I don't see why everyone freaks out about Schulz,so far all he did was talking-nice.
He appears wrong to me, fake. Yes, they all are, but some are worse, and he plays Mr. Volksnah a little too hard I find.
However, since Merkel seems unable to do the right things or do things at all, I will probably vote for the new guy, hoping something will change for the better.

The only thing that keeps me from doing that is the chance that this would turn into a Red-Red-Green coalition. Both the Left and the Green are in denial of certain realities and having both in the government would in my opinion be disastrous for Germany.:wah:
I rather stay with Merkel than letting any of those clowns take over....(that I would live to see the day at which I prefer a CDU government over any other constellation....:/\\!!:/\\!!:/\\!!)
It reminds me very much of the US election. Only idiots to vote for an no matter who you vote, Germany will lose either way.:/\\!!

You... hope...?

Hope is no strategy, no plan, no nothing. Its just summoning the fairy queen. You can known what will happen when he gets legitimised to run the office: the German policies on many levels will see dramatic shifts to the left. Merkel does that, too, left and right as political descriptions are almost meaningless nowadays to describe the characteristics of political parties.

There is only one reasonable option you have by which you do not compromise your own integrity: refusing to legitmise any rat in the rat pack the political establishment is.

Maybe - most likely - this will not acchieve a change for the better, here now deeper-rootiung processes and historical inner dynamicsare at work as if it would make a difference whether you vote for this or that non-option. of. But by withholding yourself from the demands of the mainstream, you become a little bit less guilty yourself.

Good. It's about time.

So? Do you recommend voting for the filthy rats that try to demote our society back to the fifties, or not voting at all?

I am surprised, though, what the american media recently wrote about Merkel..

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/w...ald-trump.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/16/op...man/index.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lyxAfDZnCQ

I don't see how this is strange. With the apparently less interventional policies of Trump some of the US elites wish for the ideologically close German goverment to take the mantle of leadership.

Putin not so much respects Merkel, but realises she is a primary obstacles to his plans for Europe.

Those "plans", attibuted to Putin, were created by the Western observers and are the result of demonisation of Putin.

The sad thing here is that this demonisation precludes analasys of Russian capabilities and intentions.

https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2017...re-of-warfare/

That article on a writing by Gerasimov effectively shows and says nothing. Only that Gerasimov seems to be very effective in spreading doubts on Russia's hybrid warfare - that same hybrid warfare that it has masterfully practiced on the Crimean.

You already have forgotten the quote by Gerasimov that I have had in my signature until some weeks ago. And where he stated exactly the opposite of what Gorenburg quotes him with now.

Because that quote was not representative of his work and I told you that before.

It's use by you does illustrate the problem however, instead of trying to analyse your adversary you are attibuting your fears as it's intentions. Quote mining is but a tool in that process.

For example, did you try to critically think about as to why would Russia invade or otherwise conduct operations againt Eastern European NATO members?

Gerasimov is one of the architects, or better: revivers of the "new" strategy in question. In fact it is old KGB school from the 70s already, I think, if not earlier, and the whole Crimean desinformation and confusing campaing was run like from a KGB textbook. The quote I used until some time ago thus is VERY representative - and you, ikalugin, play again your distraction game here - deflect, mislead, distract. All what you claim that it does not exist and would not make sense, - has been proven to exist for real and was exceuted for real on the Crimean, and the desire by Putin to get back what was lost during the collapse of the USSR, you simply ignore. Why Russia would want that,m you ask. Becasue thats what it is about: to regian old fame and status, power and somyblism, and last but not least: the old, former sphere of influence that NATO has "stolen". Putin may not have been like this since always. But he certainly turned into that over the past lets say 10 years or more, in reaction to NATO pushing East on and on, and Europe not taking Russia as serious as Russia wanted to be taken as. I give Russia more credit here than the common Western position, esoecially the American one, does - but I give it less credit than Russia demands. And that leaves me with pleny of free space asnd thinlking freedom, for I am standing between all seats and cannot (and will not) satisfy any of the two sides.

Im getting tired of this. I have no idea whether you have any intentional interest or job in defending these new old Russian (in)doctrinal ways - but if you have not, then these desinformation tactics nevertheless still work wonderfully well on your thinking and fully deliver on their purpose. You argue in full compliance with what they want to achieve. And you tell me they do not exist, not their mechanisms, not their goals or targets. Ha!

Ok, so you attack my character.

The amusing thing is that I am more likely to be influenced by the Western propaganda because I access western media more often than Russian media and I am not at all exposed to the state owned TV channels (RT, R24, etc) because I don't watch them. Morever I can get the insider view on the narratives they spin and thus understand how it is different from reality because one of my friends works in R24.

But I guess as you don't understand Russia nor do you have access to insider sources it would be very hard for you to do your own reasearch, say into the works by Gerasimov, rather than quote mining.

After the state of Hesse announced that Erdoghan is no longer welcomed in Germany, the AKP let announce via her platform UETP that until the referendum no more Turkish ministers will try to come to Germany to hold rallies. Originally around 30 more of such visits were planned.

Erdoghan meanwhile had started to not just attack Germany and the anonymous political scene in general, but has become poerosnalyl offensive again merkel and repeatedly defamed her personally.

Since a few days however the number of migrants arriving in grecce and coming from Turkey, has dramatically grown. It seems Turkey has opened at least some flood gates.

Recent publications in newspapers and book form lay out the case of that in 2015 the German government was indeed quite prepaaredf to close the borders when the mirgants storm began. But cabinet members feared the bad images of migrants becoming violent and borde rguards needing to act resolute in defending the border and refusing them to pass. So Merkel, the inteiror mionister and all others as well capitulated to the cirucmstance and said: let them pass. This so is a total government failure, and an irresponisble neglect of duties of all according ministers and Merkel herself. Nobody wnated to take the responsibility.

Merkel is facing consevatives in her own party organising and unifying, forming a new front against her left-leaning policy.

http://www.dw.com/en/merkel-and-the-...ght/a-38075019

Merkel has stayed in power for over a decade because whenever a poltila opponent showe dup, she annexed his agenda and made it her own. By that she now stands for all and nothing, for the only principle of that no principle shall come in her way. 100% opprtunism. Within her own poarty, all poltical heavy weights that at the beginning of her reign were not in line with here, have been mobbed out, promoted out of the way, frustrated until they voluntarily quite. The personnel pool of he rparty is comp0letely eroded, exhausted, empty. Which explaisn why the CDU is so desperately sticking to her - they have no alternatives anymore.

However, I think that Merkel will not win elections again this year. Which will give us the great ego of Martin Schultz, one of the worst left populists and agitators there are in Germany, and Europe. Unbearable.

So better Merkel? Unbearable as well. Mass migration that she channeled to Europe and Germany and her unwillingness to fulfill the constitutional duty of the govenrment to secure the borders - these two things have broken the people's loyalty for her. Plus a subjective feeling that she already is in office since 20 years. Germans grow tired of her.

It appears that her party claims to be under attack by the evill Russian hackers.

For the love of god, please, don't vote for SPD's Schulz! They should rename themselves to 'the lobbyists' minion party' or 'LMP' :timeout:

Are you trying to be sarcastic/ironic?
Because there is a rather big hacker/trolling activity, Kremlin controlled and fueled, so... Yeah, evil russian hackers indeed.

That is just fake news from the BND! ;) :D In alternative interpretation of reality, it is the Germans rigging the elections in Russia. And America. :yeah:

Do not call this evil, it is patriotic.
Be more positive.