Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

End of French-Dominated Europe in Sight?
Forbes ^ | December 24, 2003 | Paul Johnson

Posted on 12/24/2003 8:00:21 PM PST by Shermy

American policymakers should now proceed on the long-term assumption that a European superstate, with a common foreign and military policy, is not going to emerge. The collapse of the constitution conference and talk of a "two-tier" EU means unity has been abandoned. The joint decision of the French and German governments to destroy the stability pact that underpins the common currency must, in the end, mean the destruction of the euro as well. Smaller countries, such as Portugal and the Netherlands, have endured considerable economic pain in order to hold to the rules or have been massively fined for minute infractions.

Now the two biggest EU powers have engaged in a joint conspiracy to not only break the rules but also insist that in their cases the stability pact does not apply. At a stroke this kills the egalitarian basis on which the EU is supposedly founded. It echoes George Orwell's sinister tale Animal Farm about the evil pigs: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." France and Germany have emerged as the big bullies, the lawless thugs that terrorize the European street--as, of course, they have done in the past. France, under Louis XIV and Napoleon, and Germany, under Bismarck, the Kaiser and Hitler, were guilty of greedy wars of aggression, causing the smaller countries of Europe repeated suffering. Now, at the bidding of the Paris-Berlin axis, these countries are to suffer yet again.

Corrupted by Lawless Paris

But there are differences. France is undoubtedly the senior partner in this fraud. President Jacques Chirac has long regarded France as being above the EU's rules and has authorized blatant defiance of them on a score of occasions. Germany, on the other hand, being a law-abiding nation except when under control of a monster, has been punctilious in keeping the rules up to now.

Unfortunately for the French, Germany, now that it has been unleashed from moral restraints, is unlikely to end its defiance with the stability pact. There is rising resentment among Germans that their country is by far the largest net provider of EU funds, while France, though rich, is one of the largest recipients, through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the most generally hated institution in the union.

The Germans are feeling the pain of a stagnant economy, an overvalued euro, actual recession in many sectors and a dramatic collapse in East German property values. A number of German banks are technically insolvent, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to borrow the money necessary to keep German industry up to date. Given these circumstances, Germany's funding of the EU makes no sense to the German taxpayers or to the politicians who represent them. Now that Germany has blatantly broken the rules over the stability pact, what is to prevent it from reneging on EU payments? Nothing.

Coming Unstuck

If Germany cuts off its funds, various EU doles that hold the union together--not least of which is the CAP--will become bankrupt. The CAP was France's original economic reason for creating the EU. Without it, the smoldering rage of French farmers may well burst through the thin crust of France's pseudodemocracy, encouraging other disaffected groups (which are legion) to take to the streets, roads and harbors--possibly to be joined by France's Muslims, who now constitute close to 10% of the population and are huddled in poverty in slums on the edges of France's cities.

I've always maintained that the moment France finds theEU to be no longer of use, it will break it up. A German revolt against the payments system could provide that moment. Hostility to the EU is rising in France anyway, to the point where no referendum on the proposed EU constitution can be held there for fear it would be voted down heavily.

U.S. policymakers' aims should be to forge close links with in-dividual countries that have strong common interests with America in wide areas of policy. Such nations include Britain, obviously (though not Ireland, which is sure to do the opposite of anything Britain does), Spain and Italy. The latter two are deeply resentful of French-German behavior and are anxious to have a powerful friend outside the EU to redress the internal balance of power.

There are other states the U.S. should cultivate in this new situation. Poland is still afraid of both Germany and Russia and regards the U.S. as an essential ally in times of trouble. Then there are Denmark, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Austria--all of which have good reason to fear Franco-German bullying and are eager for a close friendship with the world's policeman. And if, as I predict, a split opens between France and Germany, astute U.S. policy could persuade Germany to become again, as it was in the days of Konrad Adenauer and Willy Brandt, a reliable American ally. That would complete the isolation of France and severely inhibit its ability to sabotage America's war on terrorism.

In the meantime, the U.S. should keep a tight grip on NATO (news - web sites)'s plans and strategies, ensuring that no sensitive information passes into channels to which the French military has access. The U.S. should also increase its intelligence efforts in Paris and Berlin.

