When I was a kid, I had a fascination with the German soldier of WWII. I had several WWII German soldier GI Joes. On youtube I still watch video compilations of the German soldiers. In college I read book titled Making of a Storm Trooper, which discussed how young men gravitated to Hitler’s message and decided to join his ranks and fight for what their leader believed. When I travelled through Germany and Austria in the 1990s, I had the opportunity to meet veterans of the Third Reich; they were just everyday guys serving their country. I am sure these German soldiers of 21th century will fulfill the mission of the 21th century Germany. I see no need to worry about them resurrecting the horror of the Third Reich.
The world needs a Europe with liberal, humanistic values to serve as a counter-balance to an America with similar values. Unfortunately, the odds of that continuing are diminishing quickly. Such values are not common and presently not in the ascendancy.
For seventy years Europe has been busily building exemplary internal social structures under the protection of the American military and our taxpayers. That has had the effect of allowing Europe to live in a bit of a fool's paradise, largely ignoring what was happening in much of the rest of the world, especially those things which would soon come to dramatically affect Europe itself.
The Balkan wars should have woken Europe up to its inability to collectively cope with serious issues. Unfortunately, the opportunity was wasted, and Europe sank back into self-delusion.
Europe became focused through Brussels more on what ought to be than what is. Though people live in the "is", Brussels remained in the "ought", as mass migration, Russian adventurism, a half-baked Euro, and radical Islam have all fairly quickly become impossible to ignore. As a result, the most worthy, noble, and important "European project" is seeing centrifugal forces rip it apart, as Europeans and their leaders forget why, after World War II, they began creating international structures in the first place.
German military expansion is not a problem; in fact, such is a first acknowledgement by Europe that something has to be done about its endemic weakness.
For seventy years Europe has been busily building exemplary internal social structures under the protection of the American military and our taxpayers. That has had the effect of allowing Europe to live in a bit of a fool's paradise, largely ignoring what was happening in much of the rest of the world, especially those things which would soon come to dramatically affect Europe itself.
The Balkan wars should have woken Europe up to its inability to collectively cope with serious issues. Unfortunately, the opportunity was wasted, and Europe sank back into self-delusion.
Europe became focused through Brussels more on what ought to be than what is. Though people live in the "is", Brussels remained in the "ought", as mass migration, Russian adventurism, a half-baked Euro, and radical Islam have all fairly quickly become impossible to ignore. As a result, the most worthy, noble, and important "European project" is seeing centrifugal forces rip it apart, as Europeans and their leaders forget why, after World War II, they began creating international structures in the first place.
German military expansion is not a problem; in fact, such is a first acknowledgement by Europe that something has to be done about its endemic weakness.
1
Instinctive pacifism that took hold after 1945? What planet is Ms. Smale thinking of? Germany after 1945 was worried about being absorbed in the Soviet Empire; reconstituting the German military was a priority right from the founding the West German state in 1949. Pacifism emerged on the left, particularly in the late 1970s and 1980s, but there was no generalized pacifist feeling in Germany before that.
There are flocks of elephants in this debate.
In the last decade of Cold War West German “Bundeswehr” was the most powerful offensive army that ever existed in the world. Mechanised mass counter offensive was the only military chance for the inferior West in these days so the exceptional non-nuclear fire power of West German “Heer” divisions deliberately built up by West Germany (BRD) exceeded the fire power of any other military unit by far. The reason was that these exceptional conventional abilities on the ground had to avoid the use of any nuclear weapons on the territory of Germany.
All parties on every side were aware of this. Even NVA (East German Army) and the Soviets should know it so there was no effective counter-intelligence against “HVA” of East German “Stasi”: Nobody on both sides of the fence should have had any illusions on this issue and that´s how “deterrence” worked in these days.
This is also the reason why particularly West German “Bundesheer” had to scrap most of it´s gear from 1990.
Noone in Germany wants to have this kind of military instrument any more in presence because we all remember that this exceptional conventional destruction power would have had it´s effects mostly on the territory of Germany. Nuclear or not – in Cold War terms Germany would have been destroyed anyhow.
This is some special kind of German past. A "Cold war past" this time.
In the last decade of Cold War West German “Bundeswehr” was the most powerful offensive army that ever existed in the world. Mechanised mass counter offensive was the only military chance for the inferior West in these days so the exceptional non-nuclear fire power of West German “Heer” divisions deliberately built up by West Germany (BRD) exceeded the fire power of any other military unit by far. The reason was that these exceptional conventional abilities on the ground had to avoid the use of any nuclear weapons on the territory of Germany.
All parties on every side were aware of this. Even NVA (East German Army) and the Soviets should know it so there was no effective counter-intelligence against “HVA” of East German “Stasi”: Nobody on both sides of the fence should have had any illusions on this issue and that´s how “deterrence” worked in these days.
This is also the reason why particularly West German “Bundesheer” had to scrap most of it´s gear from 1990.
Noone in Germany wants to have this kind of military instrument any more in presence because we all remember that this exceptional conventional destruction power would have had it´s effects mostly on the territory of Germany. Nuclear or not – in Cold War terms Germany would have been destroyed anyhow.
This is some special kind of German past. A "Cold war past" this time.
2
Germany to increase its military? Hah, I'll believe it when it happens. Too many of their current troops are overweight. Tanks in reserve are cannibalized for parts to make the few active runners capable of deployment. It's just too convenient for the Germans to play the guilt-trip card and find excuses why others must shoulder the burden. Adding 7,000 troops by 2023? That is the equivalent of two brigades - and brigades are the small change of any major fight. Maybe Mutti and her advisers are planning to throw knackwurst at any potential enemy.
Thank God! If the EU would commit to defending itself, the Middle East and Russia would be much less emboldened. It seems that pacifism, sadly, invites terror and violence when it comes to invading armies. What is it they say - walk softly and carry a big stick?
A long dormant Germany is awakening The Teutonic ilk beckons. The ancient Crusade must complete the journey, vanquish those who wish to destroy the West. Onward Christian soldiers..
2
What?
4
Good job, Putin. You woke The Sleeping Beast.
You, of all people, did this; and for what? Ukraine?
To reconquer Ukraine? You must be mad. Ukrainians aren't Russians. Most want nothing to do with Russia -- and even less with you. They have no desire to be forcibly "reintegrated" into your new United Russia given what subjugation by the Russian Federation would mean for them and their loved ones: to be "disappeared". Secret police terror. Political repression. Deportation. Show trials in kangaroo courts. The Gulag. Economic disaster. Stupefying corruption and stagnation.
New Russia's gifts to the world. Your gifts.
Nobody wants them.
Your ongoing destabilization campaign in the Don Basin forced Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland closer together; if not into an informal alliance. With them come north Baltic states (Finland, Sweden, Norway) because they must. And with them comes Germany; with Germany, France; and the rest of NATO. Somnolent NATO. Pacifist NATO.
Pacifist no more. Openly modernizing your army's offensive capabilities while renouncing its "no first use" nuclear doctrine throws gasoline on fires cynically lit to keep you and your kleptocracy in power cooked that. And threatening to use tactical nuclear weapons in rolling barrages, certain to return central Europe to the devastated shambles of 1945, will force Europeans to prepare to do the same -- to you.
Oblivious to the lessons of history ... .
You, of all people, should have known better.
You, of all people, did this; and for what? Ukraine?
To reconquer Ukraine? You must be mad. Ukrainians aren't Russians. Most want nothing to do with Russia -- and even less with you. They have no desire to be forcibly "reintegrated" into your new United Russia given what subjugation by the Russian Federation would mean for them and their loved ones: to be "disappeared". Secret police terror. Political repression. Deportation. Show trials in kangaroo courts. The Gulag. Economic disaster. Stupefying corruption and stagnation.
New Russia's gifts to the world. Your gifts.
Nobody wants them.
Your ongoing destabilization campaign in the Don Basin forced Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland closer together; if not into an informal alliance. With them come north Baltic states (Finland, Sweden, Norway) because they must. And with them comes Germany; with Germany, France; and the rest of NATO. Somnolent NATO. Pacifist NATO.
Pacifist no more. Openly modernizing your army's offensive capabilities while renouncing its "no first use" nuclear doctrine throws gasoline on fires cynically lit to keep you and your kleptocracy in power cooked that. And threatening to use tactical nuclear weapons in rolling barrages, certain to return central Europe to the devastated shambles of 1945, will force Europeans to prepare to do the same -- to you.
Oblivious to the lessons of history ... .
You, of all people, should have known better.
2
You forget it was the Red Army that defeated Nazi Germany. Say after me; Thanks, Mother Russia.
2
What does that have to do with anything?
You left out the fact that Russia brought that calamity on itself. Did you really forget the 1939 Hitler-Stalin Non-Aggression Pact that divided Poland between Nazi Germany and USSR, setting off WW-2?
Perhaps you've forgotten a few other unpleasant things:
- NKVD extermination campaigns against Ukrainian, Polish, Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian intelligentsia;
- the 1944 Warsaw Uprising. The Soviets first encouraged Poles to attack the German Army then abandoned them to a cruel fate after they did. Stalin wanted to destroy the Polish nation and was only too happy to let the Nazis do it for him. Warsaw was destroyed like Carthage. An estimated 700,000 dead.
- a Russian-occupied Eastern Europe that languished behind the "Iron Curtain" until 1990.
- the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, crushed by a Warsaw Pact invasion;
- "Prague Spring, 1968", also crushed by a Warsaw Pact invasion;
- the Berlin Wall, an abomination that only fell in 1989.
I saw The Wall in 1986. Grim. Menacing. Crossed East Germany on a sealed autobahn from Lübeck in the north, through the Russian military zone. Saw a Red Army parade to commemorate VE Day.
Many former East bloc members now battle Russian organized crime -- gangs engaged in drug and human trafficking (and other contraband) that use their territory to hide and move it, and "businessmen" from Putin's inner circle who hide vast sums in art and real estate.
Putin's Russia is a menace to the world.
You left out the fact that Russia brought that calamity on itself. Did you really forget the 1939 Hitler-Stalin Non-Aggression Pact that divided Poland between Nazi Germany and USSR, setting off WW-2?
Perhaps you've forgotten a few other unpleasant things:
- NKVD extermination campaigns against Ukrainian, Polish, Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian intelligentsia;
- the 1944 Warsaw Uprising. The Soviets first encouraged Poles to attack the German Army then abandoned them to a cruel fate after they did. Stalin wanted to destroy the Polish nation and was only too happy to let the Nazis do it for him. Warsaw was destroyed like Carthage. An estimated 700,000 dead.
- a Russian-occupied Eastern Europe that languished behind the "Iron Curtain" until 1990.
- the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, crushed by a Warsaw Pact invasion;
- "Prague Spring, 1968", also crushed by a Warsaw Pact invasion;
- the Berlin Wall, an abomination that only fell in 1989.
I saw The Wall in 1986. Grim. Menacing. Crossed East Germany on a sealed autobahn from Lübeck in the north, through the Russian military zone. Saw a Red Army parade to commemorate VE Day.
Many former East bloc members now battle Russian organized crime -- gangs engaged in drug and human trafficking (and other contraband) that use their territory to hide and move it, and "businessmen" from Putin's inner circle who hide vast sums in art and real estate.
Putin's Russia is a menace to the world.
3
Great news for the U.S. in the short term. Having others take on the responsibility of security makes our exhausting job of global policeman a little more manageable. Of course if you take the long view, Germany has some neighbors who might not be entirely excited about this development. No one will be sounding alarm bells, but if your neighbor is building their military it might make you pay a little more attention to yours as well. The slow-moving domino effect tilts away from U.S. hyper-power status.
This is even more good news for America, but I'm not sure that its good news for the rest of the world. Sure, hegemons predictably abuse and overreach their power. That said, I don't think the contemporaneous dominance of the U.S. military and economic flourishing of a peaceful (relative to the previous centuries of conflict) world are entirely coincidental. Hegemons provide stability, power vacuums breed power struggles.
This is even more good news for America, but I'm not sure that its good news for the rest of the world. Sure, hegemons predictably abuse and overreach their power. That said, I don't think the contemporaneous dominance of the U.S. military and economic flourishing of a peaceful (relative to the previous centuries of conflict) world are entirely coincidental. Hegemons provide stability, power vacuums breed power struggles.
Well an ordinary expansion of the military would be rather problematic. A smart expansion would be more effective. Bcz our society becomes older and there will be less younger people. We cannot hire retired people for that. A focus on elctronic military and security would be better but that's where Germany fails always.
1
The military will probably be used on behalf of German banksters to seize public assets in Greece to repay their debt to the banksters after failing to force the sale of public assets to them.
Then there's always the trillion in rare earth minerals in Afghanistan that needs to be rescued...
Then there's always the trillion in rare earth minerals in Afghanistan that needs to be rescued...
1
A sad reflection on the economic and moral exhaustion of the United States is to encourage Germany to dominate Europe not only economically but with the largest military as well. The reality is there is not a substitute for a strong American presence and indeed US dominance of NATO. The EU is close to economic fragmentation and social unrest. Only the relative stability and strength of the US has provided for a peaceful European platform for an historically long 70 years without a major European war.
4
What are you talking about??--Germany doesn't need the encouragement of the United States for anything, much less to "dominate Europe" -- you are aware that's where all the trouble first began, aren't you??
2
Germany has reached post-war maturity, or adolescence at least. It is not the place of the US to dominate any nation; haven't you learned that lesson yet, after Iraq etc. Remain vigilant in our defense, yes, but not dominate.
Europe needs to develop and pay for their own defense, while the US "defense" department needs to become much less offensive.
Europe needs to develop and pay for their own defense, while the US "defense" department needs to become much less offensive.
There must come a time when European nations take the lead in defending Europe. Collectively they have the economic horsepower to stand up to Putin and any other scallywag that replaces him and attempts to use control of energy supplies to intimidate Europe. It has been over 70 years since the cessation of hostilities in Europe. It is time for the presence of US Armed Forces there to come to an end. That does not mean we cannot maintain alliances with Europe, just on more equal terms in all things.
6
With a strong military what happens if a German Trump comes to power? Can you imagine--a demagogue in power in a militarized Germany? In past there is prologue...
1
To everyone complaining about how NATO allies don't contribute enough to thier own defense: don't forget that until recently, Germany's constitution forbade it to have any troops outside of its own borders. And there were two excellent reasons for this: World War I and World War II.
We are unreasonable in thinking that the US can simply waltz in and tell Germany that they should increase military spending without recalling that we insisted on disarming them in the first place.
We are unreasonable in thinking that the US can simply waltz in and tell Germany that they should increase military spending without recalling that we insisted on disarming them in the first place.
5
Allison:
The Germans (and other NATO "allies") made a commitment to defense spending - 2% of GDP. They and others have not lived up to their own commitment.
They made their promise not to the U.S., but to all other members of NATO. We need to pressure them to do what they have promised. If they do, then we will have a true partnership. If they don't, then it isn't really an alliance anyway.
The Germans (and other NATO "allies") made a commitment to defense spending - 2% of GDP. They and others have not lived up to their own commitment.
They made their promise not to the U.S., but to all other members of NATO. We need to pressure them to do what they have promised. If they do, then we will have a true partnership. If they don't, then it isn't really an alliance anyway.
1
Germany, the economic powerhouse of Europe, will now have a formidable military.
What could go wrong?
What could go wrong?
1
Let's hope the German's don't muck it up for the 3rd time.
Could it be that Germany realized that 85% of the economic migrants they let in, are males of fighting age, that have dispersed into the country without a trace?
3
The new immigrants will make great soldiers!
1
Sure, but with allegiance to whom?
2
It is a testament to how much Germany has changed for the better that almost the entire western world, including countries that were once trounced by the Nazis, wants Germany to expand its military.
Germany definitely earns the claim to Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit.
Germany definitely earns the claim to Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit.
3
The greatest function that a German military could serve going forward (along with the sizable militaries of the UK, France, Italy, and Greece) would be to protect and ensure the external borders of the European Union. Not only against Russian aggression, but against the hordes of migrants from the Middle East and Africa intent on "a better life" in Europe. The vast majority of migrants are not refugees from a war zone, but economic opportunists hoping for work or better yet a handout from the guilt-ridden German or Swedish governments; many of these migrants are unvetted and unidentified, minimally skilled, and uneducated. Most are adult males that come from Islamic societies with poor attitudes towards women, gays, and religious minorities, and do not have any plans to assimilate to European standards or values. Among them are hundreds or thousands of terrorists or terrorist sympathizers (499 in Germany alone according to a recent NYT article).
On the whole, uncontrolled migration to the EU has created the worst security crisis in Europe since the end of the Cold War. In the last two years we've seen in full the fruits of foolish, liberal migration policies of the past and present in the terror attacks on Paris and Brussels, the events of New Years Eve in Cologne and other cities, and riots in Sweden and the UK. In order to maintain internal security, the EU must police its external borders, and Germany must be a significant part of that effort.
On the whole, uncontrolled migration to the EU has created the worst security crisis in Europe since the end of the Cold War. In the last two years we've seen in full the fruits of foolish, liberal migration policies of the past and present in the terror attacks on Paris and Brussels, the events of New Years Eve in Cologne and other cities, and riots in Sweden and the UK. In order to maintain internal security, the EU must police its external borders, and Germany must be a significant part of that effort.
20
The army on the border? (rolls eyes)
1
Which riots in the UK in the last two years?
3
I think it is dangerous to refer to refugees, be they political or economic, as "hordes." The US was founded by political and economic refugees and as such, it didn't fare so poorly. Germany has greatly benefitted from absorbing refugees in the past (see the millions that left Eastern Europe after WWII).
You are advocating the use of military force to solve a situation that should be handled by border patrol agents. I for one don't think German tanks and frigates need to patrol the borders. Better to use the German Red Cross to help in refugee camps.
You are advocating the use of military force to solve a situation that should be handled by border patrol agents. I for one don't think German tanks and frigates need to patrol the borders. Better to use the German Red Cross to help in refugee camps.
3
If I live next to an annoying neighbor, it's real easy for someone living across town to tell me to just be a jerk to my neighbor and start being more aggressive. But, those people across town, don't have to live next to that neighbor each day.
Similarly, it's real easy for DC "think tank wonks" to tell Europe to intimidate Russia with more military spending, even though an outpost of the Russian state -- Kaliningrad -- sits in the heart of the European Union.
At some point, Europe is going to have to start peacefully resolving disputes with Russia -- to build a sustainable, long-term peace on the Eurasian continent -- and if that annoys wealthy people at Brookings or Victoria "duck the EU" Nuland, well, too bad.
Europeans don't want to be forced to the brink of nuclear war, simply because if Europe turns toward Russia instead of the United States, the U.S. is left alone and vulnerable.
Similarly, it's real easy for DC "think tank wonks" to tell Europe to intimidate Russia with more military spending, even though an outpost of the Russian state -- Kaliningrad -- sits in the heart of the European Union.
At some point, Europe is going to have to start peacefully resolving disputes with Russia -- to build a sustainable, long-term peace on the Eurasian continent -- and if that annoys wealthy people at Brookings or Victoria "duck the EU" Nuland, well, too bad.
Europeans don't want to be forced to the brink of nuclear war, simply because if Europe turns toward Russia instead of the United States, the U.S. is left alone and vulnerable.
3
I'm afraid your views don't represent Russia's neighbours, who have ample reason to feel the pressure of a sabre rattling Russia. Although Russia is a putative democracy, the reality is the Tsars never left, they only changed their appearance. Russia has demonstrated its willingness to intimidate, or rather dominate its neighbours militarily. The best way to ensure peace in the presence of a bully is to walk softly, but carry a big stick.
2
German military expansion is not a problem; in fact, such is a first acknowledgement by Europe that something has to be done about its endemic weakness.
The world needs a Europe with liberal, humanistic values to serve as a counter-balance to an America with similar values. Unfortunately, the odds of that continuing are diminishing quickly. Such values are not common and presently not in the ascendancy.
For seventy years Europe has been busily building exemplary internal social structures under the protection of the American military and our taxpayers. That has had the effect of allowing Europe to live in a bit of a fool's paradise, largely ignoring what was happening in much of the rest of the world, especially those things which would soon come to dramatically affect Europe itself.
The Balkan wars should have woken Europe up to its inability to collectively cope with serious issues. Unfortunately, the opportunity was wasted, and Europe sank back into self-delusion.
Europe became focused through Brussels more on what ought to be than what is. Though people live in the "is", Brussels remained in the "ought", as mass migration, Russian adventurism, a half-baked Euro, and radical Islam have all fairly quickly become impossible to ignore. As a result, the most worthy, noble, and important "European project" is seeing centrifugal forces rip it apart, as Europeans and their leaders forget why, after World War II, they began creating international structures in the first place.
The world needs a Europe with liberal, humanistic values to serve as a counter-balance to an America with similar values. Unfortunately, the odds of that continuing are diminishing quickly. Such values are not common and presently not in the ascendancy.
For seventy years Europe has been busily building exemplary internal social structures under the protection of the American military and our taxpayers. That has had the effect of allowing Europe to live in a bit of a fool's paradise, largely ignoring what was happening in much of the rest of the world, especially those things which would soon come to dramatically affect Europe itself.
The Balkan wars should have woken Europe up to its inability to collectively cope with serious issues. Unfortunately, the opportunity was wasted, and Europe sank back into self-delusion.
Europe became focused through Brussels more on what ought to be than what is. Though people live in the "is", Brussels remained in the "ought", as mass migration, Russian adventurism, a half-baked Euro, and radical Islam have all fairly quickly become impossible to ignore. As a result, the most worthy, noble, and important "European project" is seeing centrifugal forces rip it apart, as Europeans and their leaders forget why, after World War II, they began creating international structures in the first place.
8
Once upon a time wise men said that the U.S. pays for the warring and the E.U. pays for the reconstruction. Now it seems what everyone wants to do is warring, or at least preparing for it.
The favourite saying of the neocons ”if you want peace, prepare for war” is dangerously true today.
The favourite saying of the neocons ”if you want peace, prepare for war” is dangerously true today.
Building up the German military? What could possibly go wrong?
Let's not let that genie out of the lamp again.
