people have spoken. Schroeder's "principles" are just enough to get him elected, like most politicians, and that runs true all over the globe. The French have been playing this "we are important too!" game for a long time. Their actions are, if disappointing to me, at least consistent with their WEU, EuroCorps and ESDI stands for the past 10-12 years.
Having operated at a level with which you are completely unfamiliar, I do not expect you to be able to see what I saw from your little spot on the ground, and how it played out from levels that the average citizen of any country simply never gets to see.
1. First of all, you completely missed the reference to "nice neighborhoods," as it is an American phrase related to urban 'white flight' in the 1950's and 1960's. I know full and well where the Gast Arbeiter live, and in West Berlin in the early 1970's, it was not in Dahlem, but in Moabit, a bit rougher part of town back then. I doubt much has changed in that regard in any country, regarding where immigrants/refugees get stuck. It was Western Europe as a whole that is the 'Nice Neighborhood' and that these desparate folks were intruding upon, and putting strain on, the social welfare systems in countries with 8-12% or so unemployment in the mid 90's was not a tirvial policy matter.
You make me laugh with your naivete, but really, you make me want to weep. How old are you?
2. I am fully aware of the tension between acting in a support role and acting with troops. Japan acted in 1991 by opening thei rcheckbook for billions of dollars. Ireland acts still in many places as a peacekeeper, so too the Nordic nations, and many African nations. I am also keenly aware of why German Ground Troops were not in Yugoslavia, generally. (Some German folks were about in various HQ's and support organs, as well as non military German's in many international NGO's, or charitable organizations.) Too much bad history. However, I see the choice of Germans to contribute with limitation as a case much like the Japanese: afraid of their own shadow, when in fact Germany is a stalwart representative government. That is for the Germans, of course, to sort out in time as their sovreign interests, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, is shaped by German considerations.
But acting on 1441, which is what I was referring to as action, the resolution that threatened 'serious consequences' if Saddam did not quit his evasion, non cooperation and non compliance, has NOT been done by the German Government, other than to TALK. Hell, The Arab Leage took more action than Germany, as they asked Saddam to abdicate for the good of his country. That is more than Germany or many others even attempted other than TALK. Nothing new, no harsher measures, just TALK.
TALK is NOT ACTION.
Now, is war the only possible action? No. In that you and I most likely agree.
The problem remains, given that actions in place for 12 years -- embargo, trade restrictions on certain materials under UN ruling -- that nothing has changed other than life continuing to suck for a lot of Iraqis. What action would Germany, who SIGNED 1441 and supported it, suggest? More inspectors to be obstructed? Actually enforcing trade sanctions, which a few governments have been most vocal about trying to take down even without Iraqi compliance with the UN mandates (See Russia and France for the past few years in lobbying to lift the embargo even in a state of non compliance). What real and EFFECTIVE action to imlement the alleged will of the UN Security Council in 1441 has been proposed that is not just more of the same ineffective INACTION.
3. FYI, read your history, not the crap on the Internet. US was not the major source of defense materials to Saddam Hussein 1980-1990. Try France and USSR, and please remember who built the Iraqi Nuclear Facility that Israel bombed. France. The fact that he received some assistance vs Iran was realipolitick in action. History moves forward, or do you forget who else we allied with for a time: Stalin's USSR, our political, ideological and economic enemy in the 1930's, versus Hitler's Germany, for good reasons: USSR then became our enemy for 50 years, since they did not like us all that much, and we did not like them all that much once our common opponent was gone. And please do your homework about the German companies who supplied Khadafi with the technical capability to build his gas works. The German corporations have been at this for quite a while, and not just in Iraq. Ask the former minister of Education of Iran, his country also worked with German firms in that regard. Germany and Iran have been trading partners for a long time. Such business and sales represent profit, though the German government may have been kept in the dark on some detail, though I suspect that practicl myopia was the policy. They would not be the only government to practice in such a way . . . see the U.S. and some Latin American leadership for the past 50 years.
4. Every government has to listen to its native businesses, but to a certain extent, not as much anymore due to so much multinationalism in corporate structures. The simple reason is that business is the engine that drives tax revenue, which is what makes governments able to function. Without resources, no government education, not health care, no pensions, no social services. If you think that German based businesses do not interact with your government on a variety of levels for lucrative contracts, you are dreaming, and grossly misinformed. Suffice to say that big ticket, high tech items like the Euro FIghter, the Horizon Frigate, and the ACCS European anti air network are all rife with business and govt relationships of the most incestuous sort, in multiple nations.
5. You can pretend that Germany welcomed the refugees with open arms. The Germans I know personally were not keen to see the large volume in that short a time. Big picture wise, Germany as a nation did extend an open hand, which is why the Slavs and others went there: nicest social welfare system in Europe. :)
The Italians lived with the fact that they could not control the flow along their coastline of illegal refugees, not to mention the legal ones. The burden placed on their governments was real, and there were very clear signals that they wanted it to stop. I won't go into the special relationship between Croats and Germans, because that gets us back into Genocide versus Serbs 1941-1945, and because this post is not about Yugoslavia.
6. Where you sit determine what you see.
I do not believe that Chancellor Kohl would have responded as Herr Schroeder did, but neither am I sure that he would have participated militarily in Iraq, nor that he would not have driven harder for a different sort of effective solution. Too bad he was not in office for us to find out, but the German people have spoken. Schroeder's "principles" are just enough to get him elected, like most politicians, and that runs true all over the globe. The French have been playing this "we are important too!" game for a long time. Their actions are, if disappointing to me, at least consistent with their WEU, EuroCorps and ESDI stands for the past 10-12 years.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete