http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/05/22/...r-its-command/

There troops using our euqipment, says the article? Well, fine, but does not solve the problem of that the equipment pools of the Bundeswehr are hopelessly undersupplied.

I also question the widsom of now trying to raise a second military framework beside NATO. It is said NATO should beocme better supported, means the Germans should spend more for repairing their deficits and equipment lacks. And that NATO should become more independent from the US. Which cna only be acchieved by strenthening European legs in NATO. But when nations like Germany are being unwilling to invest the needed money, why to assume then that this money will all pof a sudden be avialable to turn an idea by theorists into a combat-strong reality?

I live in Münster, which is the central base for the logistics of the German-Dutch corps. And I knew what some of the soldiers here say about that corps. They called it a paper tiger, under-funded and undersupported. A detemrined Russian effort it would not be capable to resist. It some years now that I was told this. But i doubt that much has changed since then. Why should it have?

The shiny new world - for Germany it works perfect. On paper.

More payment for soldiers to make the job more attractive. Turkey out of NATO. More money in to repair the broken down and to replace the missing hardware. An end to pointless oversea missions that erode resources and finances for no substantial gains. All this within the framework of NATO. We do not need a second money-eating military framework beside it. For what?

This is about symbology as much as the damn Euro was. Another toy the eurocrats want to boast with, despite the obvious deficits. And no, it will not solve the basic problem. The Bundeswehr wanted to hide the fatc that it had to little working equioment by intriucing clever onceptions and shiny terminology for having the equipment being rotated between units. This of course did not chnage the fact that there was too little working equipm,ent, and still is. Now they want to hide the perosnell deficits by rotating th eperosnell between the equipment pools, so to speak.which again means that the personell deficits of the Bundeswehr will not be cured for real.

Its all self-deception. In the end you still have to little ammuntiion, to fewtanks, too few interceptors, too few helcipters, too few missile stockpiles, too few NVG, too few whatever, and still too few German soldiers who udnerstand that a soldier is no self-protective development worker, but a warrior.

And only the klatter will serve as a miliutary deterrance aainst foeign military aggressors, namely Russia in the Baltic. Not bilding schools in Afghanistan. Drilling waterholes in africa. Repairing bridges in some third world center of the world events. An army that alcks the warrior's spirit and the eqipment an dperosnnel pool that can endure longer times of conflict and higher losses, will lose the next war. Such an army will never serve as a deterrance, because it is not potent enough for that .

While I agree that Bundeswehr really should get into the shape as otherwise it is embaracing to watch, I cannot agree with this:
as it both misrepresents our interests and policies and would lead to escalation of tensions in the region (should Bundeswehr deploy there in strength) through escalationary spiral where both sides historically have shown real restraint on military-technical level.

NATO has good reasons to differ with you. The West would be stupid, after the Russian exmaples of the past years, to simply trust in statements from the Kremlin. Trust is kind. Control is better. While Russia will keep the Crimean peninsula, and most liekly the Eastern Ukraine will separate form the ukraine as well, these achievements for Rus sia come at the cost of that they serve as a wakeup call. Russia hs shown that it doe snot just balk, but alos bite - and coming from the rear. We would be naive to ignore that. That the Baltic people have bad memories of Russian occupation and thus are especially sceptic, is explained by history. Them to would be naive to ignore it.

To be honest I think that they are trying to monetise fearmongering because they would be viewed as irrelevant depopulated states that they are.

p.s. are you typing from a new device?

Majority of Germans do not want to honor supportive and assistance duties in NATO in case that the Baltic states and Eastern European contnries would get attacked by Russia.

https://euobserver.com/foreign/138000

Bastard nation. Its a disgrace.

And illustrates what this nonsense talking about a German-led Euro army is worth: its nice for having parades and posing at summits and making big words in interviews. And thats it.

Yes that is quite worrying Sky :hmmm:

Sometimes I feel that there is a conspiracy to make Russia to annex the poor baltics.

Ugh.
Can someone explain to me what my government is doing regarding Turkey at the moment? "Ähh, IF you will not let us visit our troops, then we will pull out the Bundeswehr from Incirlik, yes, we will!! For sure this time!"
It's just so embarrassing...

What is so special about Turkey that they can do whatever they want?
Another joke are the "Beitrittsverhandlungen" going on for years, instead of realizing years ago that
a) The Sultan doesn't want to join and
b) constantly lowering the standards is a severe sign of weakness and political stupidity.

God, even Trump could handle this more capable. Jesus I just said that...

Germany may benefit from acting consistently as a great power.