They should still be doing perpetual community service. Let them be a permanently peace corps. No one should forget what they are capable of.
Let's not let that genie out of the lamp again.
They should still be doing perpetual community service. Let them be a permanently peace corps. No one should forget what they are capable of.
1
That's right, a peace corp. Maybe they could attend to the families of the murdered and systematically displaced in Palestine!
The US goads everyone into its endless wars. One Vietnam after another is what the US does around the World, and by eliminating the draft here, the US Military Industrial Complex can do as it pleases, without public opposition. Europe needs to eject the US from the shores of Europe, lest they find themselves in a War of the US's making.,
5
East Central Europe just got rid of the Russian occupiers 25 years ago. Eject the US from Europe, and whose back?
2
Yes, because continental Europe was so peaceful before us Americans came and ruined it...
1
No, Europe should not eject the US, they should not need to; we should call them home of our own accord.
And yes Phil, I agree about our nations propensity to meddle when a nation democratically elects a president which our political leaders don't like; a bad model for anyone. At this point, I don't imagine the Germans could do more damage Internationally than has the US.
And yes Phil, I agree about our nations propensity to meddle when a nation democratically elects a president which our political leaders don't like; a bad model for anyone. At this point, I don't imagine the Germans could do more damage Internationally than has the US.
1
Finally we will get the benefit of militarily stronger key allies in key locations. This takes pressure off our military commitments. The fist is a nice addition to the rhetoric.
3
A lot of people here seem to entertain the notion that there could be some kind of large scale conventional military confrontation between the West and Russia where numbers of personnel decide the outcome. Just for your information there is still a thing called thermonuclear annihilation. So for all you military romantics out there, after a war with Russia; there won't be any ticker tape parades; there won't be any "Greatest Generation"; there won't be any heroic movies; there won't be any celebrations of some anniversaries where some minor party joined a theater of war; there won't be any fun video games ... (But I have to admit that there will be some pretty happy survivalists in Idaho. Good for you guys, you were right.)
9
If you want peace, prepare for war.
1
A war with Russia, would be fought conventionally.
Russia does not want nuclear dust landing on their food sources, and a US president knows that raining nuclear bomb in Europe will assure he/she does not get reelected.
Russia does not want nuclear dust landing on their food sources, and a US president knows that raining nuclear bomb in Europe will assure he/she does not get reelected.
1
@ordaz
It appears as though you've missed what Donald Trump has been saying.
It appears as though you've missed what Donald Trump has been saying.
"Berlin’s pledge last month to add almost 7,000 soldiers to its military by 2023"
That's it? Sorry, not enough. I want five new Panzer divisions and three more SS divisions before I feel good about this.
That's it? Sorry, not enough. I want five new Panzer divisions and three more SS divisions before I feel good about this.
14
Online, under the headline beginning with, "In a Reversal," is the sub, "As Europe faces pressure from ISIS and a more muscular Russia, Germany (is) reversing its decades-long instinctive pacifism." Instinctive? There is nothing instinctive about any county's choice. Germany has recently been more inclined to pacifism than it was before. All of humanity is going to have to make that choice more and more often in order to survive. But even our instinct for survival won't make it happen. We'll have to make it our choice.
8
To put the numbers in perspective - Poland, with a small fraction of German GDP, is planning to add 30,000-50,000 soldiers to it's armed forces in the next few years. Tiny Estonia, home of Skype, is spending 2% of GDP on it's armed forces. Germany's approach to national defense is best described as "Eh, let Americans take care of it".
9
Reservists, not full time soldiers. Still, a good initiative.
2
Regina,
Would you prefer that Germany reconcile its differences with Russia and pivot towards Russia -- instead of the United States -- in terms of economic and defense cooperation?
You have to understand that not everyone in Germany sees the U.S. as an intrinsically better actor than Russia. And, indeed, many in Germany would prefer to cooperate with Russia over the U.S., simply because of geographic proximity.
The U.S. needs to stop pushing other countries to war and aggression.
Would you prefer that Germany reconcile its differences with Russia and pivot towards Russia -- instead of the United States -- in terms of economic and defense cooperation?
You have to understand that not everyone in Germany sees the U.S. as an intrinsically better actor than Russia. And, indeed, many in Germany would prefer to cooperate with Russia over the U.S., simply because of geographic proximity.
The U.S. needs to stop pushing other countries to war and aggression.
2
@regina
Not so. But then, you don't realize how much it is costing Germany to contend with all Syrian the refugees (over 1 mio.) that this country has failed to take in.
Not so. But then, you don't realize how much it is costing Germany to contend with all Syrian the refugees (over 1 mio.) that this country has failed to take in.
2
What awful, awful news. Japan becoming militaristic and now Germany. Also, using Russia as an excuse is absurd. Russia and Germany should only be the closest of allies.
Awful news.
Awful news.
6
Putin's aggression is precisely what prompted this response. Germany has been literally selling off it's military hardware for the last decade and more in the biggest garage sale ever, drastically shrank it's army, and ended conscription. The Russians by invading Ukraine and seizing Crimea, have only themselves to blame for this (extremely modest) revival of German military capability.
3
The Russians still remember 20 million dead in WWII. Many will never want to cozy up to Germany.
@allison
The Russians may not want to "cozy up to Germany", but they desperately need the money.
The Russians may not want to "cozy up to Germany", but they desperately need the money.
I share Dr. Kamp's sentiments here, "The major danger he sees for these plans is “the fact that we have these anti-establishment movements on both sides of the Atlantic — we have the Alternative for Germany, we have the National Front in France and in the U.S.A. we have Trump.” One Latin American country is near electing a radical right-wing Wall Street "conservative" as President and there are movements by BIG democracy-destroying money masters to take power by buying governments around the world. Japan is going to rearm and now Germany. Weapons mean war. Average people around the world must understand what operatives of the top 1% global financial elite have in store for us - continuous chaos and war so THEY can gain even more of the world's wealth. This is truly a turning point in world history.
3
Next we will hear the Germans suggest they need more "living spaces" .
My father (a veteran of WW2, wounded by German machine guns), always said "after the war let Russian keep (all of) Germany and Japan, and let Germany keep France. Then everyone will get what they deserve."
My father (a veteran of WW2, wounded by German machine guns), always said "after the war let Russian keep (all of) Germany and Japan, and let Germany keep France. Then everyone will get what they deserve."
1
Well, well. The expansion is a request by your government. If such "need more living spaces" comes, then from DC.
@weissmann
Sorry. Nein. Stimmt nicht. The U.S. did not ask to expand NATO, that request came from the Balkan states, most notably Poland -- and for understandable reasons.
Sorry. Nein. Stimmt nicht. The U.S. did not ask to expand NATO, that request came from the Balkan states, most notably Poland -- and for understandable reasons.
1
The German military has actually had a very active role abroad for years, but more in terms of strategic support that usually involves a humanitarian effort.
Germany is very aware of the long shadow it still casts from the Second World War, and isn't in a rush to show any strength of force -- At the same time, it doesn't want to completely alienate Russia, with which it still fosters economic ties.
It's a well known fact that Angela Merkel and President Obama have a solid working relationship, but how that would play out if Trump were elected is anybody's guess, especially as far as NATO is concerned.
Germany is very aware of the long shadow it still casts from the Second World War, and isn't in a rush to show any strength of force -- At the same time, it doesn't want to completely alienate Russia, with which it still fosters economic ties.
It's a well known fact that Angela Merkel and President Obama have a solid working relationship, but how that would play out if Trump were elected is anybody's guess, especially as far as NATO is concerned.
3
Isn't it interesting how the Times and other papers discuss incredible amounts spent on the military in glowing terms vs. that spent on social programs?
$130 billion on the military = Germany paying its fair share
$130 billion spent on health care/education/public sector jobs/etc. = a "bloated" public sector that must be cut
Not hard to guess what the elite prioritize in contemporary society.
$130 billion on the military = Germany paying its fair share
$130 billion spent on health care/education/public sector jobs/etc. = a "bloated" public sector that must be cut
Not hard to guess what the elite prioritize in contemporary society.
6
Thanks for pointing this out. We cannot blame the Germans for taking care of their own household, when all we do with our military is go around messing up other countries' households, while starving oyr own people at home in order to keep feeding the war machine.
1
The headline brought, unbidden, lines from that Tom Lehrer song of 40 to 50 years ago: MLF Lullabye, about how "we taught them (the Germans) a lesson in 1918 and they've hardly bothered us since then. I believe it ended "and one of the fingers on the button will be German."
We should all be careful of what we wish for.
We should all be careful of what we wish for.
In other news, today is the 70th anniversary of D-Day. Thanks, NYT, for not missing an opportunity to ignore the exploits of American soldiers.
As for Germany, well, it's a free country, as we like to say here. The Russians are no more capable of launching an invasion into Europe than I am of dunking a basketball. But if Europe in general, and Germany in particular, feel this is a "threat" they need to address, well, it's their GDP they're wasting. At least it's not ours, for a change.
As for ISIS, it will not be defeated with conventional tools like bigger armies and air forces. It will be brought to heel with better intelligence and special ops forces. Surely someone in the military academies specializing in asymmetric warfare already knows this.
As for Germany, well, it's a free country, as we like to say here. The Russians are no more capable of launching an invasion into Europe than I am of dunking a basketball. But if Europe in general, and Germany in particular, feel this is a "threat" they need to address, well, it's their GDP they're wasting. At least it's not ours, for a change.
As for ISIS, it will not be defeated with conventional tools like bigger armies and air forces. It will be brought to heel with better intelligence and special ops forces. Surely someone in the military academies specializing in asymmetric warfare already knows this.
7
"As for ISIS, it will not be defeated with conventional tools like bigger armies and air forces. It will be brought to heel with better intelligence and special ops forces."
Or it could be totally destroyed with a few tactical nuclear weapons before it becomes more of a threat to Europe and the Middle East.
Or it could be totally destroyed with a few tactical nuclear weapons before it becomes more of a threat to Europe and the Middle East.
1
Yes, but for those pesky civilians forcefully interspersed with them.
1
Next thing you know the US will have aircraft carriers docking at Cam Ranh Bay, Vietnam and Germany conducting joint military exercises with Israel.
8
Hopefully so. There is no reason for us to show animosity toward our past enemies. We might as well not leave them out in the cold and make them resentful.
2
The numbers reported in the article are meaningless without comparative data of either the percentage increased or what part of the total in Germany - NATO etc they represent.
I wish Germany would continue to underfund their military, but there is much foreign pressure to send troops to US military adventures like the near-east or to fend off radical Islam in countries like Mali.
I wish Germany would continue to underfund their military, but there is much foreign pressure to send troops to US military adventures like the near-east or to fend off radical Islam in countries like Mali.
3
The United States is not the paper tiger it was in the 1930s when isolationism was the order of the day. Then, our army was smaller than that of Romania. Our cavalry had 10,000 horses that had to be fed and watered. The standard issue weapon was invented in 1903.
Neither Germany nor Japan, two nations at peace with the world for 75 years and leading economic powerhouses, could ever militarize to the point where the world would need fear them as it did pre WWII.
Besides, if they ever tried, we would send a carrier group or two to send them a message.