Paul Johnson, eminent British historian and author, Lee Kuan Yew, senior minister of Singapore, and Ernesto Zedillo, Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, former president of Mexico, in addition to Forbes Chairman Caspar W. Weinberger, rotate in writing this column. To see past Current Events columns, visit our Web site at http://www.forbes.com/currentevents.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: eu; europeanunion; france; newnwo; pauljohnson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 next last

1 posted on 12/24/2003 8:00:21 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: knighthawk; Eurotwit; Grampa Dave; okie01; aristeides; Cicero; Tacis; gaspar
Merry Christmas!
2 posted on 12/24/2003 8:01:11 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
And a very Merry Christmas to you, too, oh Prescient One.
3 posted on 12/24/2003 8:11:08 PM PST by okie01 (www.ArmorforCongress.com...because Congress isn't for the morally halt and the mentally lame.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
"if, as I predict, a split opens between France and Germany"

Anybody can predict it. You don't have to be prescient; just take a peek at history.

4 posted on 12/24/2003 8:23:51 PM PST by Savage Beast (Chirac is a clown.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Sounds good to me!
5 posted on 12/24/2003 8:32:13 PM PST by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Really good post.

Merry Christmas on ya!
6 posted on 12/24/2003 8:32:42 PM PST by Burn24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Burn24
Looks like 2004 will be a good year...only remainds to send the UN back to Europe
7 posted on 12/24/2003 8:38:40 PM PST by spokeshave (TDIDS = The Dow is Driving Skyward = Tom Daschle is Deeply Saddened)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Paul Johnson...
There is probably no greater intellect nor gift of writing in all of Europe.

He writes with the clarity and courage of Churchill.

Read his masterpiece, A History of the American People. Possibly the best since de Tocqueville.
8 posted on 12/24/2003 8:44:30 PM PST by edwin hubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
U.S. policy could persuade Germany to become again, as it was in the days of Konrad Adenauer and Willy Brandt, a reliable American ally.

Paul Johnson is a famous author, and I do share his feelings toward France, but Willy Brandt just cannot be attached to Konrad Adenauer by the means of simple "and".

Politically, the two were whole universe apart.

Johnson should remember the Ostpolitik of Brandt The Marxist (and the President of the Socialist International!), as well as his role of the founding father of so called 'third worldism'. The latter trend appeared when, by the words of Roger Scruton, "the toiling proletarian of the European city gave way to the sun-drenched tribesman of the African bush as the preferred recipient of left-wing condescension".

Some quotes from Roger Scruton's brilliant work Thinkers of The New Left:

Willy Brandt did more than any other post-war politician to weaken the strategic position of Western Europe... The Brandt Report is perhaps the most turgid and ill-considered document ever to have achieved the status of a radical manifesto. Nevertheless, its authority is now unquestioned in radical circles...

(The Brandt Report) presents the important facts upon which 'third worldism' is founded...(unquote)

I say, down with Willy Brandt, as well as with the French Muslims as allies! With such allies one doesn't need no enemies...

9 posted on 12/24/2003 9:13:45 PM PST by Neophyte (Nazists, Communists, Islamists... what the heck is the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
2004 looks better and better with good news like this.
10 posted on 12/24/2003 9:39:30 PM PST by ABG(anybody but Gore) (...And second prize goes to Kenny, for his Edward James Olmos impersonation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
What a neat prospect.

France and the adage "what goes around comes around."
11 posted on 12/24/2003 10:30:48 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Merry Christmas!

Two very important points about the overvalued Euro are sort of hidden in this article:

1. American policymakers should now proceed on the long-term assumption that a European superstate, with a common foreign and military policy, is not going to emerge. The collapse of the constitution conference and talk of a "two-tier" EU means unity has been abandoned. The joint decision of the French and German governments to destroy the stability pact that underpins the common currency must, in the end, mean the destruction of the euro as well.

The Germans are feeling the pain of a stagnant economy, an overvalued euro, actual recession in many sectors and a dramatic collapse in East German property values. A number of German banks are technically insolvent, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to borrow the money necessary to keep German industry up to date. Given these circumstances, Germany's funding of the EU makes no sense to the German taxpayers or to the politicians who represent them. Now that Germany has blatantly broken the rules over the stability pact, what is to prevent it from reneging on EU payments? Nothing.

2. The Euro is way over valued with the socialist countries like France And Germany playing games with what is supposedly allowed re debt. Soros is probably still propping/pumping it up.

That will bring down the Euro house of shaky cards will be the upcoming regime change in Iran. Soros got the Murdering Mullahs to drop the dollar and the payment medium for its oil. Iran will revert to the $ within thirty days after a regime change happens in Iran.

