Skip to comments.For the Germans, the War's Ambiguities Persist (WHY the Germans are insisting they're WW II victims)
Posted on 06/06/2004 8:34:26 PM PDT by quidnunc
In joining with leaders of World War II's victorious Allies in their commemoration of D-Day, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder has referred to Germany's presence on the Normandy invasion beaches as marking "the final end" to the postwar period and the completion of "Germany's long journey to the West."
Alongside the chancellor's argument that the Allies liberated the Germans from Nazi tyranny, what this comes down to is a kind of political assurance that Germany has forever abandoned its contemptuous notion of a mercantile, soulless West and its equally contemptuous but territorially hungry view of the lands beyond its eastern borders.
Coming in the context of Schröder's current drive to win Germany a seat on the United Nations Security Council, a statement sounding like a guarantee of its comfortable anchorage in the acquisitive, nonromantic world of capitalism finds few doubters.
But concerning Eastern Europe, Schröder's willful reading of his invitation to the D-Day anniversary as "the final end" to the postwar period is a different matter. It does not correspond entirely to current events and, for the time being, may be a bit of an imposition on history.
Germany's relationship in 2004 with the country's two major neighbors to the east or, perhaps most precisely, that of a significant number of Germans involves harsh, palpable difficulties.
With backing from mainstream conservative and Social Democrat personalities, politically powerful groups of expellees from former German territories in the Czech Republic and Poland are mounting newly aggressive campaigns to regain their old properties and memorialize themselves as World War II victims.
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
My father was married to a German woman for a few months. Whenever her family got together they still spoke highly of Hitler.
Everyone's a victim nowadays. Being a perp never was in style.
1. The Germans are now trying to play victim of the Nazi because they see Islamic radical not Islam, the Taliban not the Afgahnis and Saddam not the Iraqis blamed today and they naturally wonder, if nobody else is to blame for what is what happens in their name, why should Germans in WWII been different.
2. The idea that Germany will get a permanent place on the UN Security Council is silly. With both Russia and France already on the Council with the UK, Europe is over represented on the Council today. What needs to happen is for France to be removed and either Brazil from South America or South Africa or someone from Africa need to be added. The Europeans just do not get it. By moving toward a single European state, they will count as merely one vote in world affairs in the Future.
I would argue the UNSC, recognizing states based on their power and regional location, should be as follows;
France does not belong on the list when you have both Russia and the UK from Europe. And Brazil's current leader is a nutter.
Of course I would prefer scrapping the UN and replacing it with a league of democracies if anything.
The United Nations is what doesn't make sense. Get US out of the UN.
Why on earth does Germany think it's going to get a seat on the security council. As a matter of fact, if anything happens france and Britain will lose their seats and a single seat will be allowed for the EU. There will only be ONE ambassador to the UN as well and only ONE vote.
And if that doesn't happen & instead, Germany is given a seat, I think it would be time for California to demand a place at the table too.
Benes the Czech was far worse than the Poles with respect to dispossessing German "settlers". However, the Germans were not liberated they were F'ed in the mud as were the Japanese. The PC elites don't want the common folk to remember how wars are really won. For some reason the preservation of the Islamic Home World has been the Prime Directive of Foggy Headed Bottomhole for decades.
By such standard, Germany has more right then Britian.
Yeah, I could see a UNSC of:
1. US for North, Central American and the Caribean and one rotating seat.
2. China for Asia and one rotating seat.
3. UK for Europe and one rotating seat.
4. India for South Central Asia and one rotating seat. [I guess their region might stretch from India to the Med including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq Israel etc. ]
5. Brazil for South America and one rotating seat.
6. Australia for Oceana and one rotating seat.
7. Nigeria for Africa and one rotating seat.
8. Russia/Japan on a rotating basis for the 15th seat.
And there could be a rule that no country can be a rotating member of the security council IF they do not have an elected government in an election with competition within the last 8 or 6 or 5 years. Also there could be a rule that any permanent member would have their voting suspended if they do not have an elected government within the last 8 or 6 or 5 years.
But be very careful with these rules. They would be used by the left, to argue that the Electoral College must go and that the US currently does not have an elected government. We know this is bunk, but the left in the US will use anything for political advantage.
The German Army has *no* ability to project itself. All it is capable of is self defense without help from the US/UK.
You don't suppose it's something in the water?
Having lived there for 6 months, it is something. Remember of course 60 years ago they culled out all their dissenters, free thinkers, etc. And you are right, they will get closer this way than the past attempts they have made at taking over Europe.
Question: Who has not even paid the interest on their WWI debt to the US?
This brings to mind Lincoln's old anecdote about the boy who killed his parents and then threw himself on the mercy of the courts because he was an orphan.
Never forget the French helped us in our War of Independence against the British. I am not so worried about keeping score. You can only liberate those who want to be free.
The French did in 1944. If they are taken over today, maybe they do or maybe they don't want to be free. This is the issue in Iraq. You can depose any government like Saddam's that conspires against you. But we can only liberate Iraqi if the people there want freedom.
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.