Neither Germany nor Japan, two nations at peace with the world for 75 years and leading economic powerhouses, could ever militarize to the point where the world would need fear them as it did pre WWII.
Besides, if they ever tried, we would send a carrier group or two to send them a message.
6
As one who has spent many years working with Germans and traveling in country, the Germany I have learnt about is mostly highly educated in their history. The generations after 'baby boomers' - WW2 was seldom taught in depth to that generation, yet all were keenly aware of the facts- are schooled strongly in the 'ills of their past' (something that USA students have all but no realisation of USA's past e.g. native Americans). Failure to built a robust military by Germany has been influenced by the groundless notion that given an army, Germany will 'march again'. This notion has been part of the UK's, France's & USA's mythological recounts of history. Such notions are without merit because there is no 'militant gene' within the human genome.
With expansion of their military, Germany demonstrates that a society can learn from past mistakes to never repeat them again. This has been accomplished by the fine educational system in Germany and replacement of folklore/mythology with historical fact that provides many Germans with an understanding of their responsibility to themselves and the world. In short, a model for the USA to follow.
With expansion of their military, Germany demonstrates that a society can learn from past mistakes to never repeat them again. This has been accomplished by the fine educational system in Germany and replacement of folklore/mythology with historical fact that provides many Germans with an understanding of their responsibility to themselves and the world. In short, a model for the USA to follow.
29
Jim: well said.
1
Yes, well said Jim,
Given the current polarization in US politics, and in the population, I am more concerned about the rise of a fascistic US government empowered by some citizens who, as Jim mentions above, are poorly educated regarding our past and ongoing anti-democratic military and CIA exploits in nations around the world.
USA USA USA!
Given the current polarization in US politics, and in the population, I am more concerned about the rise of a fascistic US government empowered by some citizens who, as Jim mentions above, are poorly educated regarding our past and ongoing anti-democratic military and CIA exploits in nations around the world.
USA USA USA!
Now that some even in the US question its leadership role in NATO, Europeans aren't spending enough? Typical blinkered navel gazing on behalf of the usual suspects. The US never wanted a strong European defence.
I find it particularly galling that the article mentions the Franco German "ghost brigade", since the US did everything it could politically to ensure Europe remained a military vassal. To head off any semblance of European defence initiatives outside US tutelage, it played off each country's interests and sensiibilites, when it didn't actually buy them off with sweetheart arms deals (Poland???). All that to preserve the primacy of NATO and its own leadership role.
US defence spending drives US politics and federal expenditures to a degree that boggles the mind. It remains a domestic US issue over which Europeans have little to no say. One could use the word Empire except one is hard pressed to see the payoff for the American public outside of defence contractors and the politicians who depend on their largess.
The US got the European defence it both wanted and played a hand in creating.
I find it particularly galling that the article mentions the Franco German "ghost brigade", since the US did everything it could politically to ensure Europe remained a military vassal. To head off any semblance of European defence initiatives outside US tutelage, it played off each country's interests and sensiibilites, when it didn't actually buy them off with sweetheart arms deals (Poland???). All that to preserve the primacy of NATO and its own leadership role.
US defence spending drives US politics and federal expenditures to a degree that boggles the mind. It remains a domestic US issue over which Europeans have little to no say. One could use the word Empire except one is hard pressed to see the payoff for the American public outside of defence contractors and the politicians who depend on their largess.
The US got the European defence it both wanted and played a hand in creating.
14
Andy: your are correct, but times have changed and now look what a forward thinking POTUS has done: restore relations with Cuba, constrain Iran's ability to produce nuclear weapons, and pivot out of the middle east quicksand.
We have now revised and reversed a long standing (and no longer optimum) NATO policy to get the European Defenses we all need them while our attention turns to ASIA.
We have now revised and reversed a long standing (and no longer optimum) NATO policy to get the European Defenses we all need them while our attention turns to ASIA.
2
@stage you'll get no argument from me on the need for European initiatives on defence. Hopefully they'll be encouraged rather than hypocritically criticized.
2
It is not really so hard to see the payoff from nouveau Empire For certain communities in the US.
We all see how communities around defense contractors display vastly more wealth than their surrounding areas; Look at San Diego, look at communities where subs and ships are built, where missile systems are engineered and built, and look at Silicon Valley as the presence of the defense Dept. Grows there.
We all see how communities around defense contractors display vastly more wealth than their surrounding areas; Look at San Diego, look at communities where subs and ships are built, where missile systems are engineered and built, and look at Silicon Valley as the presence of the defense Dept. Grows there.
First Japan, now Germany. With Nationalism taking over, in both countries, and the fact that both countries created the mess we deal with today, do you really want either have a robust military?
Japan, after its army was trained by the US, in the late 19th century, as a bulwark against European colonialism, it expanded its empire until it turned on the US in 1941. And while it occupied China, Korea, Indochina, and many Pacific Islands; it brought with it brutal force, and atrocities, all in the name of their living god emperor. Eventually sowing the seeds for the spread of Stalism in south and eastern
Germany, the starter of two major wars on Europe. The first one changed the map of the map of the world. As the European powers divided the spoils of the German Empire and its allies. including the mess we call the Middle East. And of course, the worse was yet to come the rise of the Third Reich, the Shoah, almost 100 million killed before it was over. Also, ushering in the rise of world wide Stalism, the Cold War and nuclear proliferation.
On this, the 72nd anniversary of D-Day, we remember the thousands who gave their lives to end the Third Reich less than a year later. And we must never forget what Germany and Japan did, in the early to mid-20th century which still bears scars even 71 years years after the end of WWII.
Japan, after its army was trained by the US, in the late 19th century, as a bulwark against European colonialism, it expanded its empire until it turned on the US in 1941. And while it occupied China, Korea, Indochina, and many Pacific Islands; it brought with it brutal force, and atrocities, all in the name of their living god emperor. Eventually sowing the seeds for the spread of Stalism in south and eastern
Germany, the starter of two major wars on Europe. The first one changed the map of the map of the world. As the European powers divided the spoils of the German Empire and its allies. including the mess we call the Middle East. And of course, the worse was yet to come the rise of the Third Reich, the Shoah, almost 100 million killed before it was over. Also, ushering in the rise of world wide Stalism, the Cold War and nuclear proliferation.
On this, the 72nd anniversary of D-Day, we remember the thousands who gave their lives to end the Third Reich less than a year later. And we must never forget what Germany and Japan did, in the early to mid-20th century which still bears scars even 71 years years after the end of WWII.
3
I seem to recall that Italy, Greece and Finland were also part of the Axis during WW!11 although perhaps France, while not an original partner, was certainly the greatest collaborator. No one trusted the French for good reason. Even the Brits had to sink the French fleet before they joined the NAZIs.
2
@Nick Metrowsky: You write that Germany started two major wars in Europe. I assume that you are referring to WWI and WWII. As for WWI, you are incorrect. Germany did not start WWI. That war was started by Serbia, when a Serbian assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austro-Hungary. In response to the assassination of the Archduke, Austria declared war on Serbia on July 28, 1914. Next Russia, in alliance with Serbia, declared war on Austria on July 29, 1914. Russia then ordered a general mobilization against Germany, an ally of Austria, on July 30, 1914. On August 1, 1914, Germany declared war on Russia. As for WWII, you are correct, as Germany’s invasion of Poland on September started that war. For that, I award you a gold star. Cheers!
11
I think the Greeks would be annoyed, if not highly angered, at your comment referring to them as having been part of the Axis. The Greeks put up a valiant fight against the Italians but then were overwhelmed by Wehrmacht in 1941.
1
Great news for the global defense industry. Something else comes out of Alison Smale's detailed description of Germany's defense buildup. It is a story of the military motif, one that continues into the 21st century. The world can't shake it.
Building militaries is the dual aspect of progress. As we progress, we build militaries which impair progress, but we use them to measure our progress. Today we say that Germany's military now improves. In all our self-acknowledged advanced thinking, we cannot see beyond the horizon of national defense.
No effective real world geopolitical policy exists, so militaries grow as a measure of geopolitical influence. Defense solves nothing, but it makes us all feel better and is a fillip to sagging economies. Maybe we'll have to wait until the 22nd century for meaningful diplomatic progress.
Building militaries is the dual aspect of progress. As we progress, we build militaries which impair progress, but we use them to measure our progress. Today we say that Germany's military now improves. In all our self-acknowledged advanced thinking, we cannot see beyond the horizon of national defense.
No effective real world geopolitical policy exists, so militaries grow as a measure of geopolitical influence. Defense solves nothing, but it makes us all feel better and is a fillip to sagging economies. Maybe we'll have to wait until the 22nd century for meaningful diplomatic progress.
3
Said every Chamberlain, Delardier and masses of capitulators since forever...
3
It's about time that Germany carried more of its own water militarily. Unfortunately, it's just a drop in the bucket of all the billions that American taxpayers pony up annually to protect European nations. It's time for Germany, France and all the other nations of Europe to pay their own way.
15
Paul:
yes, the POTUS is finally getting them to pony up and pay there own way.
Thnx Prez!
yes, the POTUS is finally getting them to pony up and pay there own way.
Thnx Prez!
2
I don't think Ursula von der Leyen will ever be President. Nor should she lead the new German Armed Forces. Not only do Germans fear the Russians but also the threat from inside created by the insane Merkel policy of open borders. At some point a lot of countries will dislike Germany again and they know it.
5
At this point, I think Germany's neighbors are more worried about Merkel taking in another million+ Muslims into the heart of Europe than a beefed up German army.
6
Yes, times have changed a lot, very, very different from the '40s. It is time Europeans took on more of the onus of their own protection, currently taken care by us - a country separated from Europe by a huge ocean. NATO was right for the '40s. Now the Europeans are fighting a war in their own backyard. Each country is rich enough and very capable of getting a well-equipped, sophisticated army. The logistics would be better for them than us. Now Germany is seeing the light. They know their history and will certainly not repeat it. So I hope we fight Russia's nonchalant advances and ISIS not with small contingents from these countries but with their armies with a small contingent from the USA. Being the World's Leader has gotten to be an expensive, heavy burden. Time to delegate responsibility. Germany as usual is ahead of the curve. I hope the other European countries follow the Leader of their pack.
7
I think Germany is ready to have a powerful military again. Without like 11 aircraft carriers, the United States would not have the power to influence decisions around the world. As all these dubious actors like China and Russia build their militaries, it would be folly for NATO countries to just assume the U.S. will come to save them with money, troops, and material.
Germany, France, and Britain need to double military expenditures, and do it fast. The United States, even with the 11 carriers and billions of dollars, cannot police the world any longer. We need to spend less, and they should spend more to even out the military power in the world.
Germany, France, and Britain need to double military expenditures, and do it fast. The United States, even with the 11 carriers and billions of dollars, cannot police the world any longer. We need to spend less, and they should spend more to even out the military power in the world.
7
France and Britain carry their own weight.
And Germany was defanged intentionally by all involved, including the US. Even Russia benefited from German and subsequent US military drawdowns, by having what amounts to a neutral country buffer zone in Germany, despite nominal NATO membership and infrastructure.