Then the Euro will collapse.

12 posted on 12/24/2003 10:31:42 PM PST by Grampa Dave (Kaddaffi, "I will do whatever the Americans want because I saw what happened in Iraq. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Cheers to President Bush who had the foresight and political will to devalue the US Dollar as an instrument of US Economic and Political policy against those in the WTO (opps, met France and Germany) who politically ran election campaigns in 2002 (along with South Korea) that focued on disparging the US and President Bush personally. Imports have been hurt from Europe and Exports on the rise, however, in the EUrozone prices do not drop to reflect competition or new sources of competing products - therefore the overvaluation of the EUro currency. Forcing a political change in EUrope is possible thorugh the very economic and political policy implemented by President Bush against Schroeder and Chiraq!
13 posted on 12/25/2003 12:04:39 AM PST by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Does soros have a "business" we could avoid? Basically watever he touches is a business to be avoided.

On a lighter note, which countries would like to become states of the USA?
14 posted on 12/25/2003 12:23:20 AM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
On a lighter note, which countries would like to become states of the USA?

I would guess the majority of former Warsaw Pact nations would love the chance. ;^)

15 posted on 12/25/2003 12:32:07 AM PST by ABG(anybody but Gore) (...And second prize goes to Kenny, for his Edward James Olmos impersonation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Jumper
"Forcing a political change in EUrope is possible thorugh the very economic and political policy implemented by President Bush against Schroeder and Chiraq!"

Damn, that stupid cowboy strikes again! :)

16 posted on 12/25/2003 2:32:43 AM PST by Fenris6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Meer Christmasto you too!
17 posted on 12/25/2003 3:29:29 AM PST by knighthawk (Live today, there is no time to lose, because when tomorrow comes it's all just yesterday's blues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Merry Christmas! I just got Paul Johnson's new book, his Art: A New History.
18 posted on 12/25/2003 4:35:29 AM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Neophyte
Isolate the French by watching the EU crumble on its own, then pick up the pieces with Britain, Germany, Italy, Spain and eastern european nations such as Poland who are eager for US friendship.

19 posted on 12/25/2003 5:04:03 AM PST by WildWeasel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
This is a very good article. It summed up in a very concise way what is about to happen. It should come in handy as a reference. Thanks for posting this.
20 posted on 12/25/2003 5:56:34 AM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanbychoice; Michael81Dus
American policymakers should now proceed on the long-term assumption that a European superstate, with a common foreign and military policy, is not going to emerge.

Hi. I pinged you two because we were involved in a similar discussion elsewhere. I was trying to make a similar point as this writer but I guess that's why he's getting paid to do it and I'm still sharpening my razor at FR ;-)

But that sentence above should just about sum it up. In the writer's opinion (and I share it) the disintegration of the EU is practically a done deal at this point. I see France as being the source of most difficulty in Europe (and with our current diplomatic troubles between France/Germany). As the EU begins to unravel, there will be no reason for a nation like Germany to continue to pander to the French. Once that relationship starts to diverge- that's pretty much it. Game over.

If Germany cuts off its funds, various EU doles that hold the union together--not least of which is the CAP--will become bankrupt.

This is another point I wish more Europeans could grok- the EU can only make Germany weaker- not stronger. Germany was and is already a strong nation and a sovereign one (and had a very strong and respected currency). Any agreement where Germany gave up its sovereignty and became the biggest payer of subsidies to the rest of the EU can only make Germany a lesser nation. Whatever perceived strength you would have gained through a stronger voice in world affairs would only be diluted by the fact that this 'new stronger voice' would probably not speak with a German tongue and for German interests but with a French one and for French interests. So Germany would not have a louder voice on the world stage at all but would effectively be giving up its voice to lesser nations just as she has done with her capital (in the form of these agri-subsidies and other hand-outs).

This is going to be a good thing in the long run but it could be a little chaotic in the short term. I'm interested though to see what happens with the currency. The Euro cannot survive without a common economic policy- this is fairly obvious. You cannot have a common economic policy without the power to enforce it (the honor system will not work). You cannot have the power to enforce it without a binding constitution or legal framework of some sort that all the members respect and that doesn't look like it's going to happen (well, unless you're one of the true believers in a unified Europe).