Man, we've really messed you Germans up. You sure could use another Frederick the Great instead of Steve Urkel, I mean Merkel.
http://cdn.hark.com/images/000/001/5...0/original.jpg
https://shariaunveiled.files.wordpre...ized.jpg?w=627

Who is "we"?
And by doing what did whoever "mess the Germans up"?

:hmmm:

The "Allies": by winning WW2, and then re-educating you into peaceful beatniks. :D

Aha, "Allies".
You know, for a second, my "America did it all" alarm bell rang rather loud, so I thought I might ask to prevent misunderstandings.

Anyways, I have to disagree about the 're-education' though.
Fact is, Germans - the people - weren't more or less thirsty for blood than most other western nations at their time. They (not "we") had an opportunity to take more than they had at the moment, something pretty much every nation and/or people did, and will do, if opportunity comes along and seems worth it.
That, in combination with Hitler, the consequences of WW1, as well as the general fascist-wave Europe went through at that time was, of course, a recipe for disaster.

But does any of that mean the Germans of 1933-1945 were in general, as if by nature, different than anyone else? Doubtful, if we look at human history.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't think you meant to suggest that seriously, but as a post-WW2 German, I get kinda tired of the eternal prejudice some people seem to have about Germans. All of them. In general.

As Mr. Rogers from the neighborhood would say, I liked you just the way you were. Except for the small percentage of you that were Nazi'ed' up of course. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HN1ygrDiq90
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...0eedce8c6b.jpg

There can be little doubt that the oberwhelming guilt once the horrible crimes in the KZs became completel yuncovered, as well as the reeducation program - which ws aiming at and designed to prevent that a strong National feeling should ever grow again in the German subjects, have plenty to do with why Germans are today these hollow corpusses that they are, when it comes to a sense for own, hitorically grown identity. The rest was taken care of by Soviet proaganda and its infuence of the German students, the academic intelligenzia especially in the education branch, and then in the peace movement. Thinking left is en vogue on Germany, so was, and is again, anti-Americanism.

Bush and Trump however make it very easy to become anti-American, however, so indeed this time its not just the Germans' but also the Americans' fault.

That nationalistic and patriotic feelings do not get differenciated in Germany, also what I usually call a historically grown sense of own identity gets rejected, does not help to de-confuse the mess. What I mean by that? To have a feeling of the fundaments in philosophy, culture, arts, uniqueness that one'S own way of life today is inevitably basing on and without which this way of life today could not exist and would not have seen the arts blossoming, the rights prospering and the liberty culminating. From the influence of Greek philosophy (rejected in the EU constituion and thus deleted), over the influence of the Christian thinking (rejected in the EU constitution and thus deleted) to the prosperity and blossoming of scinece, arts, klowledge in general during the pre-natioanal time of Germany and even in the early stage of the latter - it all gets rejected today over here, gets forgotten, gets aggressively denied and wiped out. The EU and German mindset work mutually reinforcing here, unfortunately. No other country goes as far as Germany in writing into its constitution that it aims for self-dissolving in favour of a higher, supoernatioanl order.

Germans would only be satisfied if they would seize to exist as a German something. Do not be mistaken when seeing fans waving flags at football matches and stuff like that, or read about Nazi paroles in the Bundeswehr. That is just on the surface. Rituals whose deeper meaning - and once satisfying - content are not really understood, or felt. A hollow rite.

I do not want natioanlism, but I can understand how a patriot ticks and feels and accept it. I base on and root in the intellectual heritage that the history and tradition of the occident has kindly provided to me. There were ups and there were down, yes. But all in all it has pushed the West further into a constructive, progressive, liberal direction than any other people or cultures in the world has ever reached. And every techcnolgical, scientific, civilizational ,industrial progress by the others - was made on the grounds of our ancestory uncoutnable acchievements. From dentist injections to satellite TV, from code Napoleon to the declaration of human rights, from the CDC in Atlanta to the Hubble telescope - none of that would exist without the history of the West having formed it. Surely there also is smoke and ashes left and right of the way, and chapters written in blood and with disasters. Still, beside the dark spots nevertheless there are the bright spots. German hsotiry dates back almost one thosuand years, it is so much more than just WW2, and the West'S historic cycles pans over almost three thousand years, there were injustices and dramas, and there were revolutonary progresses made.

Buit today, many people, and ever more young people, want to reject just all of that, without any discrimination.

You cannot form a self-identity without defining what is NOT part of your identity: what you do NOT want to be like. A state of lacking idnetity btw is a deeply worrying state of mind, a psychologically pathologic crisis. It make speopel suffer, and turns them into a danger to themselves, sometimes to others.