If European defence is in its current state, it is because the US preferred the primacy of NATO under its own leadership., and played European countries off one another to stiffle any European defence initiatives not under NATO (ie US) tutelage.
Now that even some in the US no longer want the role of leadership, you want to cry about the shaky edifice you've built?
And Germany was defanged intentionally by all involved, including the US. Even Russia benefited from German and subsequent US military drawdowns, by having what amounts to a neutral country buffer zone in Germany, despite nominal NATO membership and infrastructure.
If European defence is in its current state, it is because the US preferred the primacy of NATO under its own leadership., and played European countries off one another to stiffle any European defence initiatives not under NATO (ie US) tutelage.
Now that even some in the US no longer want the role of leadership, you want to cry about the shaky edifice you've built?
6
Ok. I guess Germany need help from Donald Trump. After election Donald Trump should go back to his NATIVE Germany and chant MAKE GERMANY GREAT AGAIN.
8
Why doesn't the media, especially NYT, tell us more about Mr. Trump's heritage. Such as where his ancestors in Germany lived, who they were, when they came to America, etc.
Everyone knows about President Obama's background. Tell us more about the man who may be our next president. Thanks.
Everyone knows about President Obama's background. Tell us more about the man who may be our next president. Thanks.
3
This is a most unfavorable comment in its sentiment. And were you in Germany, you would probably be a member of 'Alternative für Deutschland'.
A new wave of nationalism and xenophobia is sweeping Europe and almost putting a reactionary candidate in power in Austria. Since the one country that we can be absolutely sure has no "instinctive pacifism" is Germany, especially when the nationalistic drums are beating, we should not be so welcoming to a new buildup of the German military. The reactivation of Cold-War thinking, more so in America than Europe, has caused the U.S. to push for a greater investment in and buildup of NATO. NATO's growth has already pushed Putin into doing dangerous things and planting more German troops on the Russian border is provocative and more likely to lead to dangerous confrontation than peace.
1
two thoughts:
1) nothing about D-Day?
2) how ironic that a NATO meeting is taking place in Warsaw
1) nothing about D-Day?
2) how ironic that a NATO meeting is taking place in Warsaw
11
You are exactly right. I have not read in the NYT or any other newspaper, nor did I hear anything on NPR this morning about this being the 72nd anniversary of D-Day. Even the Drudge Report did not make mention of it. Do the liberals want D-Day to go away? Soon the liberals will want to ignore December 7, Pearl Harbor Day. The liberals truly hate America.
3
That's a sweeping generalization. And entirely untrue. I would argue that Republicans hate America, considering their untiring efforts to impoverish the middle and lower classes, destroy our system of government by turning it into a plutocracy, and gutting the public institutions that we used to be rightly proud of.
2
If Donald Trump is indeed correct , why should the USA be paying a part of the security for Germany , Japan and Saudi Arabia. Let them pay for their own security.
12
Germans are smart people. They realize that military spending beyond a certain point is a complete waste, even counterproductive. They may even be way short of that certain point but as a US taxpayer I know America is way way over. How people can so blithely countenance our propensity for war that is expensive beyond all belief amidst all our talk of budget woes and a too large federal government baffles me.
Our two big Asian wars have been debacles, just like our previous Asian war in Vietnam. Smart people would take a lesson from this, but our war politics and military politics somehow prevent this. Sometimes I think the generals took over a long time ago, perhaps around the time Kennedy was killed, and civilian government has had certain decision making authority removed.
You need a strong military but you don't need a cancer of militarism at the heart of your government, devouring everything.
Our two big Asian wars have been debacles, just like our previous Asian war in Vietnam. Smart people would take a lesson from this, but our war politics and military politics somehow prevent this. Sometimes I think the generals took over a long time ago, perhaps around the time Kennedy was killed, and civilian government has had certain decision making authority removed.
You need a strong military but you don't need a cancer of militarism at the heart of your government, devouring everything.
3
Be careful what you wish for: Today's feeling of "Western relief" over Germany's remilitarization may be tomorrow's feeling of "Western dread."
The byline to this story on the Times website, probably scripted by an senior editor, not the author, ends " reversing its decades-long instinctive pacifism." There is nothing instinctive about the pacifism in Germany. It is imposed, by the rest of Europe and accepted by the German people who survived the ravages of WW II. Germany is the most feared country in Europe, mostly by Russia but also shared by many of the other European countries.
You will not see a military as strong as its economy in Germany until NATO, i.e, the United States, disintegrates. But with the bankrupting of the U.S. by the American Left, that day is coming sooner than most people expect.
You will not see a military as strong as its economy in Germany until NATO, i.e, the United States, disintegrates. But with the bankrupting of the U.S. by the American Left, that day is coming sooner than most people expect.
2
"But with the bankrupting of the U.S. by the American Left . . . ." Did you by any chance read the article about the Panama Papers? Just asking.
4
It certainly looks as if we're being bankrupted by the wealthy right wing, who apparently think they should be above paying taxes.
2
@hardhat
Sorry. I disagree with your statement: "There is nothing instinctive about pacifism in Germany".
But then, you probably weren't there at the end of the Second World War, when the country lay in ashes, without food, electricity, and the most basic of human needs -- because THAT is what made pacifism "instinctive" in Germany.
And it's also why they did not rush into building and equipping another army, no matter the cause.
Sorry. I disagree with your statement: "There is nothing instinctive about pacifism in Germany".
But then, you probably weren't there at the end of the Second World War, when the country lay in ashes, without food, electricity, and the most basic of human needs -- because THAT is what made pacifism "instinctive" in Germany.
And it's also why they did not rush into building and equipping another army, no matter the cause.
If militarization is the product of 'tolerance' and 'diversity' it seems a devil's bargain.
When will they ever learn? When will we, ever learn?
When will they ever learn? When will we, ever learn?
Well, if many of the comments here are to be taken seriously, the answer is simple: never.
This is the first step. A German army will come in handy when we need to crush the coming Caliphate.
3
Hopefully a Grand Alliance of the US, the EU, Russia and India will be formed to destroy the Islamic Caliphate in Africa and Europe.
2
Get ready. 3-2-1 Trump "They are doing this because of me. The only reason. Believe me. I know. My big brain told me so".
2
This latest crop of populists around the world is blind folding the young to history. They say that there are no need for alliances either at home or abroad. They lie and say that the past was better, and that everything that was done back then has now caused the present to be awful. NATO, National Vaccination programs and the New Deal are now seen as outdated. The populists say that we never needed these things, and the youth have no reference of how bad things were before these plans were enacted.
The youth were not around to see post-WWII Europe or Japan. They were not around for the Great Depression, and they were not around to see 75% of siblings die before there 5th birthday, because of childhood diseases. Demagogues always seem to take advantage of that. Therefore, I can understand why Germany feels that it is time to get more involved in the world, militarily. They have seen this movie before.
The youth were not around to see post-WWII Europe or Japan. They were not around for the Great Depression, and they were not around to see 75% of siblings die before there 5th birthday, because of childhood diseases. Demagogues always seem to take advantage of that. Therefore, I can understand why Germany feels that it is time to get more involved in the world, militarily. They have seen this movie before.
4
"The policy-making elite, on other hand, know that “strategic thinking includes the notion that you have to build a force in order to be taken seriously, and that you have to spend on this dimension,” Ms. Tempel said."
Around the world elite is another word for en-titled narcissist. Democracy is so yesterday.
Around the world elite is another word for en-titled narcissist. Democracy is so yesterday.
4
As repellant as I find the Clinton campaign's "I'm with Her" advertisements, I am not running an ad blocker because I want the Times and other sites I visit to get their share of the money being thrown around.
@coast
No offense, but I fail to see where and how this figures in with the thread of this comment section.
No offense, but I fail to see where and how this figures in with the thread of this comment section.
@smith
A Clinton ad was thrust upon me as I clicked onto this story. I threw up in my mouth a little bit and then ran through the mental process that led me to decide I wouldn't run ad blocker because I want the Times and other sites I visit to get their share of the money being thrown around.
A Clinton ad was thrust upon me as I clicked onto this story. I threw up in my mouth a little bit and then ran through the mental process that led me to decide I wouldn't run ad blocker because I want the Times and other sites I visit to get their share of the money being thrown around.
The lead is in the middle of the article where we find out that even with these increases, Germany will spend significantly less than 2% of GDP on its military. So there is less to this story than meet the eye.
8
Germany faces no real military threat, neither by ISIS, Russia or any other country or organization. Somehow we humans seem to need enemies to define our friends, but the reality is that NATO is so incredibly much stronger than any other force on this planet that the argument that it would need even more weapons to defend itself is just ridiculous and Germany of all countries certainly has no desire to project power or "control" other regions of this planet.
So those 130 billion are money wasted to satisfy a part of the electorate that needs enemies, tanks and bombs to feel secure of itself.
They would have been much better spent on schools or fixing the pension system.
So those 130 billion are money wasted to satisfy a part of the electorate that needs enemies, tanks and bombs to feel secure of itself.
They would have been much better spent on schools or fixing the pension system.
3
@zhou
Seeing as you are in China, it's difficult to know what your news sources are -- but let me assure you that Germany, and all of Europe is under threat from ISIS, and to a certain extent from Russia as well, albeit for different reasons.
And until the world is free of the territorial expansionist tendencies of certain countries, a military alternative is bound to remain in place as a deterrent.
Seeing as you are in China, it's difficult to know what your news sources are -- but let me assure you that Germany, and all of Europe is under threat from ISIS, and to a certain extent from Russia as well, albeit for different reasons.
And until the world is free of the territorial expansionist tendencies of certain countries, a military alternative is bound to remain in place as a deterrent.
1
Germany is the only country in Europe that has the money, industrial capacity and engineering abilty to build a military, including developing nuclear weapons, to deter the Russians on its own. If Germany believes a Russian threat is real, they have the obligation to it's people to defend themselves.
The difficult question here concerns the German culture. Has the culture changed deeply enough over the past 70 years that they can be trusted not to use their military for aggressive purposes? From a distance it seems like it has changed, and an additional
strong military ally to relieve the pressure from the US military, and the associated costs, is welcome.
The difficult question here concerns the German culture. Has the culture changed deeply enough over the past 70 years that they can be trusted not to use their military for aggressive purposes? From a distance it seems like it has changed, and an additional
strong military ally to relieve the pressure from the US military, and the associated costs, is welcome.
10
Larry Gr, you ask, "Has the culture changed deeply enough over the past 70 years that they can be trusted not to use their military for aggressive purposes?" It depends solely on who they chose as their leaders and the top 1% global financial elite are trying to get their radical right operatives elected around the world. It is sinister.
2
A long time coming. Welcome back to the fight. The fight for freedom! World freedom!
3
Germany is number 5 in world sales of arms. Contrast this fact with the reality that Japan still has to tap dance with the apology tour and has to explain to the world that it's safe for Japan to sell arms to the world. Why such a difference in approach and attitude between Germany and Japan?
I see these political games completely and utterly ridiculous with no consistent position or policy whatsoever. It's as if they say whatever sounds good or will pass for the moment.
I see these political games completely and utterly ridiculous with no consistent position or policy whatsoever. It's as if they say whatever sounds good or will pass for the moment.
2
Because Japan still believes that it was fighting for all of East Asia against the
White colonialists in Europe and their cousins in the USA. The Germans apologized for killing all those Jews and invading Russia. The USA will not, as we know, apologize for dropping Atomic Bombs on Japan and the Japanese will not apologize for kidnapping tens of thousands of "comfort women" to prepare it armies for battle. Then, too, the USA and Germany are racially linked!
White colonialists in Europe and their cousins in the USA. The Germans apologized for killing all those Jews and invading Russia. The USA will not, as we know, apologize for dropping Atomic Bombs on Japan and the Japanese will not apologize for kidnapping tens of thousands of "comfort women" to prepare it armies for battle. Then, too, the USA and Germany are racially linked!
2
Japan has apologized many, many times. You just haven't been listening.
And do you really want to dredge up old war history? The Nazis? Do we really need to go there. Do I really need to cite all those horrors? No, I don't really think so.
Your last sentence really gets to the point. Germans are white Caucasians, the Japanese, not white, not Caucasian. There's all the difference right there! Racism is alive and well, and we need to recognize it wherever it sticks it's ugly head up.
And do you really want to dredge up old war history? The Nazis? Do we really need to go there. Do I really need to cite all those horrors? No, I don't really think so.
Your last sentence really gets to the point. Germans are white Caucasians, the Japanese, not white, not Caucasian. There's all the difference right there! Racism is alive and well, and we need to recognize it wherever it sticks it's ugly head up.
This is good news because the US should not have to shoulder the cost of defending Europe against Russia all by ourselves. It is long overdue for Germany to rebuild their military and help defend the west against putin's armed adventures in eastern Europe and the Baltics. One can understand their reluctance given the history of ww2, but that was then and this is now. It would be wise for Germany to close its borders to wide open lawless immigration because the muslim culture is not compatible in the traditional German culture, nor is it fitting in the US. Would you really want to live under the 6th century provisions of sharia law instead of the legal system we have now? Think about it. Only oboma and Clinton are inviting terrorists to live among us.
Vote for NO democrats in 2016.
Vote for NO democrats in 2016.
1
As a german I didn't even hear about this expansion until now, but that may be because 7000 additional troops in 7 years appears like symbolism, nothing more. What will a few thousand more soldiers change? Nothing.
Our chancellor and our government - and, to be fair, many millions of ordinary Germans - prefer to spend untold billions on arab refugees that undermine our security (another three plotting syrian terrorists arrested this week in Germany who came here as refugees), instead of on our actual security.
Our chancellor and our government - and, to be fair, many millions of ordinary Germans - prefer to spend untold billions on arab refugees that undermine our security (another three plotting syrian terrorists arrested this week in Germany who came here as refugees), instead of on our actual security.
6
@gabe
Sehr lustig -- Because the real problem now lies with the imminent Conservative Party (CDU/CSU) breakup, the resignation of President Gauck, the rise of the AfD, and of course, the refugee crisis...No small wonder you missed this.
Sehr lustig -- Because the real problem now lies with the imminent Conservative Party (CDU/CSU) breakup, the resignation of President Gauck, the rise of the AfD, and of course, the refugee crisis...No small wonder you missed this.
Finally, a country in Europe that could keep Putin up at night.
5
Let us recall that Stalin’s Red Army was led by a handful of peasant-type marshals and generals who commanded millions of Russian peasants and a rainbow assortment of other “Untermenschen”, in their battle for Berlin early in 1945, in which they destroyed the sad remnants of Hitler’s armies – that included the so-called “racially pure” Waffen-SS ̶ commanded by an impressive military elite not only by Prussian noblemen field marshals but also of Nazi-generals like “the butcher Schörner” and the vulgar Waffen-SS Obergruppenführer Eicke, a battle to the finish that resulted in the total defeat of the Nazi German forces on the Eastern Front. Let us also recall the strategically brilliant but morally questionable decision by President Roosevelt – a devout Christian ̶ to side with Stalin’s Godless Bolsheviks, as the most effective means by which to defeat the Nazi-hordes while saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of Allied soldiers. The “Russian Bear” does not scare easily. Instead of sending to Lithuania a bunch of (democratic) German troops is said to have the purpose of preventing Russia’s presumed re-occupation of the Baltic states – in my view, a totally ill-advised move that will result in increasing antagonism between NATO and Russia - we, the West, should try to secure Mr. Putin and his Russia as our principal allies, as a means to prevent China’s possible invasion of parts of Far-east Siberia.
Respectfully submitted, Adalbert Lallier
Respectfully submitted, Adalbert Lallier
1
" we, the West, should try to secure Mr. Putin and his Russia as our principal allies, as a means to prevent China’s possible invasion of parts of Far-east Siberia."
And also to prevent the rise of a radical Islamic Caliphate in Africa and Europe.
And also to prevent the rise of a radical Islamic Caliphate in Africa and Europe.
2
Both France and the UK do meet their 2% of GDP military spending targets, which you would think would have some place in an article like this, if only to underline that Trump is lying to voters. France, the UK, and Germany are by far the US's largest and most significant allies, and the only reason Germany isn't spending at comparable levels is, as the article noted, a legacy of world war. Getting past that legacy is important for all of us, but the contributions of others shouldn't be overlooked. Lies are what give Trump his power.
15
Germany stepping up and sharing the responsibility for providing European security is welcome news.
Let's also let Japan and South Korea and Israel and countless other countries step up and start providing their own security.
We are spending hundreds of billions of dollars to keep our troops and weaponry all over the planet. American is suffering from wage stagnation, skyrocketing college tuition, massive wealth disparities and a host of other pressing issues.
How about we start shirking the size of our overseas military empire and start spending that money here at home
Let's also let Japan and South Korea and Israel and countless other countries step up and start providing their own security.
We are spending hundreds of billions of dollars to keep our troops and weaponry all over the planet. American is suffering from wage stagnation, skyrocketing college tuition, massive wealth disparities and a host of other pressing issues.
How about we start shirking the size of our overseas military empire and start spending that money here at home
7
I know some may disagree, but I think one of President Obama's most noteworthy achievements has been the restraint he has shown in getting the US involved in the World's problems. For too long it seemed like everyone expected us to pay the bill and send in the troops. Added to this is the double edged sword that when we often help our "allies" (see Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Afghanistan, or Kuwait) we end up creating more enemies who seek our destruction (and yes, our allies have included Big Oil). Germany is seen as a leader in the EU - it's good to see that they are ready to go the distance and take on the protection of Europe.
8
So the proper nouns are the US and the World.
The world apparently being a sovereign actor. Yeah yeah. Sure.
My hypothesis: the "World" includes the nation of the "United States of America."
Further, the "United States of America" has interests outside its territorial boundaries in that world that it pursues through its own, selfish (hopefully) "foreign policy."
But, I do not expect any supporter of Obama to ever concern themselves with "foreign policy" since the Obama policy is to have a policy-free foreign policy. Foreign policy is so embarrrasssing if you have power. What would Zinn think of using that power? Horrors! Stick to lecturing foreign leaders and to drone assassinations directed from the WH. (The WH has made clear its chosen role in the assassination protocol. Point of pride.)
Now, lecturing commissioned military officers on graduation day at the USAAF Academy, duty bound to follow and give orders as a necessary condition of prevailing in combat, on,
wait now....
being diplomats,
this I expect of Obama. Yep, He did. Neither he nor his "advisors" know any better, but vainly strut on, policyless, clueless, proud of it. They have inverted their grasp of things in the venn diagram of the "World." They think they know it all and so lecture those they find unknowing, when, they can't grasp the basics.
And, for the Obama supporters out there, the United States does have actual diplomatic officers. Really. It does. Cool, huh? They work for Obama.
The world apparently being a sovereign actor. Yeah yeah. Sure.
My hypothesis: the "World" includes the nation of the "United States of America."
Further, the "United States of America" has interests outside its territorial boundaries in that world that it pursues through its own, selfish (hopefully) "foreign policy."
But, I do not expect any supporter of Obama to ever concern themselves with "foreign policy" since the Obama policy is to have a policy-free foreign policy. Foreign policy is so embarrrasssing if you have power. What would Zinn think of using that power? Horrors! Stick to lecturing foreign leaders and to drone assassinations directed from the WH. (The WH has made clear its chosen role in the assassination protocol. Point of pride.)
Now, lecturing commissioned military officers on graduation day at the USAAF Academy, duty bound to follow and give orders as a necessary condition of prevailing in combat, on,
wait now....
being diplomats,
this I expect of Obama. Yep, He did. Neither he nor his "advisors" know any better, but vainly strut on, policyless, clueless, proud of it. They have inverted their grasp of things in the venn diagram of the "World." They think they know it all and so lecture those they find unknowing, when, they can't grasp the basics.
And, for the Obama supporters out there, the United States does have actual diplomatic officers. Really. It does. Cool, huh? They work for Obama.
When Mr. Putin seized the Crimea he put 40 to 70,000 troops in the field out of his 1.4 million man Army for 'exercises'. NATO is now publicizing its own VAST improvement by putting 4, 1,000 man 'brigades into Eastern Europe. Nothing so illustrates NATO's current lack of capability and realism as its own publicized improvements.
Trump is of course correct. NATO is presently a high living bureaucratic team based in Brussels with little or no military capability, but a bloated publicity capability.
Trump is of course correct. NATO is presently a high living bureaucratic team based in Brussels with little or no military capability, but a bloated publicity capability.
3
the way the german wages are, the army has to be conscripted or they need additional 'gastarbeiters' to man the guns. or they could do what the arab emirates do...hire battle hardened soldiers from colombia.
2
German wages are moderate in European terms, thanks to labour reform carried out in the 90s. German politicians like to say this is the reason for German success, when the euro was much more important economically than any "reform".
3
@toronto
The German wages aren't the real problem, the German taxes are. For the most part, they're STILL paying for East Germany since the Berlin Wall came down.
And now, they're paying to feed, house, and educate over 1 mio. refugees.
As for "Gastarbeitern" manning the guns -- won't happen. That's against the German Bundesgesetzen.
The German wages aren't the real problem, the German taxes are. For the most part, they're STILL paying for East Germany since the Berlin Wall came down.
And now, they're paying to feed, house, and educate over 1 mio. refugees.
As for "Gastarbeitern" manning the guns -- won't happen. That's against the German Bundesgesetzen.
The Germans are still basically pacifists and that is a good thing. Both world wars were started because the Germans believed they had to deal with the Russian threat. The wars were mainly about Germany and Russia. In the first war, the German Army wanted to stop the Russians, before they got too powerful. Russia was modernizing, its economy was growing fast, and the Germans were worried that Russia would become a regional hegemon. They decided to go to war before Russia became too powerful.
In the second war, Hitler had a lot of crackpot theories about Russia. His plan was always to attack and defeat Russia. If the Germans get it into their heads that the Russians are a real threat again, then a European war could become more likely. The Russians are likely to view German rearmament negatively.
In the second war, Hitler had a lot of crackpot theories about Russia. His plan was always to attack and defeat Russia. If the Germans get it into their heads that the Russians are a real threat again, then a European war could become more likely. The Russians are likely to view German rearmament negatively.
