Wxman

My Grandfather was a battalion tank-commander during Operation Barbarossa. Soon after the surrender of Germany to Allied forces, the letters to Oma became more and more infrequent. Eventually no more letters arrived. There were no responses from the Soviet govenrment to formal diplomatic inquiries concerning my Grandfather's fate. In the early 60's, a Soviet diplomatic attache' rang my Grandmother's door, and when she answered asked if she was who she was. When she proved that affirmatively, the Soviet diplomatic attache' handed her a box, indicating that she was entitled to my Grandfather's personal-effects. He wished her a nice day and left.

To this day nobody knows what happened to him.

With respect to Britain being too weak, I post the following and allow one to draw their own conclusions:

Europe threatens action as Iran airs new 'confession'

EU foreign ministers support British position and warn of 'appropriate measures' if 15 sailors and marines not released

The EU threatened to act against Iran last night if it did not immediately and unconditionally release the 15 British sailors and marines it has been holding for more than a week.

EU foreign ministers meeting in Bremen, Germany, threatened "appropriate measures" if Tehran did not let the group go, supporting Britain's position that the crew had been in Iraqi waters when they were seized eight days ago. The ministers did not spell out what measures would be taken, but British diplomats hoped they would involve an escalating array of punitive steps.

EU refuses to back Britain over call to threaten exports freeze

European foreign ministers failed last night to back Britain in a threat to freeze the €14 14 billion trade in exports to Iran, as the hostage crisis descended into a propaganda circus.

Tony Blair could only issue a new statement of disgust as Iran tormented him with another sailor’s video confession and a fresh letter from the young mother detainee.

Evil Americans, Poor Mullahs

According to a recent Forsa public opinion poll, commissioned by Stern magazine, among young Germans in particular -- 57 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds, to be precise -- are said to consider the United States more dangerous than the religious regime in Iran.

Today, when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about a world without Israel while dreaming of an atom bomb, it seems obvious that we -- as Germans of all people -- should be putting two and two together. Why shouldn't Ahmadinejad mean what he says? But the Germans only know what they believe: Americans are more dangerous than the ayatollahs.

==============================

I posit that its not Britain, per se, that is weak, but the liberal PC mentality of the entire West in general, and its pontificating, grandstanding, progressive, welfare-state politiician leaders that are weak. If anybody has ever played CivIII, and had to deal with the various idiosynchracies of various forms of government knows full well that democracies and republics are notoriously difficult with respect to military campaigns. Is that a good or a bad thing? I posit that its both simultaneously. Is that good or bad? Again, I posit that it is both.

With respect to Britain being too weak, well, the social and societal issues notwithstanding (they not being entirely germane), and focusing entirely on the military variables of the equation: the modern status quo respecting warfare is such that its not military defeat that will be a nation's downfall, but that of financial ruin. Case in point the former Soviet Union.

Nevertheless it is becoming increasingly cost prohibitive to wage modern war. On the other hand, the financial implications to the alternative of military failure are just as ruinous. To the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, the prevailing convention of a standing army would've been anathema in their day. However, who could dispute the wisdom of having a small, well-trained, well-equiped standing army to address the threats that the modern world posses? However, the fact of the matter is that is becoming more and more expensive, and given most countries balance-sheets, almost cost prohibitive.

Albert Einstien once said: "I don't know about the next world-war, but the one after that will be fought with sticks and stones.".

I'll tell you this, if it ever comes to another "world war" akin to WWII, people will be in for the most rude awakening imaginable. Because both of the "great" wars of the XX'th century entailed great sacrifice and suffering. What does the West know about sacriifice and suffering on the scales of the Great War, or even the one that soon followed on its heels? The answer: nothing.

I heard it stated, firsthand, that if the North ever attacks the South, that the South would capitulate within 30 minutes. The reason being that the South would stand to lose far more respecting their way of life, and standard of living than the North. To drive this point home I point to anectdotal accounts of there being no stray animals running around in Europe after the end of WWII. Neither was there a large rodent problem (despite the devestation and carnage of urban, and rural food-producing areas).

All you have to do is look at nightime pictures of Hollywood, San Fran, London, Berlin, Paris. Images of Mega-lo-Mart's fully stocked food aisles, examine the TV schedule of broadcasts for the upcoming week (and correlate it with ratings statistics), take stock at the fervor and intensity of local, regional and international sporting events. And then take a look at the state of trees that can be found in the North (without any bark). Ever eat bark soup? Take a look at the standard of living of the majority in the largest populated countries on this planet.

What it boils down to is this: the people that have the financial wherewithall to wage war don't have the intestinal fortitude to do so; the one's that don't want to see those that can exterminated from the planet (and will use whatever means they can get their grubby paws onto to accomplish that end).

If the population of China was marched single file into the Pacific Ocean at marching pace until they drowned, the line would be double its length by the end of next century. If China knew for absolute fact that in any confrontation as little as 750,000 of their population would survive, they'd initiate action. That's one thing. On the other hand there is clear empirical data from the Soviet archives concerning the Cuban Missle Crises with respect to Che Guevera at the time when Cuba actually controlled nuclear weapons. As Castro's right hand man, Che was going to outright initiate a nuclear war that would necessitate Russia finishing it. When asked in the 70's why he'd do something that would no doubt have resulted in the total destruction of Cuba, he replied: "But the United States would've been absolutely annhiliated, and that's a price worth paying."