I don't think a lot of Europeans have realized it yet but this disagreement over the constitution was the last chance. There are too many factors involved now that have a life of their own. There are also many unknown variables that might pop up- a major terrorist attack on Continent or in the UK (for example) would throw the EU in an uproar. There are just too many things going against the EU right now. If I were the involved nations, I would be developing a contingency plan for a currency. Germany could take a leadership position right now by pushing France to the sidelines (which is the proper place for France).

21 posted on 12/25/2003 6:19:28 AM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neophyte
Don´t be so harsh with Brandt. He was not that bad at all - we consider his appeasement to the East as an essential step towards reunification (and therefore the end of the Cold War). Even though it was hard for my parents to accept it. But I think the author has completely forgotten Kohl, who surely stands in the same row like Adenauer!
22 posted on 12/25/2003 7:22:45 AM PST by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
I´m not in the mood to answer detailed (I´m at my parents home), but I think that the European unification is not over at all - but it´s delayed, and that´s good. Too many fools wanted to do too much too fast - this couldn´t be successful. I predict that Germany will concentrate itself more on its own instead on Europe until 2010. Europe as a great free market, hooray, Europe as a political union, no way. I´ll be curious what will happen to the Euro, and when the first politicians will slowly start to call for a national-interests-first policy. Well, Schröder made a start regarding the constitution (voting system), but that was only the start.
23 posted on 12/25/2003 7:30:24 AM PST by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
A great Christmas morning read.
24 posted on 12/25/2003 7:32:20 AM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
but I think that the European unification is not over at all - but it´s delayed

I just don't see how it can survive Michael. The ability of the Euro to survive without a central gov't is highly doubtful. Once the currency starts having even more problems or the (individual economies) and there is no consensus among the different nations about how to deal with it- this will only lead to more splits within the Union itself.

We had this in the US. Civil War. Some states wanted to split with the original agreement and our nation's bloodiest war was the result. Those states that wanted to leave were compelled by force to stay within the Union. But short of that force, nothing would have accomplished that. The EU has already begun to split before it ever got started. There will be no compelling military force to make the Union hold together.

In Europe, the differing nations don't even have as much to hold them together as our differing states did; there's no common culture or language. And at any rate, as I said before, creating a Unified Europe will only make the strong nations weaker- never stronger. It would not be in any strong nation's interest to continue with the Union. And then when we look at the other side of the coin, the weak nations in many instances could gain more influence simply by a series of alliances as has always been done throughout history. No need to bind themselves to a Federal System that sees them pushed around by the bigger members. Poland, for example, has gained much from allying itself with the US. Poland stands to lose though if it cedes much power to stronger states in the EU.

I can think of almost no example why there is a good reason for the EU to exist. You don't need the EU to have an open and free market. You don't need the EU to be part of a strong military alliance. You don't need the EU to have a stable currency (The British Pound and the German Mark are two very good examples).

The only advantage there ever was in the EU was for countries like France who wish someone like Germany to help pay their bills and Ireland who sought to improve upon its infrastructure. But these examples always amount to a handout from the richer nations. Germany gains not too much from upgrading Irish roads. Germany gains nothing from subsidizing French Farmers (and I know this is a big issue and it isn't new because it was a big deal when I still lived in Germany).

When we look at the UK, they get shafted even more by completely immersing themselves in the EU. The Queen would no longer be the Head of State- although she would remain the head of state in Australia and Canada for example (or would she? would the EU eventually exert control there as well?). Their military would increasingly come under the control of Brussels. They would lose their own currency. (In the case of the military alone- their military is what makes Britain such a powerful nation on the world stage (along with their alliance with us. Britain can project power around the globe if she needs to.) And what about the Commonwealth and the UNSC veto power? Eventually that veto vote would come under the control of Brussels. Increasingly the EU would pressure the UK to deal in certain ways with its Commonwealth members. I just don't see any advantage for the UK or Germany in the EU. Plus every nation would eventually lose their UN votes.

There are many more negatives than positives. I just don't see it working out and I'm not the only one. Perhaps Europeans have difficulty seeing this from the inside of the situation? It's not going to happen. Especially now that the US has exploited some of the overt fractures in the Union.

25 posted on 12/25/2003 7:59:42 AM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory; Liz; SierraWasp; BOBTHENAILER
$oreA$$ has no businesses to buycott.

However, one of his best friends, Lewi$, is the CEO and main stock holder of Progressive Insurance.