1
Let's hope it gives them pause for thought. I support these measures.
Thank you for this, so USA view point, however, such over simplification totally misses the factual background.
WW1 was the result of a failed alliance amongst newly formed unified Germany, Austro-Hungary, & Russia to divide up other regions. WW2 was the direct result of the President Wilson of the USA failure to truly support the League of Nations he voiced support for; this resulted in unbearable financial penalties upon Germany from WW1. Yes, this is also a quick view, but a solid synopsis of the reality.
WW1 was the result of a failed alliance amongst newly formed unified Germany, Austro-Hungary, & Russia to divide up other regions. WW2 was the direct result of the President Wilson of the USA failure to truly support the League of Nations he voiced support for; this resulted in unbearable financial penalties upon Germany from WW1. Yes, this is also a quick view, but a solid synopsis of the reality.
5
WW II was to "deal with the Russian threat?" No, for Germany it was about taking over the world, literally, starting with Europe.
1
The German decision to add more military muscle to its leadership profile in Europe though not very disturbing to its European and the trans-Atlantic ally the US and not much expansionary too. Yet, since the defense is subject to parliamentary control, and the parliament can't easily ignore the public mood that's perhaps not so welcoming to the elite decision on military expansion, specially in the face of sharp political polarisation in the country. As such not much should be read into the proposed militarisation move that seems to have been dictated by the political compulsions arising out of the Allies' security related demands as also by the need to counter the increasing influence of the rightist forces.
2
This “free riders” narrative really makes me angry.
We are hosting over a million refugees, this is our kind of political engagement beyond our border. And maybe in time people will learn, that this may be a much better investment than in bombs and guns.
We have learned our lesson from WW2 - there is no country you can defeat against the will of their citizen. Even an high-tech army like the US can not do this.
Our real strength is what we are representing to any potential adversary, and this is not just terror and superiority, but also a better future against their own misery.
We are hosting over a million refugees, this is our kind of political engagement beyond our border. And maybe in time people will learn, that this may be a much better investment than in bombs and guns.
We have learned our lesson from WW2 - there is no country you can defeat against the will of their citizen. Even an high-tech army like the US can not do this.
Our real strength is what we are representing to any potential adversary, and this is not just terror and superiority, but also a better future against their own misery.
57
The "free riders" comment obviously refers to Germany not honoring the NATO 2% military expenditures guideline. Germany is currently only at 1%, so the critique is reasonable. Germany needs to double military spending to meet the minimum commitment.
Whether or not Germany chooses to take in millions of refugees/immigrants is irrelevent to whether or not it meets its obligations as a NATO member.
Whether or not Germany chooses to take in millions of refugees/immigrants is irrelevent to whether or not it meets its obligations as a NATO member.
8
In 2006, the 28 members of NATO agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their own GDP, to spending on defence (the US has always committed more than 2%). Of those 28 members - only 5 have been contributing per the agreement and Germany was not one of them....in which case.....the US picked up the slack for Germany and the other countries. That is why President Obama's made the comment about free riders.
9
Mathias - we have millions of US citizens who are starving, destitute or indebted. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Many of us don't feel great about subsidizing the higher European standard of living with grossly inflated military expenditures to take up your slack. The same goes for Asia.
It is painful to agree with Donald Trump but Obama has also made this point in the past. Both are right.
It is painful to agree with Donald Trump but Obama has also made this point in the past. Both are right.
8
Mr. Obama's frustration is very understandable. We have become the only effective fighting force in the West, and we are paying for everything when it comes to maintaining world order and stability, and it does not stop there. We are also paying significant amounts for our role in the UN and other international organizations. Often, rather than getting praise and understanding for our generosity, dedication, and support, we get no understanding and abundant criticism. It is time to put things on a more equitable footing. Germany's efforts are a small start. There is still a long way to go.
34
“World order?” “Stability?” Ah, perhaps if we allow the gloves to come off, the “only effective fighting force” will quell the people of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan in their desire to run their own countries. The US military sure knows how to bomb countries into the stone age. Order and stability are not the outcome. Only rubble and hatred - both increasing in all compass directions, including in the homeland.
1
The German military is changing and improving...from being woefully undersized to merely significantly undersized.
Germany's GDP is spending about $30 billion annually below their promised levels. They are very smart. They let the U.S. pay for defense, while they run a balanced budget.
As it stands, NATO is not an alliance, but a dependency. Trump is correct that the U.S. must immediately demand that our "allies" do their fair share.
Unfortunately for the Bush/Clinton's Pax Americana, we might find that our "allies" balk at spending more and cut some deal with Russia. So be it. We cannot want European defense more than the Europeans themselves want it.
Germany's GDP is spending about $30 billion annually below their promised levels. They are very smart. They let the U.S. pay for defense, while they run a balanced budget.
As it stands, NATO is not an alliance, but a dependency. Trump is correct that the U.S. must immediately demand that our "allies" do their fair share.
Unfortunately for the Bush/Clinton's Pax Americana, we might find that our "allies" balk at spending more and cut some deal with Russia. So be it. We cannot want European defense more than the Europeans themselves want it.
42
Nothing will strike more fear in the hearts of the Russians than a well-trained German Army. Dig back into the training manuals of the Wehrmacht and revive the small-unit leadership training that produced one of the most effective and efficient armies of the world. Build motorized panzer grenadiers and strong Leopard tank units and that will give our Russian friend pause.
17
russia highly likely, will keep to its sphere of influence. it has neither the money nor the technology to wage wars outside its own natural borders (which includes some of the post soviet break up nation states). will the docile germans of today really accept oder/neisse line as the border of germany? the danube germans, the sudeten germans and the east prussians all have a grudge..they lost about 40% of the land of the erstwhile germany. not to forget alsace/lorraine.
In both world wars, no unit of regular German soldiers was ever defeated by an Allied unit of equal or lesser strength.
4
What about the Waffen SS while you are on the Russian genocide fantasy trip?? And they say the Trump supporters are the disgusting one's! Dem's like you are no better. Perhaps worse when you consider you are less ignorant.
Quite disgusting. Oh and I'm German. I don't hate the Russians. Sorry to disappoint you!
Quite disgusting. Oh and I'm German. I don't hate the Russians. Sorry to disappoint you!
2
This development is welcome, of course, but it should be noted as the 'baby step' that it is. Germany's armed forces are tiny compared to ours, the UK, and France. Germany lacks even one aircraft carrier. Germany is essentially a pacifist country and even 'beefed up' will only play a minor supporting role in today's conflicts. Ursula von der Leyen is positioning herself as the logical successor to Angela Merkel and is trying to look the part with such photo ops.
16
german navy is a product of the 20th century. it is the land army that needs to be feared. i see, europe gradually shifting back to its old alignments. the slavs looking to russia, the french wary of germany, the british aloof, and poor poland caught in the middle. hmmmmmm
1
Germany has historically been a military power not a naval one and for good geographic reasons. I would not expect them to have an aircraft carrier, perhaps some U-boats, though.
2
Most of the 'Slavs' are in the EU like Croatia,Bulgaria and Slovenia. Serbia also wants to join. France's main problems are an anaemic economy and a poorly integrated minority population. Britain will most probably vote to remain in the EU and Poland is firmly in the EU camp. Welcome to the 21st century!
6
For how many 1000 years were those Huns then Prussians the hired mercenary soldiers of Europe? Edward Gibbon wrote how when things got sticky the women would follow their men into battle. So many generations must have bred a certain temperament which takes to soldiering. Interesting and scary times when that history now meets millions of recent immigrants from the war zone. No amount of recent papering over with Merkels feel good kumbaya is going to defuse the situation.
6
Our role as world policemen is over, as the world knows we turned in our badge. Fair enough, middle east wars are a waste of American lives. So both Japan and Germany see the hand writing on the wall. Washington hypes China and Russia as major threats, as Nato is fast becoming obsolete. The current administration clearly understands Russia has a green light in the Ukraine, and can exercise its influence for its priorities in Syria.
11
"Washington hypes China and Russia as major threats, as Nato is fast becoming obsolete."
Washington seems oblivious to the threat of a third world war between the West and radical Islam. Our current president can not even bring himself to say the words "Islamic terrorists". Hopefully President Trump will do better.
Washington seems oblivious to the threat of a third world war between the West and radical Islam. Our current president can not even bring himself to say the words "Islamic terrorists". Hopefully President Trump will do better.
"Germany's instinctive pacifism"? Have we forgotten the 100 million people killed in Germany's wars of the twentieth century? What could be more terrifying than a rearmed Germany? Let them supply the euros while other less aggressive countries supply the troops and materiel.
2
Germany has been a solid NATO ally for over 60 years. If a rearmed Germany gives the Russian government pause, good.
6
"What could be more terrifying than a rearmed Germany?"
How about a radical Islamic Caliphate that wants to force Shira Law on Africa, then Europe and then the whole world?
How about a radical Islamic Caliphate that wants to force Shira Law on Africa, then Europe and then the whole world?
3
Let it go. WW2 ended 70 years ago. My grandfather in Germany was a teenager at the end of WW2. Or are you suggesting that there is something inherently and innately wrong with Germans, who are a pretty diverse lot these days? Because that would be a deeply unsettling suggestion.
4
It is important to note that Germany felt it had a responsibility to atone for its mistakes in the years after WWII. This atonement was anchored into its post war constitution: it would permanently remain without a standing army and would accept all refugees that arrive at its borders. One must imagine the great anxiety felt by its neighbours and that these measure were the least Germany could do. In 1955 the first of these fundamental principles were questioned when Germany reestablished a standing army. The second principle was called into question after the Wall fell in 1989 and the borders became far more easily accessible by those in need.
If Germans express concern about the repercussions of changes to these two principles then there are long standing reasons for their concern that readers should take into consideration as two sides of a coin.
I rather think that those who produce weapons and sell them on the world market, should be obliged to take all the refugees that arrive at their borders and Germany, even if it held the numbers of its army low and did not take part in war efforts beyond its borders has certainly been a large scale producer of weapons of war (like the USA).
These questions cannot be disentangled from one another.
If Germans express concern about the repercussions of changes to these two principles then there are long standing reasons for their concern that readers should take into consideration as two sides of a coin.
I rather think that those who produce weapons and sell them on the world market, should be obliged to take all the refugees that arrive at their borders and Germany, even if it held the numbers of its army low and did not take part in war efforts beyond its borders has certainly been a large scale producer of weapons of war (like the USA).
These questions cannot be disentangled from one another.
14
The Times doesn’t mention US “meddling” by overthrowing the legitimate Ukrainian government to install “our man Yats.” Excluding context achieves a high art by the corporate media. Will Russia cave and allow the US corporate establishment to take its second bite since 1990 from that country’s resources and allies? When both sides possess more than enough nuclear bombs to incinerate the earth and all its inhabitants, playing the game of chicken breaches insanity. Were Russia and its allies to run military exercises and install first-strike missiles along the US-Mexican border, nuclear war would already have destroyed Corporate America and its media mouthpieces. Russians, unlike history-blinded US residents, suffer no amnesia regarding Germany’s multiple invasions, or the US and its NATO arm’s propensity to threaten, demonize, terrify, invade and overthrow. And the likelihood of leaving chaos in the wake of these attacks - from Congo to Afghanistan to Iraq - obviously fails to deter the invaders. The US/NATO hasn’t run out of lands to invade and nations to tear asunder, but maybe, just maybe the cost has skyrocketed.