You must discriminate between yourself, and the others, own culture and other culture. You must discmrinate what you claim to be, and what you do nto want to be. A completely inflationary identity claiming to be just everybdoy and everythign is as uch a disaster as is the complete lack of a self-identity.

We are not all the same.We are not all equal in our conditions of birth, and genetic sets. We are different.

A TV documentary on the inherent and growing anti-semitism in Western societies and Islam, that was paid for by ARTE and WDR, is being boycotted by state TV.

In German.

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleto...-15044790.html

Perfectly revealing the underhanded, cheating Zeitgeist that is blindly pro Islam and anti Jews, and hides antisemitism under new labels to dodge criticism.

No further comment by me needed. The story speaks for itself.

I vaguely remember that the americans believed after WW2 that 'prussia' was the root of all evil in germany. I think they were trying to take steps to delete prussia from german history but never actually went through with it.

I'm confident you guys know what I believe to have heard there?

Yes. Destroying any sense of national identity, or fundament for it, so that Germany never could become a strong central state again. This was a design goal demanded by the Americans for the surrogate constitution of the post-war West German federal republic: to have a strong federal structure so that the states could always play foul on the national government, and so the two sides prevent each other to form a strong nationality - and nationalism - again: chancelory and minister presidents are set up against each other, not together with each other. At least that was the idea. Not even many Germans know why the constitution and the federal structure of the German state is what it is.

But its true, the basic structure was enforced by America, with the goal to keep the new German state weak, both in administration, and psyche.

I wonder if later this was regretted on Americna side.

However, there have been serious clashes between German and American administrations in the past before, Merkle and Trump are not a first, not at all.

Lyndon B. Johnson demanded Ludwig Erhard to send German combat troops to Vietnam, which made the Germans furious opponents of the American position in Vietnam and really flipped their switches to the anti-US position, Johnson found the safest way to bring the Germans up against him, it ended with a grumbling "compromise" of a single German hospital ship getting sent instead of troops.

Nixon never trusted Brand with his Eastern diplomacy, both men had utmost antipathy for each other.

With Carter and Schmidt they say it was even worse, Carter hated Schmidt's arrogance, and Schmidt, a fighting war veteran, disliked Carter's weakness and lack of determination - first the German resisted the American plan to build the neutron bomb, and when Schmidt finally gave up diplomatic resistence to it, Carter changed his mind and made Schmidt facing an utmost unpleasant situation with his opposition in Germany, later Schmidt had to fight against the Americans again to convince them to station Pershing-2s and Cruise Missiles in Germany in reply to the Sovjet stationing of SS-20s: while the German population hated the idea and strictly opposed it, Schmidt took it very queer that he had to fight against his own people and the Americans as well, although this time the American govenment complied. - I was at highschool at that time, so it was the first of these pplitical events that I actually witnessed first hand and have memories of - and we live din West-Berlin at that time, where anti-American dmeonstraitons were especially intense and lead to many clashes between students and police in the streets. It was the time when the Greens and the so-called Alternative Liste - militant squatters, communists and anarchists - formed up, especially in Berlin. Both groups later became one party.

And then there was Bush junior and Schroeder, Bush said the German promised him that Germany would be with him in Iraq if only the war would be clean, short and determined, while Schroeder always denied that claim by Bush and indeed already on his return from his visit in Germany and since then for always strictly opposed the Iraq war.

True after WW1 anyway, they thought of Prussia as "the evil". Which is, b.t.w., complete bovine scatology. "Prussia" had not been one state though, but a patchwork of different smaller patches of land, alot of them belonging to polish kings of the time. Prussia then had an army alright, but if you compare the armies of the time Prussia's was much more "liberal" and enligthened, than others of the time. Prussia's kings (Friedrich1 and 2 or 'Frederick') of the time were also much more modern than kings of other countries.

Friedrich Wilhelm I. certainly forged a new army type, and gave lots of money for that. But despite the arms build-up he only fought one war, together with Denmark and Saxony, against Karl XII from Sweden. Tolerance and freedom of religion, the first health care, freedom of taxes, money, free places and free material for to build houses to help immigrants getting a new home, numerous other examples.

Maybe the US were just afraid that could plant new ideas in the heads of their people.

Good article in german: http://www.planet-wissen.de/geschich...hte_preussens/

You must be living in a different country. Anti islam and anti muslim attitude have become mainstream in Germany in the last few years while antisemitism is restricted to the right and left wing extremists. Take this for reference: In my hometown a new synagogue and a new mosque were to be built. Absolutely no protest against the synagogue, but lots of disgusting racist action at the construction site of the mosque.

To suggest, antisemitism is not adequately addressed in German state-run media is one of your typical oversimplifications.

A promise? Too good to be true.