Another Super Rich Liberal who hates GW, is Warren Buffet.
Geico Insurance and Fruit the Loom are two companies that his holding company controls. Conservatives should avoid buying Geico insurance and Fruit of the Loom products

Before I buy a new mutual fund, I look at the top holdings of the fund company. If they own the Buffett holding company or Progressive, I send them an email explaining that I'm a conservative Republican. I state that I refuse to buy any mutual fund which owns Buffett stuff. Then I include a list the mutual funds we own without this liberal control companies.

Many of these PC/iberal fund companies look like a PC balance sheet with the stocks they own. Bottom line is most of those lib owned companies don't declare dividends, and that is a way they $crew mutual fund owners.
26 posted on 12/25/2003 9:28:26 AM PST by Grampa Dave (Kaddaffi, "I will do whatever the Americans want because I saw what happened in Iraq. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: edwin hubble
Agreed
27 posted on 12/25/2003 9:31:42 AM PST by AmericanVictory (If Arnold is the governater, Howard is the governatter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Neophyte
Recall also his staging of a bogus terrorist incident at the time of the Olympics massacre of Israeli athletes so that he could let the terrorists go, an early precursor of the alliance between Marxists and Islamic Terrorists.
28 posted on 12/25/2003 9:34:07 AM PST by AmericanVictory (If Arnold is the governater, Howard is the governatter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
No AMERICAN business, but hasn't he got some EU interests we could encourage folks to shy away from? I got so sick of the multi-level marketing tactics of a German based company in my industry called Allianz that I'm boycotting them in a big way.

I know Buffet is huge into Insurance and Reinsurance which is harder to touch since it insures the insurors. How's his relationship going with Arnold? Is he going to buy CA's HIGH YIELD junk bonds after the March election???

I'm not trying to be a smartalec, I really am curious as to who is most interested in getting the $15 Billion, plus the multibillion school bond measure that Arnold is NOT distancing himself from on the same March ballot.

29 posted on 12/25/2003 9:52:57 AM PST by SierraWasp ("In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world..." John 16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
I hope you and yours are having a wonderful Christmas.
I agree with you on many points, however, I am not certain about the near and long term future of the EU. It depends on what will happen.
Should the proposed constipation, sorry, constitution be adopted, it would spell the doom of that very organisation. As I have said before many times over, Europe would be heading toward a Revolution. It could be bloody or not.
The reasons for that are many. Very few people in Europe have yet bothered to read it. Even the media does not even highlight any of the provisions. I find that somewhat strange, unless they know it would cause the certain defeat of this article and member governments are pressuring them not to write about it. Most Governments know that a referendum posed to a knowledgable constituency would call for uproar.
If the EU just keeps going along as a free marketplace, it may be able to hold on for a while longer. However, again there is the present problem of that "Government" already establishing laws in every country. Just look at the silly laws already being enforced: The Swingset law that has Playgrounds in England taking down their Swings because of height requirements, The Banana and Apples Law that regulates the curveature of bananas and the redness of apples? All these laws require a lot of money to be spent needlessly and this will just infuriate the public more and more.
The Aristocrats in Europe trying to gain power again, ruling from the top down will find a much more sophisticated public than before and an overthrow would be much quicker than before.
Therefore, long term: In my opinion,the EU will be headed for dismantlement as a political Superstructure without State rights.
I could go on and on with reasons, but so little space and time..................
30 posted on 12/25/2003 10:00:30 AM PST by americanbychoice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave; Dog Gone; Carry_Okie; BOBTHENAILER; Liz
You just caused me to look up one of the most prescient paragraphs in Baylint Vazsonyi's brilliant book "America's Thirty Years War." (Page 106):

"The context is one of irreconcilable differences between two views of the world. One view, the Anglo-American, holds that human ability to comprehend, adjudicate, and arrange the world around us is limited; that the only attainable goal is continuously to improve the conditions which enable individuals to achieve their personal best. The other view, predominantly Franco-Germanic, places human reason at the center of our existence, claiming that certain people are capable of comprehending, adjudication and arranging the world around us; and that such people are called upon to guide all others toward an increasingly perfect and just world in which all desires will have been either eliminated or satisfied."

I highly recommend this book to all FReepers by the recently deceased LEGAL IMMIGRANT and great American!!!

31 posted on 12/25/2003 11:06:37 AM PST by SierraWasp ("In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world..." John 16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave; SierraWasp
The collapse of the constitution conference and talk of a "two-tier" EU means unity has been abandoned.

