GER politics thread

[Skybird]

Here, a state-imposed government betrayal against its own population is being initiated, the extent of which is at least equal to that of the Euro catastrophe.


I remind you that the Greens have been a fundamentally Marxist-Maoist movement from the very beginning in the eighties - and have always remained so.
-------------------------------------


This climate policy risks social peace

The media response to Berlin's planned ban on fossil-fuel heating is great. And that's a good thing. Because at the same time, Brussels is also pushing ahead with its building directive. Owners and tenants should be aware of the decisive consequences both have for them.

A full 18 percent of German citizens think the planned ban on oil and gas heating from the beginning of 2024 is right, while 79 percent are against it, according to a survey by "Stern" magazine. Economics Minister Robert Habeck is looking to the public to counteract: with appeasements, new promises of support and moral appeals, he wants to make the coming heat pump republic palatable to the citizens. The fact that the draft bill for the building energy law of the traffic light government, which became public last week, could develop such a tremendous effective power, is good news.

After all, hardly any other topic will have such a drastic effect on the lives of people in Germany in the future as the plans of politicians to fight for climate targets for houses and apartments. With widespread media coverage, more and more citizens are now finding out what's in store for them - and how serious the government really is about transforming the building sector.

And that's not all. Because in addition to the plans at national level, Brussels is also working at full speed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the building sector with a view to the Paris climate targets.

Together, these two factors are exposing Germany's building stock - and its owners - to unprecedented pressure to change. In the name of climate protection, policymakers are massively encroaching on the most private thing people have: The four walls in which they live. And in a remarkable departure from its duty to provide for the public good, the state wants to shift implementation and responsibility for these plans onto citizens.

While the traffic light coalition is seeking air sovereignty over boiler rooms and wants to ban the installation of new oil and gas heating systems from January 1, 2024, the Brussels institutions are fine-tuning an amendment to the EU Buildings Directive (EPBD). According to this, residential buildings are to be brought up to at least European efficiency class E by 2030. Class D is then to be mandatory by 2033.

Promised subsidies would often only be a placebo


2033 - that's a whole ten years away. Of the roughly 16 million single- and two-family homes in Germany, more than half are currently in the lower efficiency classes E to H due to their energy condition. In order to bring these buildings up to the classes acceptable to the EU, massive investment is needed in facade insulation, windows, roofs and - see above - heating.

Even in Germany, the country with the strongest economy in the EU, many people will simply not be able to afford this. Inflation is hitting all areas of life and mercilessly narrowing financial leeway. In many cases, the promised subsidies are likely to be little more than a placebo. The owners of old buildings in particular have often got on in years together with their properties, have paid off their loans over decades - and are now, shortly before retirement, supposed to start all over again with them. Without any guarantee that the investment will actually pay off.

But even if they wanted to: Some of them would be refused a new loan by the banks anyway - they are often too old, and with the new energy efficiency requirements, their property naturally also loses value as collateral. What's more, all owners who bought their property with a low-interest loan and will have to take out follow-up financing in the next few years face a significant additional burden from debt servicing alone, given the rise in interest rates.

In other, poorer countries with much poorer building standards, the EU's plan is even more hopeless. There, however, people sometimes have a government that stands up for the interests of its citizens.

In Italy, for example, a broad alliance across party lines exerted such massive pressure on the responsible Irish MEP, Ciaran Cuffe (Greens), with the demand for a "balance between ambition and feasibility" that the entire project threatened to falter. Thus, the boot state wrested a number of exceptions from Brussels, together with Poland, and countries are also being given greater leeway for their national renovation plans.

Politicians fail to recognize the reality of people's lives

That this will be used differently in Italy than in Germany should not be too bold a prediction. Together with France, Germany would have preferred to push through the stricter version of the building directive - proof of the extent to which politicians misjudge, disregard and disregard the situation, the needs and the reality of people's lives. And thus jeopardizes trust in politics and social peace.

Of course, there are still people who believe that they will not be affected by the climate policy clampdown from Berlin and Brussels because they do not own any real estate. This is often a fallacy, because where rented houses and apartments are being compulsorily renovated, the owner will recoup his investment from the tenant through the rent.

In this way, politicians make many owners and tenants pay for a sacrifice in terms of prosperity that does not even benefit the climate - because the oil and gas that is no longer burned in Germany is then simply used for heating elsewhere. In any case, it will not remain unused in the ground, as there are too few imitators of the European way.

In the future, however, heat pumps will buzz in the front yards of German households and provide heat for the home, despite the uncertain and sometimes not at all green power supply. That's what the Greens want. It's a plan with a longer history than Robert Habeck's inaugural date as Minister of Economics and Climate Change would suggest.

Many will have to part with their homes

The goal he has set, for example, of reaching a stock of six million heat pumps in Germany by 2030, can already be found in a study by the so-called Agora Energiewende think tank from February 2017. The organization's director at the time was Patrick Graichen. Today, he is state secretary under Habeck.

Those who cannot afford to renovate their homes and say goodbye to fossil-fuel heating will also have to bow to the plan. They will have to part with their homes - and then become a burden on a rental housing market that is already hopelessly overloaded. Within just a few years, Germany's population has risen to 84 million, politicians are making no attempt to control further immigration, and the Construction Ministry is desperately trying to recapture the new construction target of 400,000 homes per year from the early days of the coalition, which now seems like something from another world. This collateral damage is also the responsibility of those who overburden citizens with their policies.

Green policy will have to adjust to headwinds

How will we be allowed to live and heat in the future? The fact that this question is suddenly getting space in the public debate is important. It puts pressure on politicians to pursue goals with a sense of proportion, to find a balance between desires and their feasibility, and to take people along with them in their actions. Disregarding their will and the reality of their lives, green policies, mandated by the will of 14.8 percent of the electorate, will hardly be sustainable for long.

A kind of warning sign may have just been observed in Frankfurt/Main: There, a Green Party candidate unexpectedly missed the runoff for mayor. She had entered the election campaign with one central theme: Making Frankfurt climate-neutral by 2035.

-----------------------------

And all this for - NOTHING. It will nto change anything regarding global climate. Absolutely nothing. These damages are initiated by ideologists politicians only to delay their own demasking.


Unfassbar. One of the many faces of madness. Remains of Nero burning down Rome.

[Catfish]

Where is the energy for the noisy heat pumps supposed to come from?
Solar cells? Not enough yield, especially not in regions far north or south of the equator.
Ah i forgot there are wall plugs, no need to think further

[Skybird]

Madness is a way too serious topic than to leave it to the ill. Leave the execution of lunacy to the experts:
------------------

Bureaucratic insanity: official wants to decommission intact howitzers for new guns

The Bundeswehr had handed over 14 howitzers to Ukraine. However, according to internal documents, the contract for the follow-up purchase only provides for the procurement of ten self-propelled howitzers in the first stage. Further howitzers can be procured in quantities of six howitzers each. So, from a purely legal point of view, the German government could buy the Bundeswehr four howitzers too few - or two too many.

According to internal documents, a top official in the ministry has now suggested in a submission to the House leadership that two more functioning howitzers be decommissioned so that 16 can then be purchased. He apparently got the green light for this from Armaments Secretary Benedikt Zimmer in a memo.

In response to an inquiry from Business Insider, a spokesman for the Defense Ministry claimed that the ministry was not considering such a move to decommission functioning systems in order to buy new ones. The Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information Technology and In-Service Support (BAAINBw), which is ultimately responsible for the implementation of the howitzer procurement, did not want to comment on the events when asked by Business Insider.

[Skybird]

From the Achse des Guten:
-------------------------------


The "energy transformation" is costing us our freedom

"Paris calls for concession," says the headline. It's about Germany blocking the ban on internal combustion vehicles. It is no wonder that the rulers in France want to push through the ban on internal combustion vehicles. Not only because they have plenty of electricity due to their nuclear power plants, but also because they hope that their carmakers will profit from it.

But that's not it alone, the EU also wants to enforce a compulsory renovation of houses. As part of the "Green Deal", facades are to be insulated, windows replaced and, for example, solar roofs installed throughout Europe in order to achieve a certain energy standard. However, the way it is being implemented puts German homeowners at a clear disadvantage:

"The Commission's draft stipulates that member states define those 15 percent of their buildings that are the worst insulated as Class G - i.e., the lowest category. The other houses and apartments are then to be distributed among the remaining classes F through A.

This is therefore a relative classification. The EU does not want to set rigid, Europe-wide target values, such as for energy consumption in kilowatt hours per square meter. Instead, the classes are based on the condition of other buildings in the respective country.

For countries like Italy, Spain and Greece, this is a great help. After all, the insulation there is often much worse than in Germany, for example, so the need for renovation is significantly higher. And it would be unrealistic to bring all the houses in Greece up to Class D by German standards in the next ten years.

For Germany, on the other hand, where a lot of renovation work has already been done, the relative classification is disadvantageous. This is because it means that those states that have made an effort in the past will now have to do even more. After all, their most inefficient 15 percent are already - comparatively - doing well."
Result: cold expropriation

Not only does this mean that those who have already made special efforts will be penalized for doing so, but this plan will result in cold expropriation. Those who cannot afford such costly renovations will have to sell their homes, but will hardly get anything in return because of these regulations. The home of one's own as an old-age security and retirement home - the dream is shattered. Incidentally, this is also a bitter loss for the generation of heirs, and in a country where private wealth is already lower than in other EU countries. "Wealth shock: Germans are the poor sausages of the EU," was the title of one article that pointed out that citizens in most EU countries have more than twice as much wealth as in this country.

Germany does not need external enemies, we are doing away with ourselves. Putin and Xi just need a little patience with our politicians and the EU, and their calculations will work out. One can't help but wonder what business connections there are. Many people profit from and with the Greens, not only NGOs.

China should be pleased. Its plans to expand and become the dominant world power will be furthered by this. It is well known that the West is dependent on China for semiconductors. The West has transferred its know-how to China, has accepted the unspeakable conditions of China's CP for "the quick mark" and now stands there empty-handed. Stupidity that hurts.
No energy turnaround without rare earths

But it's not just semiconductors, the issue of "rare earths" is just as important.

"Without the 'rare earths' and strategic metals, there is unlikely to be any chance of the energy transition, the automotive transition to electric cars would also have to fail and the entire industry would not be able to manufacture its core products."

One could now enumerate where lithium, molybdenum, titanium, cobalt, tungsten, manganese, gallium, chromium, tantalum, germanium and indium are used, but one can also simply put it all in a nutshell: The "energy turnaround" depends crucially on "rare earths", without them no e-cars, wind power and solar plants and much more.

And who has "rare earths"?

"In the case of 'rare earths,' for example, the 'U.S. Geological Survey' in 2020 already indicated that China has a global share of 37 percent of the reserves, Vietnam is second at 18 percent, Brazil at the same 18 percent, Russia at 10 percent, India at 6 percent, Australia at 3 percent, Greenland and the U.S. at 1 percent, and the remaining countries at 6 percent."

So anyone who pushes the energy transition is driving us directly into the arms of China and ultimately Russia. This counteracts all necessary efforts at strategic independence from the states that are fighting a rights-based, free world order.

There is only one way: Either the free West fights for its way of life or there is the "energy transition". Both at the same time is not possible, the goals are mutually exclusive.
--------------------------


It only makes no sense as long as one sticks to the idea that they want to defend liberty, competing market economy and burgoise humanistic society. The moment you realise that it is the intention to destroy these three things you see that the plan by which to achieve these objectives makes perfect sense.



Marx slobbers in his grave.

[Skybird]

Presentation of the annual report of the Commissioner for the Armed Forces. As usual: sobering.

https://www-focus-de.translate.goog/..._x_tr_pto=wapp

[Skybird]

End of this month Germany will switch off its last three nuclear powerplants. Because their power is not needed and there is capacity enough, the government has started to reactivate additonal new coal powerplants - additional to those coal plants that got reactivated already over the past 12 months. They also mull the reactivation of oil powerplants. This is because we have power enough, and electricity from the nuclear plants is not needed, and coal and oil is so much cleaner than nuclear power, which in itself is not only a technology, but a high risk technology. Freak out, please.

An association of the German industry and businesses, i forgot which one it was, some days ago published a study, and it was a quite extensive examination of the trends in electricity demands and supplies over the next 7 years. Considering the elctrification, the plans for homes and heating and e-mobility, assuming that there will be no construction limitations due to material shortages (shall we say thats very optimistic?!) , they calculated that in 2030 Germany will have a deficit in electricity supply of minimum 30 GW, that is roughly the equivalent of 25-30 nuclear powerplants (a typical german medium-sized plant like Lingen--Emsland had a capacity of 1400 MW). This illustrates that these three nuclear powerplants, which are an extremely dangerous and existence-threatening high risk technology, mind you, are not needed. You now may freak out again at the risks of nuclear energy, if you want.

Also, the drugstores report steady supplies of tea lights. So what could go wrong?

[Skybird]

https://unbesorgt-de.translate.goog/..._x_tr_pto=wapp

Only when you have shut down the last burner, dismantled the last gas heater and the last fuel oil tank is empty, will you realize that fine dust from wood and coal stoves is the least of your problems. They're not the problem, they're a symptom. The symptom of a country's energetic and economic impoverishment. And environmental awareness, environmental protection and the responsible use of resources is a state of mind that only sets in when people can lift their noses out of the furrow of their daily struggle for existence. Increasing the pressure to the point where people are forced back into this rut not only leads directly to economic catastrophe, but also to ecological one.

[Rockstar]

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann: "On Russian tanks it says 'to Berlin'. And Kadyrov threatens to occupy East Germany"

Defense is the central issue of the next generation, says German defense politician Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann. She sees Germany's long hesitation in arms deliveries as a mistake, and she criticizes Switzerland's lack of cooperation.

Claudia Schwartz, Benedict Neff
146 comments
03/17/2023, 5:30 a.m.

https://www.nzz.ch/feuilleton/marie-...17&mktcid=smch

Google translate

Ms. Strack-Zimmermann, is Germany actually experiencing a turning point, or is this a major political phrase?

The turn of the century works, albeit slowly. The fact alone proves that we talk publicly about the Russian war of aggression every day, that it is worth a headline when we discuss the ammunition issue in the EU, which would not have really interested or alarmed anyone months ago. Also the Chancellor's speech in the Bundestag on the occasion of the anniversary of the Russian attack on the 24th. February and the form, as he almost of course spoke of the delivery of the tank to Ukraine, would have been unthinkable months ago. At best, it would have been discussed once again that the Bundeswehr should be strengthened.

However, the sudden turnaround also has something strange: when, for example, the Green politician Anton Hofreiter, who was in the reputation of a pacifist, now suddenly talks fluently about all weapon systems.

The clear announcement also by the Greens to supply Ukraine with weapons without restriction surprised many and would have been unimaginable a year ago. However, I find it at least as remarkable that their base and their voters obviously fully support this.

Germany hesitated for a long time to supply Ukraine with substantial weapons. Is politics really more determined now?

This hesitation and waiting was a big mistake. The Federal Republic should have reacted much faster. If Leopard tanks had stood in eastern Ukraine in time, the military situation today would be different. Tragically, too much time has gone into the country. In the meantime, we have a new defense minister who brings movement into the system. As a Social Democrat, he also picks up people who have so far had little to no connection to the Bundeswehr and have recently refused the use and supply of weapons. A conservative government would not have succeeded in doing that

Why?

A conservative chancellor would have triggered significantly more resistance per se in certain circles, no matter what he would have decided.

The Ukrainians defend their country and receive the support of most German politicians. Is the relationship with the nation-state changing in Germany in general?

Through the dramatic images that we get to see every day from Ukraine, and the perception of how bravely the Ukrainians defend their homeland, it is clearly shown to all of us what it means when a large country like Russia mercilessly questions the integrity of its neighbor. Defending one's own homeland accordingly is just a value in itself. We Germans are very inclined to react to challenges either euphorically or completely contradictory, with great horror and fear. Due to their own past, it took the Germans a long time to accept their nation. In Germany, we have succeeded in working through our own history over generations. This has particularly shaped my generation and taught us that it is of great importance to be part of a strong community. Specifically as part of the EU and a member of NATO.

Is the war in Germany also growing awareness that you need a defensive nation-state yourself?

I very much hope that it dawns on most people that a peaceful life in freedom and democracy is not given to God, but must always be cherished and cared for and defended in an emergency. Many people in Germany probably believed that after the fall of the Wall and the end of the Cold War, we could live safely and unscathed in the heart of Europe, surrounded by friendly states. At the latest with the Russian attack, it should have become clear that we are also exposed to the aggression of Russia. On Russian tanks it says "after Berlin", and the Chechen president and Moscow's ally Kadyrov openly threatens with the occupation of East Germany. It must be clear to all of us: Never before has there been such a long phase of peace in world history as in Europe since 1945 until today. We should not be naive, such a phase can always come to an end. This does not mean that we should be anxious or even hysterical. However, we should already be defensive, defensive and able to defend ourselves.

You once said that the Bundeswehr needs an "enemy image" and that is Russia. Why does the German army need a concrete enemy?

With this statement, I have once again made a lot of friends . . . We should be aware of the dangers to which we are exposed. The free Western world is confronted today with the fact that there are brutal autocrats whose declared goal is to fight democracy: economically, socially, unfortunately also militarily. These can be attacks of a conventional nature, but also cyber attacks or also targeted destabilization of democracy from within. Fake news is spread on the net every day in order to destabilize society. It is obvious that the language on the net has radicalized massively. This was already clearly visible during the pandemic, and it has continued since Russia's attack on Ukraine.

Do you think Corona has pushed ahead with the brutalization?

The fear of the virus, the associated restrictions in everyday life and, as a result, social isolation, all this has consequences that we will have to live with for a long time. It is also no coincidence that Putin launched the attack on Ukraine just in 2022.

This means that Putin expected less resistance in the face of a Western society weakened by Corona?

Putin obviously expected a weakened Western society, which was more concerned with itself and which has already hardly reacted to the annexation of Crimea and the first attack on Donbass in 2014. Even understanding was expressed for Russia's actions: Well, you have to understand that the Russians wanted to have guaranteed access to their own Black Sea fleet. Such explanations were disturbing. By the way, Corona has strategically brought many setbacks to the West. Problems that were believed to be under control broke out again. For example, in northern Iraq, where terrorism had been successfully fought, IS was able to record success again because Western soldiers could not be de facto present due to Corona. Terror has also taken advantage of the weakness of the West. By the way, Putin reports that he also withdrew in the pandemic for fear of the virus and radicalized even more.

The Swiss War Materials Act prohibits countries such as Germany from re-exporting weapons acquired in Switzerland. As chairman of the Defense Committee in the Bundestag, how do you assess Switzerland's position?

It is not for me to explain to Switzerland what to do. But the question arises: What to do? In Switzerland, ammunition is produced on a large scale, including for the German fighter planes Tornado and Eurofighter, for the Mantis air defense system and for the anti-aircraft gun tank Gepard, which is currently in use in Ukraine, among other things, to protect the port of Odessa from Russian air attacks. Grain is exported worldwide from Odessa. There are 190 million people depending on it. In order to carry out at least a fraction of this, Germany has asked Switzerland for permission to export the ammunition already stored with us to Ukraine. Switzerland's no has raised the question in Germany of how reliable the supply chain of urgently needed ammunition will be in the future if Switzerland itself does not deliver in defense of food exports.

What consequences do Germany and NATO draw from this?

Of course, we have to accept the Swiss attitude. But let's think ahead and assume that the Baltic States would be attacked by Russia, Germany would defend Lithuania as a NATO state, and Switzerland would also declare in this case that it does not want to deliver ammunition to a crisis area. The answer is obvious. In the future, the ammunition should be purchased exclusively in NATO states or produced directly in Germany. And that's exactly what's happening now. In a few months, the cheetah ammunition will be produced in Germany. We make ourselves independent and can react immediately in the event of a crisis.

Why did you actually specialize in defense policy when you were first elected to the Bundestag in 2017? At that time, this was a completely unpopular topic in Germany.

I have already dealt intensively with security policy in my political studies and have never been able to fully understand why we no longer care about the security of the country in Germany. It was therefore clear to me that if we should return to the Bundestag, I would like to make a security policy. Thankfully, the FDP group has allowed this, probably also in the assumption that no one would really be interested in the topic.

It turned out differently.

After the Bundestag election in December 2021, the FDP took over the chairmanship of the Defense Committee. I was elected chairman. 72 days later, Russia attacked Ukraine. The rest is history, also that this committee then received this media attention.

You don't like the exposed at all?

If you go into politics and don't want to be noticed with your work, you missed the job. But the attention that is now being paid to my work has indeed taken on a different dimension.

We have read how you are characterized in this way.

Oh, now I'll get the warm jacket out . . .

They have already been described as "the woman who confuses the republic", as the "clear writer", the "strong large caliber of the FDP", the "lintenweib", the "caughty" or "the woman because of whom the party leader can no longer sleep at night".

I like "Rauflustig". That corresponds to my Rhenish temperament. I'm fighting, but to make that clear, not because of the fight. I'm all about it, and yes, I'm passionate about that. The Chancellery actually accused me that I would make a "business model" of criticizing the chancellor. I find that frankly almost cynical. We discuss for months how we can help Ukraine, which is struggling for survival, and a subaltern has nothing better to do than to worry less about the content than about the form of discussion. The turn of the century means not only having a strong Bundeswehr, taking significantly more money into your hands, but also that the situation we are in is also in the head. To pretend that all this does not concern us or that the political world continues to turn unchanged is dangerously naive.

Have you changed these last few months?

I sleep too little . . . But my family and friends would hopefully tell me that, because that would be terrible.

Have you already made education and health policy as aggressive as you are now doing defence policy?

Being confronted with a war is literally a particularly serious and brutal issue. But I would say that I have always done politics like that. I was active for many years, among other things, in the urban planning committee in the Council of the City of Düsseldorf. When I walked through Zurich today, I thought to myself: Why does the city of Zurich actually allow a multi-lane road to run across the city and directly along the lake. That almost screams for a city tunnel. The cars belong underground, the surface belongs to the people. The city is approaching the lake.

With the left-green-dominated Zurich government, you run into open doors.

We implemented it in exactly the same way in Düsseldorf. We have laid the main roads in the city center underground. You can't even imagine the quality of stay there. Imagine Zurich is located directly at the lake. Wouldn't that be great?

