I know that you like to play cynical and a man with a critical eye to the nonsense of politics. It should be quite easy to find the foreign policy goals and strategic interests of your own nation online. I have posted much of this before. If you do not understand how Ukraine is in Germany’s strategic interests and therefore of great importance to your nation geopolitically, let me know and I will be happy to provide you with the OFFICIAL statements of your own government. Believe them if you like, or continue to view this as the yap yapping of your politicians. That may make you feel happy but it ain’t the reality for most of your foreign-policy or military professionals. Angela Merkel understands that very well, though I doubt the Habermas-inspired Fischer ever did. I think that the Ideal Communication Discourse has addled the brains of most bien pensant Germans (hell other Europeans and even leftist Americans for that matter). If we could just understand, then we could have fruitful negotiations and all the world’s ills could be dialecticized (my invention) but with nations like Iran who understand this mindset, I don’t think you will get very far. Also, is a nuclear Iran not a threat to Germany? You can just laugh this off as yap yapping? Can you? Any other Germans care to agree? Rascal? Awfully silent these days aren’t we?
Says who? Given the track record of “official statements” and how they hold up to reality later on you will need a bit more than that to convince me about the “gloom and doom coming from the Urkraine”.
Or about “Die Renten sind sicher”. Or that multi-culturalism is THE way to go.
All official government statements in their times and according to your reasoning nothing but the truth, correct? What was your oppinion on the offical European statements about global warming and the Kyoto Protocols again?
Are you merely fearmongering or talking about what to do? After all, this started off with you claiming the U.S. does too much in comparison and that being not fair.
You read the article I linked to? What’s your alternate plan again?
No - I am not too concerned about Iran soon also having the bomb (if that). Scares me about as much as the Soviet Union having them back then, China having them now, North Korea flaunting them or Muslim Pakistan upping its arsenal.
Define multicultural to me. I think that we are using the word differently. My understanding is that it is saying all cultures are equal but given the overpropensity of the Western culture to dominate, more effort needs to be spent listening to narratives from the downtrodden masses of the Third World. I am against that. I am a believer in the Western Enlightenment and would like to see this extended to ALL people as it is a better form of government. I believe that all people and all races can benefit equally from this enlightened form of government liberal democracy along with capitalism. Those who suffer most are those who have the system of government or economy farthest from this ideal. I also happen to believe that the Western form of government and economy lead to the greatest peace and prosperity.
Clinton was the first baby boomer president. I don’t think the America of the baby boomer generation is the same as that of their parents and grandparents generations. It’s heart and soul different.
The same generational values switch has occurred – often subtly but still tectonically – in other cultures, Japan for instance.
The differences in values and policies between GB1’s presidency and GB2’s presidency highlights the generational shift in values. It would be interesting to know if the rumors are true that GB1 has issues with the direction his son is taking the country.
Yep. That describes the “official government statement” made for years in Germany (and elsewhere) pretty well. Not the exact wording of course, they come usually more long-winded.
And it is crap (my oppinion only of course).
And as this is not an isolated incident of “official government statements” turning out to be not much more than yap-yap-yap I think I will go on with what you call cynism and view them as hot air unless proven otherwise.
And there goes your:
Can you maybe offer an alternative source instead? If I remember right you wanted to stress the point that Germany has to up its defense spendings based on the Ukraine.
That’s now supposed to scare me? The vague mention of “urm … erm … maybe Russia rules the Ukraine again one day”? No mention by what means (economically? by coercion? by invasion? culturally?) and even less so how likely each such a scenario would be. Not the least either how from your vague idea then things would go on to threaten me.
Politically? Can we be any more vague? Economically by Russia and the Ukraine starting to notch up their union to something akin to the EU? That would be bad? That would be dangerous? Or military via conflict with Rumania / Poland / Hungaria / Slovakia & thus the NATO? That’s the worst case? How is that much different from the status quo where the same could happen via Estonia / Latvia / Lithuania & the NATO? Because of Moldova?
And of course again no mention of how likely or unlikely again any of these various unspecific scenarios would be.
You need to notch up the scaremongering a bit Fred. Being more specific would be a first step. Vague “what if” projections alone are a bit thin and most unimpressive.
How about another “what if” scenario?
What if the U.S. cuts back its security guarantee and world police business? Drop out of these rip-offs you allude to. All these contingencies on which the U.S. spends, spends, spends but does not really do for its own good, but just on other peoples behalf?
So far you only alluded to these unfair practices and handouts in a very general manner. Care to name any specific ones where the U.S. is suckered into paying for other’s interests instead for its own?
Nope. Not worth testing. Too vague, too unspecific, smacks of undefined scaremongering. You need to add a bit more of substance to your scenario.