This really breaks my heart.

Thanks for the flag to this heartening article. Ketchup boy is really bothered by this and knows it is all Bush's fault.

I'll have to remember to get that book, SW, thanks.

Merry Christmas to both of you and your families and loved ones. This has been a good year in many ways and next year should be even better.

32 posted on 12/25/2003 12:16:39 PM PST by BOBTHENAILER (One by one, in groups or whole armies.....we don't care how we getcha, but we will)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: BOBTHENAILER; Grampa Dave
Merry Christmas, big fella! I enjoyed your smashing rant on that other thread, by the way. (grin) The passionate reply that really put things back into prospective!!!

I have a signed copy of that book and traveled all the way to Berkeley, CA (CA Commonist HQ) to meet him on a rainy night! Great American, without question. And like you... he understands things, which is what makes both of you "dangerous!" (bigger grin)

33 posted on 12/25/2003 12:28:02 PM PST by SierraWasp ("In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world..." John 16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Shermy; Grampa Dave; BOBTHENAILER
Bookmarked!!! This one's a classic. I'm not a "bible thumper," but I remember from my up-bringing in all church schools that Daniel interpreted a dream for Nebbuchadnezzer, another Iraqi driven mad by God, about a huge statue that had a head of gold and feet of clay mixed with iron! Each section was made of different stuff and represented an era of rule by successive world powers.

The message I was taught was that the crazy mixed-up feet of iron and clay wouldn't adhere and represented the attempt to make Europe into a "world power" that couldn't possible work toward the end of history when the whole statue was "smitten" by a huge rolling stone (asteroid?)!!!

Anyway, I found this article intensely interesting and NO moderators, I don't want this article moved to "Religion!" (there's already too much hate & discontent on the last one to be moved there)

34 posted on 12/25/2003 12:41:26 PM PST by SierraWasp ("In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world..." John 16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanVictory
...staging of a bogus terrorist incident at the time of the Olympics massacre of Israeli athletes...

Thank you for reminding me of that episode. Another confirmation of my tag-line truthfulness.

35 posted on 12/25/2003 10:53:38 PM PST by Neophyte (Nazists, Communists, Islamists... what the heck is the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
...increasingly perfect and just world in which all desires will have been either eliminated or satisfied.

A brilliant example of how it would be possible one finds in an old Soviet joke which goes like this:
An announcement on the milk shop window when 'real communism' won: Comrades! There will be no demand for milk today.

36 posted on 12/25/2003 11:02:16 PM PST by Neophyte (Nazists, Communists, Islamists... what the heck is the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
...we consider his appeasement to the East as an essential step towards reunification (and therefore the end of the Cold War).

Well, I consider his appeasement of the Soviets & Co as the very step which legitimised that cannibal regimes and prolonged their survival. Thus it postponed the reunification.

The latter became possible thanks to president Reagan having balls to catch Soviets by the same and to squeese... :-))

As to the Cold War, do you really believe it's over? For the West, maybe. But certainly not for Putin.

37 posted on 12/25/2003 11:18:28 PM PST by Neophyte (Nazists, Communists, Islamists... what the heck is the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Neophyte
What is that with you Freepers that you think that Reagan managed the end of the Cold War by himself?? Hey, he surely has set important signs, his policy (and the support of Thatcher, Kohl) have were the reason for the economic crush of the Eastern Empire, but we know that evil regimes which are economically down, can survive politically with military power (N Korea, Iraq).

Therefore I suggest, that you do not underestimate the achievements of Kohls and Bushs meetings with the reunification-opponents Gorbatchov (at the beginning of the uprises in the GDR), Thatcher and Mitterand.

Just imagine what would have happened if Clinton and Schröder had ruled the US and W Germany! They had said: "We don´t care, kill your opponents, this is not our business!" Maybe they´d have sent billions of $ to aid them...