11
Mr Putin! You're English has improved remarkably! Really, though, don't you have tigers to wrestle and small boys to fondle?
12
Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Czechs, Hungarians "suffer no amnesia regarding" Russia's "multiple invasions" and occupations. Chechens, Ingush, and Tatars know all about the deportations inflicted on them by Russian despotic brutes. Ukrainians know all about the starvation forced upon them in the 1930s by Soviet terrorists. Putin and his little green men have started to revise the frontiers of Europe. Two can play at that game... frankly 'Henry' it is high time that the ancient city of Koenigsberg was returned to its original owners.
11
"The Times doesn’t mention US “meddling” by overthrowing the legitimate Ukrainian government to install “our man Yats.” "
Overthrown? Invasions? Aside from being off topic, the narrative is counter factual and quite frankly, ridiculous.
The former president of Ukraine fled to hide behind the skirts of his master, Putin, when his own secret police no longer had the stomach to continue murdering their own compatriots. That the US played favourites is no secret and is perfectly legitimate in light of the nature of the former regime, and its puppet leader. Faced with a cowardly deserter, the parliament did the near impossible to continue running the country, despite actual invasions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, the illegal annexation of Crimea, etc. Ironic you failed to mention Russian meddling and direct military intervention, no?
Any mention of Russia in an article, no matter how tangential, brings out the 50 cent posters ... boring.
Overthrown? Invasions? Aside from being off topic, the narrative is counter factual and quite frankly, ridiculous.
The former president of Ukraine fled to hide behind the skirts of his master, Putin, when his own secret police no longer had the stomach to continue murdering their own compatriots. That the US played favourites is no secret and is perfectly legitimate in light of the nature of the former regime, and its puppet leader. Faced with a cowardly deserter, the parliament did the near impossible to continue running the country, despite actual invasions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, the illegal annexation of Crimea, etc. Ironic you failed to mention Russian meddling and direct military intervention, no?
Any mention of Russia in an article, no matter how tangential, brings out the 50 cent posters ... boring.
7
There was a time when I would have objected to a German Military buildup, but would the feckless Obama response to Russian Aggression, I find it comforting.
There is nothing the Russians fear more than a confrontation with German Troops, yes I know they beat the Germans in World War 2., but that was with the help of American Aid, & the Western Allies.The Russians lost upwards of 20 million lives fighting Germany.The world has changed our allies have become our enemies & our enemies have become our Allies.
There is nothing the Russians fear more than a confrontation with German Troops, yes I know they beat the Germans in World War 2., but that was with the help of American Aid, & the Western Allies.The Russians lost upwards of 20 million lives fighting Germany.The world has changed our allies have become our enemies & our enemies have become our Allies.
17
i think obama did right in keeping u.s. troops away in russia. the mid east and afghanistan are graveyards of western empires. no need to shed american blood for saudi wahabi monarchy.
1
Oh great you no doubt think you represent the 'progressive' West when what you do represent is the permanent war ideology. No doubt the fact that the Ukrainian Government has ex NATO chief Rasmussen and Joseph Biden as part of the 'Ukrainian Government', along with Blackwater (now Academe) and neo Nazi private Militias in a murderous ex Democracy doesn't bother you. Those damn Russians eh. Good thing the Germans killed so many right?!
I'm willing to bet you support Hillary and don't get why others do not. Well it's not only the 'enemies and allies' who change but so does our democracy. From a meritocratic Democracy to a dynastic Oligarchy and a Democrat party once known as the anti war Party now get support from ex GOP supporters for being more pro war than the present GOP candidate.
Bibi's Israel is also transforming; from a secular democracy oppressing it's minorities ot a full blown theocratic apartheid military dictatorship while once healthy lands have been destroyed (Libya, Iraq, Syria) and democracies (Honduras, Egypt, Ukraine) over turned; all in the name of democracy.
Yup along with liberties, the ideas of privacy and a once functioning United Nations now utterly irrelevant; times are indeed changing and not for the better. You now share the ideas of Barry Goldwater and your instincts are too push for a new Cold War or a Hot one. Poor Gorbachov who does not like Putin; he used to be 'our hero' but since he told the truth about our betrayal of Russia he is not!
I'm willing to bet you support Hillary and don't get why others do not. Well it's not only the 'enemies and allies' who change but so does our democracy. From a meritocratic Democracy to a dynastic Oligarchy and a Democrat party once known as the anti war Party now get support from ex GOP supporters for being more pro war than the present GOP candidate.
Bibi's Israel is also transforming; from a secular democracy oppressing it's minorities ot a full blown theocratic apartheid military dictatorship while once healthy lands have been destroyed (Libya, Iraq, Syria) and democracies (Honduras, Egypt, Ukraine) over turned; all in the name of democracy.
Yup along with liberties, the ideas of privacy and a once functioning United Nations now utterly irrelevant; times are indeed changing and not for the better. You now share the ideas of Barry Goldwater and your instincts are too push for a new Cold War or a Hot one. Poor Gorbachov who does not like Putin; he used to be 'our hero' but since he told the truth about our betrayal of Russia he is not!
1
There are some things in your comment that make sense and others that do not. You are correct that the United States and other Allies significantly helped the Russians fight the Germans during World War II. There is some debate as to whether the Russians would have been successful without that aid.
But there are two items I find overly simplistic in your comment. First, Obama's 'feckless response to Russian Aggression.' While Russian annexation of Crimea is a problem it does not warrant our direct military escalation. But you are ignoring the fact that our military is active in Europe and our Navy active close to their borders. More broadly, Obama has worked with our Allies to impose damaging economic sanctions on Russia for these actions. In my opinion these sanctions are more damaging than any viable military intervention.
Second your comment, 'The world has changed our allies have become our enemies & our enemies have become our Allies,' is also too simplistic. Certainly there was a reversal of alliances after World War II but the reality of it was more nuanced. We were never political or ideological allies with the USSR. We were simply military allies who held a common goal: the elimination of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. It was an alliance of necessity. Our alliance with modern Germany is way more substantial than our alliance with the USSR.
I don't agree with their build up because of our weakness, but rather because of our strong mutual interests.
But there are two items I find overly simplistic in your comment. First, Obama's 'feckless response to Russian Aggression.' While Russian annexation of Crimea is a problem it does not warrant our direct military escalation. But you are ignoring the fact that our military is active in Europe and our Navy active close to their borders. More broadly, Obama has worked with our Allies to impose damaging economic sanctions on Russia for these actions. In my opinion these sanctions are more damaging than any viable military intervention.
Second your comment, 'The world has changed our allies have become our enemies & our enemies have become our Allies,' is also too simplistic. Certainly there was a reversal of alliances after World War II but the reality of it was more nuanced. We were never political or ideological allies with the USSR. We were simply military allies who held a common goal: the elimination of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. It was an alliance of necessity. Our alliance with modern Germany is way more substantial than our alliance with the USSR.
I don't agree with their build up because of our weakness, but rather because of our strong mutual interests.
2
If there is any culture that would be cautious about using military force it would be the current generation of Germans. The ones that have had their whole lives to deal with the consequences of the previous generations.
5
The sins of the fathers are not the sins of the sons.
9
Of course not, but those sons have had to live with the consequences of what their forefathers did. I wish Americans had more awareness of some of the destruction brought by our use of force. It might give us pause when our top political candidates suggest carpet bombing civilian areas.
On this, the 72nd anniversary of D=Day, I see no coverage. Too bad.
39
The German Army during the Cold War was 12 divisions, half of them Panzer divisions. That was just West Germany. East Germany had another 11 divisions.
What is Germany today had a combined 23 divisions.
Now it has one. One. There is another division-equivalent of peace-keeping troops, specialized in things other than major war.
Germany can expand from one division with exciting fear. Britain, France, even Italy have more of an army.
The real story here is how completely the Germans collapsed their armed forces. They just evaporated on both sides.
That is not to say they are "free riders." The American Army also withdrew from Germany. Americans demobilized the whole Armored Corp that had been sent to the Persian Gulf from Germany, and never replaced it. There are NO American tanks in Germany, in organized units stationed there. Both the Germans and the Americans still in Germany do other things. But they don't have an Army stationed there.
Germany can do some of that without panic to any of its friends. That is not a threatening expansion. It is possible to conceive an expansion that would be threatening, but nothing remotely suggested by anyone fits that category.
What is Germany today had a combined 23 divisions.
Now it has one. One. There is another division-equivalent of peace-keeping troops, specialized in things other than major war.
Germany can expand from one division with exciting fear. Britain, France, even Italy have more of an army.
The real story here is how completely the Germans collapsed their armed forces. They just evaporated on both sides.
That is not to say they are "free riders." The American Army also withdrew from Germany. Americans demobilized the whole Armored Corp that had been sent to the Persian Gulf from Germany, and never replaced it. There are NO American tanks in Germany, in organized units stationed there. Both the Germans and the Americans still in Germany do other things. But they don't have an Army stationed there.
Germany can do some of that without panic to any of its friends. That is not a threatening expansion. It is possible to conceive an expansion that would be threatening, but nothing remotely suggested by anyone fits that category.
44
While true in regards to the end of 2013, the tanks have been returned, somewhat, in 2014. "....Grafenwöhr to be used at the training facilities there, at the Joint Multinational Readiness Center at Hohenfels and at other training areas across Europe." There is now a battalion of Armor stationed in the Grafenwohr training area.
They are serviced by US troops stationed there. There are 62,000 US troops stationed in Europe. That is enough. The President was correct. The Europeans have used the United States as their military. They have not "shared the cost" of this deployment nor spend the funds to make their military useful in the defense of their own country. It's time they did.
We have borrowed money to protect them. Let them borrow money to protect themselves. With a bellicose Russia, we should not leave or disband NATO. But, there is no reason we need to pay for the European defense plan. There is no reason we should "lead" NATO. Let the Europeans lead and pay.
They are serviced by US troops stationed there. There are 62,000 US troops stationed in Europe. That is enough. The President was correct. The Europeans have used the United States as their military. They have not "shared the cost" of this deployment nor spend the funds to make their military useful in the defense of their own country. It's time they did.
We have borrowed money to protect them. Let them borrow money to protect themselves. With a bellicose Russia, we should not leave or disband NATO. But, there is no reason we need to pay for the European defense plan. There is no reason we should "lead" NATO. Let the Europeans lead and pay.
You know the Bundeswehr is undersized when even the polish defense minister calls for a 'greater commitment.'
2
I don't know where you get your numbers, but according to Global Firepower, Germany has the 9th strongest military in the world, with nearly 350K active and reserve personnel and a considerable armored force. In sheer numbers they are not very far behind France and UK (ranked 5 and 6 respectively). My guess is their technology and weaponry is fairly high-grade.
Can Germany increase its military strength and contribute more? The consensus seems to be yes, but NATO and Germany are not exactly toothless.
Can Germany increase its military strength and contribute more? The consensus seems to be yes, but NATO and Germany are not exactly toothless.
2