Now you dodge a bit, we wanted to talk about your person.

I didn't want to distract. But talking about yourself is kind of strange. Through my work, I am currently very exposed in public and trigger clear feelings, sympathy, but also blatant rejection.

Their strong commitment to Ukraine is polarizing, especially in the peace movement. Do you particularly like a woman?

Women are approached particularly harshly in public. But maybe we also react to primitive and stupid sayings more sensitively than our colleagues. What is certain, however, is that there are still people who still do not stick to women on certain political issues. We have many experts in the Bundeswehr, in foreign policy and in security policy. The public broadcasters in Germany have the requirement that not only men should sit in the talk shows. So now we realize: Wow, there are really good women.

Does that mean that the women's quota is of some use?

I'm not a friend of the quota. But what cannot be: that we talk about socio-politically relevant topics and discuss only men except the moderator.

The CDU decided on the women's quota last year, the young women rather rejected it, the women over fifty like Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer or Julia Klöckner voted for it. Apparently they think it is not possible without a quota. What does the FDP look like?

This is also being discussed by the Free Democrats. If not about the quota, then increasingly about a self-commitment to consider men and women equally, especially when setting up the list in view of upcoming elections. At the base, the voices are getting louder in this regard. I welcome that.

Her parents were in the CDU. Why did you choose the FDP?

The Women's Union approached me as a young woman. But the image of women in the Union was not mine. I was just brought up differently. My father attached great importance to the fact that you can feed yourself as a woman and not make yourself dependent on your husband. There are certain similarities in economic and defense policy with the CDU, but a lot separates us socio-politically.

In Switzerland, independence, self-responsibility, freedom are terms for the community. In Germany, equality, justice, community are the more dominant coordinates. Can the FDP shake up this basic consensus at all, or is it hopeless?

Being a free democrat has never been easy in Germany. There has never been a liberal mainstream. We have never been a party that moves the masses, because Germany is structurally a very conservative country. And yet there is a great liberal potential for us.

However, the German model says: If there are problems, one looks at the state expectantly. The FDP is crooked in the political landscape.

They can't always call for the state only when it gets difficult. The state can set a legal framework in which we move freely. He can have a social effect, but he will never be able to completely compensate for personal risks. We may stand in the way of some state authorities, but we are not crooked. We have a very strong medium-sized company, phenomenal company. Maintaining this means being open to technology and not rigidly serving everything.

Let's come back to the discussion about arms deliveries to Ukraine. In your lecture in Zurich, you distanced yourself severely from Alice Schwarzer because of her pacifist manifesto, with which intellectuals call for negotiations. Is the icon Schwarzer just falling itself off the pedestal?

Alice Schwarzer was an icon for us women, detached from their political attitude. She has done an incredible amount for the women. This makes it all the more unimaginable that she in particular ignores the suffering of the raped women in Ukraine and does not even address it during demonstrations. She betrays her own values.

You also talked about this at your lecture in Zurich: What happens to women in Ukraine?

I don't know if there is an increase in perversity. Ukrainian women have told me that the hands of the women who are raped by Russian soldiers are broken beforehand so that they cannot defend themselves. I heard from a Ukrainian soldier how he lost many comrades in Irpin while trying to save children. They had been placed on the bodies of the raped and killed mothers and then put explosive traps. Where is Mrs. Schwarzer? I don't just expect an outcry from her.

Don't demonstrations for peace also have their justification?

Dreaming of peace is honorable. But we just have to be aware: Vladimir Putin's on this earth is not interested in this. Defensiveness is the central theme of the next generation. If we can't manage to defend ourselves, then God's grace.

Vertical starter in the Bundestag
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (65) studied journalism, political science and German studies and worked for a long time in publishing. From 2008 to 2014, she was the first mayor of the NRW state capital Düsseldorf. Since 2017, she has been a member of the German Bundestag and has made a vertical start here; since 2021 chairman of the Defense Committee of the German Bundestag. She is a member of the FDP Federal Executive Board and the Executive Board of the FDP parliamentary group. Strack-Zimmermann is married and has three adult children. The interview took place as part of a lecture by Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann at the University of Zurich at the invitation of the Swiss Institute for International Research (Siaf).

[Skybird]

https://think-again.org/deutschland-ein-trauerfall/
-----------------------------------



GERMANY - A BEREAVEMENT

Even if our rulers suddenly had the best intentions for the German people, if they suddenly made a political 180° turn - they would not be remotely capable of implementing them. After all, they had not even been able to learn a decent trade or complete a degree. How were they now going to solve the challenging political problems where integrity, intelligence, discipline and enormous general knowledge are required? At best, they would make a 360-degree turnaround.

The dictionary translates "sober" as "sober," but that doesn't do the English vocabulary justice. Not everyone with zero alcohol in their blood is "sober." It includes seriousness, calmness and respect for the importance of the moment.

The other day I was talking to an acquaintance via Skype, and immediately I noticed that he was highly "sober." His facial expressions, his choice of words, his posture and even his clothing were full of the aforementioned seriousness, calmness and respect for the importance of the moment.

I wanted to know, "what's wrong with you," but he didn't understand my question. He was not aware of his state of mind. In the course of the conversation, however, it became clear what had happened: there had been a bereavement in the family.

He and his wife had been tossing around the idea of emigrating from Germany to the U.S. for some time, but had only half-heartedly pursued the plan so far. Nostalgia kept coming up, memories of the dear neighborhood, the landscape, the culture and the history of Germany. This made them hesitate to take the decisive step. And they felt responsible; they did not want to abandon their homeland.

Yes, they knew, of course, that politics in the country was in a desolate state, and that the green mania would stop at nothing, but they secretly hoped for a kind of peaceful revolution; for a reasonable majority of the population to become aware of this disastrous political course, and for a return to reason. But this illusion was shattered by a trivial experience.

The two had visited an art-house cinema in a nearby provincial town, where a film about the hard life in one of the world's slums was being shown. Before the screening began, however, the equal opportunity commissioner of this very provincial town appeared on stage and enlightened the audience about the oppression of women, in particular about the fact that, according to the calculations of the World Economic Forum, real equality would only be achieved in 134 years if things continued as slowly as before.

Now this was too much bull**** for my acquaintance and his wife, they looked at each other shaking their heads and uttering sounds of disapproval. But they were the only ones. The rest of the audience gave restrained applause, not a single boo came from the auditorium. And now the two knew there could be no hope. If the worst politically correct garbage is allowed to be emptied over the heads of society without the slightest objection, then the future is lost.

The Germany of yesterday, which they knew and loved, no longer existed from that moment on. The beloved homeland had died for them at that moment. And after this very bereavement, a state of mind of seriousness, calmness and respect for the importance of the moment spontaneously set in. The two of them had said goodbye, goodbye to the world of yesterday, and the path to the future suddenly lay clearly before them.

It hurt, of course, to accept that the current generation was ignoring the unique cultural legacies of Hegel and Heisenberg, Wagner and Weber, Straßmann and Schnitzler; that they were wantonly trampling on the legacy of the economic miracle brought about by founders and pioneers; and that they dare to deface Germany's uniquely beautiful meadows, forests and floodplains on a large scale with useless technology.

It had also become clear to my acquaintances, however, that even if those in power were suddenly to change their minds, if they wanted to act with the best of intentions for the German people, if they wanted to realize a political 180° turnaround - they would not be remotely capable of doing so. After all, they had not even been able to learn a decent profession or complete a degree. How were they going to lead a sophisticated political renaissance now, where integrity, intelligence, discipline and enormous general knowledge were required? At best, they would make a 360° turnaround.

In any case, we wish our emigrants the very best in the new world.
-----------------------

[Skybird]

This post first appeared on Birgit Kelle's Facebook page:




A German court is currently making it a punishable offense to speak the truth - namely, to refer to a biological male as a man. We are no longer talking about funny "gendergaga", but a massive attack on women's rights and freedom of expression that affects us all.

In case anyone still hasn't understood why trans politics in this form must not only be criticized, but stopped: We are no longer talking about funny "gendergaga", but a massive attack on women's rights and freedom of expression that affects all of us:

"In a decision dated March 17, 2023, the Press Chamber of the Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main prohibited Rome Medien GmbH and its author Judith Sevinç Basad from referring to the journalist Janka Kluge as a 'man' in a published article. For the first time a regional court forbids thereby in the way of a provisional order the Mis-gendering of a trans woman , writes Dr. Jasper Prigge, the attorney Janka Kluges, on its Blog.

And adds:

"The publishing company led by ex-BILD editor-in-chief Julian Reichelt had published a post on the blog 'Pleiteticker.de' for which it was responsible, in which our client was criticized. In the post, our client was first referred to as a 'transwoman,' then 'biological man,' and towards the end only as a 'man.'"

A German court currently criminalizes speaking the truth. It is forbidden to point out a fact and is subject to a six-figure fine if repeated. In this logic, to give an example, it is a criminal offense to point out that "Tessa" Ganserer is on a women's seat ticket for the Green Party in the German Bundestag, even though he is a man and named Markus. These are facts, which he himself confirms, his real name stood nevertheless also correctly and officially exactly in such a way on the ballot paper.

This is exactly the evil face of transpolitics. Our government wants to raise exactly this to the new standard in Germany with the now planned self-determination law and the associated "deadnaming" ban (the naming of the original first name of a gender-reassigned person, editor's note).

Our "Queer" commissioner, whom we all pay for with our tax money, Sven Lehmann, wants to introduce exactly such laws. Offenses and dissenting opinions are already registered as "transphobia" or even as "antifeminism" at the state-funded registration offices in NRW and at the Amadeu Antonio Foundation as of now.

We register non-crimes of non-offenders in order to pillory them for non-crimes. This is the preliminary stage.

Once the law is in place, you will all be in court. We will then all find ourselves in court if we still point out that being a woman is not a matter of imagination and a trans woman is simply a biological man. Lies will then become law and truth a crime.

And to enlighten all those who are now hyperventilating at the drop of a hat and already reporting this posting: Very well I support the protection of real transwomen and respectful treatment. At the same time, the issue of facts is non-negotiable, we must protect the rights of bio-women in shelters, sports and locker rooms just as much without ifs and buts, and respect is not a one-way street either, by the way.



Anyone remember George Orwell, 1984: "Black and White"...?

The time for laughing about Genderism and such things is over. Now it becomes threatening and dangerously real. Mind you: this is valid law in germany now, since some time already. This is valid law. It was thgre atened for some years, and now the hread has been turne dinto reality. The penalties for ignoring it, are obscenely high, macking mockery of robbery, assault, rape and such. The mind terror gets enforced with maximum brute force by the state which has completely lost all its senses, has become completely insane.

Really, I cannot laugh anymore at all. The laughter got stuck in my throat already a long time ago.

This country more and moree turns into a mental landfill.

[Skybird]

A newly published book takes a dim view of the German socialists' Russia policy and describes Gerhard Schröder's environment as downright conspiratorially pro-Russian.

https://www.nzz.ch/feuilleton/gerhar...&_x_tr_sl=auto

Reading the «Moscow Connection» leaves you breathless. As a Swiss reader, you have to ask yourself whether you actually ever knew your neighbors; as a German reader, one wonders in which country one has lived so far.

https://www.amazon.de/Die-Moskau-Con...ps%2C78&sr=8-1

And with the same destructive, incorrigible and blase self-confidence, they are now driving the economy and the German bourgeoisie head-on into the wall at top speed - just like that.

[Skybird]

It is a realistic scenario that the Bundeswehr will go bankrupt in 2 years.

https://www.nzz.ch/international/bun...&_x_tr_sl=auto

And the exodus of frustrated soldiers who are "fed up with the Saftladen" is accelerating rapidly.

And since the Ukraine war, the dropout rate of recruits has increased dramatically. They suddenly get reminded of the nature of what is expected of soldiers to do. And that is not drilling waterholes for the regional population in the third world and repairing bridges in villages and painting the walls in village schools and protecting the locals' market place on the other side of the planet, but to fight in wars.

The article says that 30 days of war like in Ukraine would cost the BW ammuntiioon nworth 30-40 billion Euros. The reserves are gone, the magoziones int he bunkers als practically empty. The Bundeswehr plans to buy ammunition worth 1.5 billion. Do the math yourself.

If I were NATO, I woudl get rid of the Germa ns as fast as possible, they are like a millstone around everyone else's neck. Other nations may fail in their military obligations as well, but in no other case the failure counts as heavy as in the Germans' case.

But what else to expect of a country that is mad enough to kill its last running nuclear reactors in the midst of an energy crisis and uncertain future of electricity production and "energy transformation"? Or should I better say "transformation of the laws of physics"?

[Jimbuna]

You have to register for free to read on.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

You have to register for free to read on.

Strange, in Germany you must not. And it is a Swiss newspaper, not a German one. Think I must then stop to refere to the NZZ. Thats a loss, its one of the few remaining best newspapers we have in German-speaking Europe, and probably Europe in general. As Helmut Schmidt once put it: "Why should I read the daily breafings of the Bundesnachrichtendiest if I could spend the same time better with reading the NZZ?"
----------------

A special fund of 100 billion euros, a current defense budget of 50 billion euros, and yet the German armed forces are threatened with running out of money in two years. How can that be?

The Norwegian Arctic, German soldiers in white uniforms skiing and snowmobiling through the snow, assault rifle in front of their chests, backpacks on their backs. Mountain troops from Bavaria, "extreme terrain and extreme weather are their daily business," says an off-screen voice. "With this knowledge, the Gebirgsjäger troop also positions itself strongly for long-term national and alliance defense."

Then the video ends, a Bundeswehr promotional film taken last winter of the "Ice Crystal 2022" exercise. It shows German soldiers training in ice and snow in temperatures as low as minus 30 degrees. That was before the Russian attack on Ukraine. Since then, Berlin has been committed to making the Bundeswehr operational again in order to be able to defend Germany and NATO territory against an attack.

To this end, the troops should be given everything they need. This is what Chancellor Olaf Scholz said in his "turn of the times" speech at the end of February last year. A special fund of 100 billion euros and an annual defense budget of 50 billion - after the social budget, Germany spends more money on nothing else than on its defense.

No exercise should fail any more for lack of funds, former Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht had said. But when the German Army wanted to send the mountain troops to Norway again this winter, financial planners shook their heads. "Ice Crystal 2023" took place without the Germans. The reason: no money.

One could overlook this, could say that it was, after all, only a single exercise. But the cancellation of "Eiskristall 2023" may be just the harbinger of what Andreas Schwarz, budget and defense expert for the Social Democrats, describes as follows: "If we don't massively increase the defense budget, things will soon look bleak for the Bundeswehr."

Schwarz is not just anyone. He is responsible for the defense budget for the chancellor's party. He is a powerful man. His counterpart in the opposition is Ingo Gädechens. He and Schwarz are rivals. But in this case, the Christian Democrat and the Social Democrat are on the same page. "If it stays with the current financial planning, the Bundeswehr will soon be broke," Gädechens says.

100 billion in special assets, 50 billion in the defense budget, and the Bundeswehr will soon be broke? To explain this, you have to look at what the Bundeswehr spends all that money on.

First of all, there is the special fund, 100 billion euros, financed by debt. It is supposed to be used to buy urgently needed weapons and equipment. This includes new fighter jets (F-35), transport helicopters (Chinook), maritime reconnaissance aircraft (Poseidon), submarines, warships, armored personnel carriers, air defense systems, digital radios, all included in a list approved by the Bundestag last year.
Ammunition, which the Bundeswehr needs at least as badly, is largely not included.

When the government incurs debt, it has to pay interest. How high these will be was revealed by the Defense Ministry at an internal event in Bonn in January. There, a ministerial housekeeper said that interest of 13 billion euros could be expected over the years.

This means that there are not 100 billion euros in the special assets, but only 87 billion. Added to this is the high inflation. All in all, deductions from the special assets are so large that the procurement list adopted by the Bundestag last summer is now obsolete. Already at the end of last year, K130 corvettes and F126 frigates had to be removed from the list.

Now, according to NZZ information, the Defense Ministry is said to be considering removing the procurement of 15 Eurofighter ECRs from the special assets list as well. The aircraft are designed to jam the enemy's electronics and disable its radar sites. They would now have to be financed from the regular defense budget. But there they compete with other projects. In addition, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has already hinted at having to shift further projects from the special assets to the defense budget.

But that is unlikely to be possible. The defense budget in Germany this year is 50.1 billion euros. That is also a lot of money, much more than in most years since reunification. Nevertheless, only a small portion of this remains for the Bundeswehr to invest in new weapons, ammunition and equipment.

That's because just under half of the budget is spent on personnel and a third on day-to-day operations. Even from the rest, not everything remains for investments in new weapons, equipment and ammunition. Of this, for example, the expenditures for NATO must also be made.

All in all, this leaves around 7.8 billion euros for military procurement this year. That is 15.5 percent of the total defense budget. 1.1 billion euros of that will go toward buying new ammunition, a fraction of what the Bundeswehr just needed. Just to stockpile ammunition for 30 days of war, as required by NATO, the German armed forces budget between 30 and 40 billion euros. Their stockpiles are as good as empty.

The Bundeswehr is therefore in urgent need of significantly more money to invest in its equipment. But if the defense budget does not increase significantly in the next few years, it may soon no longer be able to invest any money at all from the current budget in new weapons, equipment and ammunition.
Andreas Schwarz of the Social Democrats assumes that this "catastrophe" will occur as early as 2025. Ingo Gädechens from the CDU/CSU takes a similar view.

There are three reasons for this.

The first reason is personnel costs. The Bundeswehr currently has 183,000 soldiers and 80,000 civilian employees. They are all public service employees. Employers and unions have been negotiating a new collective agreement for months. The employee side wants 10.5 percent more pay, while the public employers are offering 5. The mediation round is currently underway. Schwarz and Gädechens expect an agreement on 8 percent. This would result in an annual increase of about 1.5 billion euros in personnel spending by the Bundeswehr. Possible one-time payments have not yet been taken into account.

The second reason is the inflation rate. Whether the Bundeswehr is buying new weapons and ammunition or meat and potatoes, everything costs more money than in previous years.

The third reason seems paradoxical at first glance: It is the special assets. Tanks, guns, airplanes, helicopters, ships and boats - basically all the new equipment that the Bundeswehr will be getting in the coming years - mean that there is less and less money left in the defense budget for investment. The reason is the cost of maintaining these highly complex, high-maintenance weapons systems.

For example, the F-35 fighter aircraft costs 80,000 euros to fly a Eurofighter for one hour. Ingo Gädechens reckons that the cost of the F-35 will be significantly higher. He would have liked to find out how much from the Ministry of Defense. But the ministry is stonewalling. "The ministry says they first have to do a requirements analysis on the costs of using the aircraft," says Gädechens. For him, this is an unmistakable sign that the expenditure "will be extremely high.

With the new weapons from the special fund, it's like buying a car. While you used to be able to repair an old car yourself, today even minor damage to the bumper costs thousands of euros because dozens of sensors are installed there that are connected to the car's electronic and computer system.

The situation is similar for tanks, airplanes, ships and boats. The Bundeswehr can hardly repair its equipment itself. It has become far too complex. It needs industry to do it. Years ago, the industry said that in the future, it would not be the sale of a new weapon that would bring in the most money, but long-term maintenance and repair.

The Bundeswehr has more money than ever before, and yet it runs the risk of soon being unable to make any more investments from its current budget. This is because, if the defense budget remains unchanged, all additional spending on personnel and operating costs will be charged to the procurement budget.

Boris Pistorius, the German defense minister, recognized this shortly after taking office in January. Since then, a figure has been circulating:10 billion. According to Pistorius, that is the amount by which the defense budget would have to increase in the coming years, at least, in order to cope with the expected expenditures and at the same time be able to buy weapons and ammunition.

But at the moment, it doesn't look like that will happen. The federal government has not yet been able to agree on the key points for the 2023 budget and subsequent years. There are too many desires of the individual ministries, such as 12 billion euros for the basic child allowance, because of which other ministries would have to make savings.

Finance Minister Christian Lindner has made it clear on several occasions that there will be no new debts or tax increases with him. Only what the federal government takes in through taxes can be spent, he said. The amount of this is not yet known, the current tax estimate is not yet available.

Ingo Gädechens fears that Pistorius will get at most 3 billion euros more for 2024. Andreas Schwarz says that, according to his calculations, the Bundeswehr needs 10 billion more to avoid hitting the wall in two years. But actually, 70 billion euros a year would be needed in the long term to meet NATO's financial targets and thus become fully operational again.

An army has value when it has well-trained and motivated soldiers, modern equipment and sufficient ammunition. Recently, a senior officer wrote on Twitter that many young soldiers leave the Bundeswehr not because of hard training, but because of the lack of material. They are frustrated, he said, because they were promised modern equipment that does not exist.

There is one piece of good news, however. The Army announced that the mountain troops would again participate in the "Ice Crystal" exercise next year. It would again be in the exercise calendar as usual, it said.

[Skybird]

https://www-focus-de.translate.goog/..._x_tr_pto=wapp

Gunther Kegel, successful manager and president of the electrical engineering association ZVEI, has now warned in “Die Welt” of dangerous de-industrialization. His prognosis is bleak: "Hardly any new factories are being built, not enough is being invested in existing ones, and with the sharp rise in energy prices caused by the war, many companies from the energy-intensive sectors are now threatening to quickly depart." When large corporations partially relocate their production abroad, this inevitably affects medium-sized suppliers and service providers as well. The ZVEI President therefore fears the loss of particularly well-paid jobs that require insurance and thus a “massive loss of prosperity”. Without explicitly naming the Greens, Kegel speaks of “forces that are even happy about this and want to destroy individual branches of industry in order to create something new and want to accelerate the necessary transformation towards climate neutrality in a way that is almost impossible to achieve. These are ideological world saviors who want to show and demonstrate to the whole world what industry should look like in the future.”
(...)

The picture that the association president paints of Germany as a location is gloomy, but not unrealistic. Because the signs of creeping deindustrialization are unmistakable. The Volkswagen Group is building a production facility for electric vehicles in the USA for two billion dollars. The chemical group BASF is relocating parts of its production abroad [and massively to China, Skybird]. Bayer is expanding its pharmaceutical research – in the USA. The vaccine pioneer Biontech, one of the great success stories of recent years, has chosen Great Britain as the location for expanding cancer research. And and and …