I repeat it: without Bush and Kohl there would have been not such a fast end of the Communist empire. And without the solidarnosc-movement in Poland, Gorbatchov probably would have never enforced Peristroika. Still, mainly responsible for the end of the Cold War are Gorbatchov and Bush.
38 posted on 12/26/2003 2:32:28 AM PST by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
Never sais a word against Kohl, Bush senior, or Thatcher on this topic. But Willy Brandt was an @$$hole, and with a Soviet spy for a private secretary, too.
39 posted on 12/26/2003 5:33:08 AM PST by Neophyte (Nazists, Communists, Islamists... what the heck is the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Neophyte
Never said a word that is. Sorry for the typo.
40 posted on 12/26/2003 5:34:38 AM PST by Neophyte (Nazists, Communists, Islamists... what the heck is the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
Sorry Michael, The one Person who had more to do with the fall of the Soviet Union than anyone else, was REAGAN.
41 posted on 12/26/2003 6:36:09 AM PST by americanbychoice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: americanbychoice
And I´m sorry that I have to refuse your apology. You are wrong. Certainly Reagan was one important player, but not one of the most important. History has decided, and it were not Reagan walking through the Brandenburg Gate or having celebrated the end of the SU in 1991 as a US President...
42 posted on 12/26/2003 2:08:26 PM PST by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Neophyte
Well, he was my nations Chancellor, wasn´t he? It wasn´t that bad at all that the left here got a chance to govern, and he couldn´t do much wrong, because the most important decisions regarding W Europes security were made before his time.

Sure, he had a GDR-spy in his rows. However, that didn´t affect his decisions - only those of the GDR/Soviet leaders, lol. On a scale between +5 /-5 Brandt would get a +0,5, while Schröder would receive a -3,0. At least there´s no nuclear war right now and we´re still in NATO. ;-)
43 posted on 12/26/2003 2:12:19 PM PST by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
tHE ONLY REASON rEAGAN DIDN'T WALK THROUGH THE bRANDENBURG GATE WAS THAT HE WASN'T PRESIDENT ANYMORE. wHAT HE DID WAS PLACE THE COLLAPSE AND THE uNIFICATION ON aUTOPILOT PRIOR TO HIM LEAVING. nO ONE ELSE CAN TAKE CREDIT FOR THIS, EXCEPT IN A SMALLER WAY gORBATCHEW.
44 posted on 12/26/2003 2:12:54 PM PST by americanbychoice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: americanbychoice
I disagree. It was not an automanism. It could have went a completely different way, just like violent oppression of the uncontent people - like they did in 1953. Crushed economy does not mean the fall of a system. It is an automatism in democratic societies (just look at Schröders polls), but it is not in oppressive regimes. Look at N Korea!
45 posted on 12/26/2003 2:39:03 PM PST by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
You're correct, a strong and a lasting Union can't be forged with hot air, it can only be done with blood and guts.
46 posted on 12/26/2003 2:49:59 PM PST by desertcry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
Certainly Reagan was one important player, but not one of the most important.

Michael, what's up with this? The Russians themselves admit that Reagan's policies broke them. This is not to say that others were not involved and do not have credit coming to them. But to say that Reagan was not one of the most important players in this respect is just not correct.

47 posted on 12/26/2003 2:53:49 PM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
What is that with you Freepers that you think that Reagan managed the end of the Cold War by himself??

Nobody says this. There were many many people and different American Presidents that contributed. We are all aware of this. 'Ich bin ein Berliner' anyone? Do you think this is lost on anybody here? The Berlin airlift was also a key moment.

And I would remind you that you are a Freeper as well. So, it isn't 'you Freepers'. You are one of us. Don't create a dichotomy where one need not exist... It just isn't wise. It is better to discuss matters where we agree. This is what friendship and alliance is all about. Focusing on our differences is a recipe for more disagreement. You are a Freeper too.

48 posted on 12/26/2003 2:59:23 PM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
You are confusing theory with fact again.
49 posted on 12/26/2003 3:13:16 PM PST by americanbychoice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
History has decided...

Historical determinism, or the idea that history somehow has a natural ("scientific") direction of its own, is an old Marxian fallacy. History doesn't decide anything, people do.

And Reagan was not only one of such people, in the case of the coup de grace dealt to the Soviet system he was DA MAN.

It wasn´t that bad at all that the left here got a chance to govern.

Ever after the WW II the Left were the real elite of West Germany, with a status similar to that of aristocracy of the time of Frederich the Great. Their very specific, German kind of Marxism was regarded as true polar opposite to Nazism.

Etablierte Linke dominates German universities, where it repoducts itself and populates the offices of the country with its disciples whose main political task is to uproot 'reactionary ideas', that is any conservative or right wing ones.

You see, they still believe in Germany that Nazism and fascism were extreme right movements. In reality however they were... er, read my tag-line.

50 posted on 12/26/2003 10:09:44 PM PST by Neophyte (Nazists, Communists, Islamists... what the heck is the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson