This Came From an Editorial in a German Publication????

[j2k4]

The burden of proof is not on me because one person in German is in favor of intervention. People have different views in the world, and this is no different in Germany. I gather that you agree that his perspective is not representative of the majority of Germans. So my question to you is why in a country that does have the historical perspective you speak of, do most people not support the US invasion of Iraq and our general foreign policy?

The fellow, as a businessman, has a more comprehensive understanding of cause-and-effect (historically) than your average German, by virtue of nothing more than his standing.

In a country such as Germany, where the norm is, I think, a 32-hour work-week, and state-sponsored medical programs, and such-basically your comprehensive "nanny-state", there seems to exist a presumption of enlightened existence and contempt for what one might call the "American way of life"; and I believe that is the genesis for any over-arching public opinion (in Germany) that America is wrong for acting peremptorily in the Mideast.

It is one thing for any nation to bemoan the strength of another nation which perceives a "call-to-duty", as it were, but quite another to actually hear that call, and have the power to act, even if others may deem such action to be imperialistic in intent.

Having said that, I hope you will resist the urge to draw any parallels between our invasion of Iraq and Germany's "expansion" into Chechoslovakia (the Sudetenland) and Poland in the name of "liebensraum"; although you might not see a difference, I do.

As to the end result of WWII, whether or not any are even willing to attribute Germany's defeat (and thereby the survival of France and Britain, et. al.) to the apparently over-late intervention of America, I think the end result speaks well for the U.S.; if you disagree with this last, perhaps you would speculate as to the result absent American participation?

Vid-

If there were errors in translation, or liberties taken with the original text (I thank ilw for pointing these out), I don't feel any errors recounted so far sufficiently change the intent of the piece to a degree warranting a need for retraction or repudiation.

Thanks for asking, nonetheless.

[vidcc]

Vid-

If there were errors in translation, or liberties taken with the original text (I thank ilw for pointing these out), I don't feel any errors recounted so far sufficiently change the intent of the piece to a degree warranting a need for retraction or repudiation.

Thanks for asking, nonetheless.

Ah but i see it as being very similar in that it has falsehoods.... with the CBS "documents" the fact that the basic story was actually true was overlooked because the documents were fake....but that's a completely different thread

I have no doubts that this translation was within original intent of the opinion, however to quote GW Bush...... "that would be one of those".......(come on Georgie, you practiced this word all week)....... "eggsajurasions"

[j2k4]

with the CBS "documents" the fact that the basic story was actually true was overlooked because the documents were fake

Really?

Proof?

Show me.

[vidcc]

Really?

Proof?

Show me.

Bush did enjoy "special treatment" to get into the national guard etc. it was a way to avoid fighting in vietnam.
He wasn't the only politicians son to benefit from connections

He also did fail to have a mandatory medical and didn't meet all the required attendance drills...all this is a matter of public record
i have never used it to diminish his right to be president in fact i have stated it doesn't matter on several occasions as i feel his military record has nothing to do with his ability to be president

[mogadishu]

Having said that, I hope you will resist the urge to draw any parallels between our invasion of Iraq and Germany's "expansion" into Chechoslovakia (the Sudetenland) and Poland in the name of "liebensraum"; although you might not see a difference, I do.

Ok i never made that comparison. I actually compared nazi germany to terrorism, if only for arguements sake. I dont think you can draw strong parallels to either, but I most defenitely never compared german expansion to the US war in Iraq.

As to the end result of WWII, whether or not any are even willing to attribute Germany's defeat (and thereby the survival of France and Britain, et. al.) to the apparently over-late intervention of America, I think the end result speaks well for the U.S.; if you disagree with this last, perhaps you would speculate as to the result absent American participation?

Of course I agree the US played a huge role in WWII and their role was absolutely positive. Personally, I believe the Soviet Union won WWII, but that is merely my opinion after looking at facts, and it has nothing at all to do with politics.

[clocker]

The fellow, as a businessman, has a more comprehensive understanding of cause-and-effect (historically) than your average German, by virtue of nothing more than his standing.

Huh?
He may well have a better understanding of finance and acquisition than the "average German", but how this morphs into a better grasp of historical cause and effect is a mystery to me.
Unless of course, you are willing to grant the same expertise to say, H. Ross Perot or Martha Stewart....

[BigBank_Hank]

Personally, I believe the Soviet Union won WWII, but that is merely my opinion after looking at facts, and it has nothing at all to do with politics.

Congratulations are in order because this is your most idiotic statement yet. Where in the world do you come up with this stuff?

[vidcc]

Congratulations are in order because this is your most idiotic statement yet. Where in the world do you come up with this stuff?

I don't think any one country won WW2.

There are too many variables. We often hear the question about what would have been the result if the usa hadn't joined in... but things may have been different if the soviets were not involved and hitler hadn't over stretched his forces. Or if it wasn't for the RAF "few"

So i say to all concerned...check your ego at the door....it was a group effort.

And also remember it was our parents and grandparents that fought...not us.

[Cheese]

Congratulations are in order because this is your most idiotic statement yet. Where in the world do you come up with this stuff?

I don't think that his statement is as idiotic as yours, yours is just more of the tedious insult the poster rather than make any attempt at a coherent comment that goes on around here. The Soviets played a huge role in the eventual defeat of Nazi Germany, some would argue that the defeat of the 6th army at Stalingrad was the turning point of WWII.

I tend to side with Vidcc myself that the war was one by a group effort. Without american aid Moscow would have fallen, without Soviet/Britian remaining free of Nazi oppression america would have never dared step foot in Europe.

[Busyman]

This man is not (at least, I gather he is not) an ex-pat American, yet his understanding of the dynamic at work between Europe and the U.S. mirrrors mine-it is understandable that under that particular circumstance you felt I was presuming his proxy, but, as I said, he and I both hold that perspective, and were I to state my case, I couldn't do any better than he has.

Vintage j2. Nary an original thought so you use a German (translator's?) words?

Again, my point is that his geographical orientation should (one might think) more closely reflect your view rather than mine; the question is, why doesn't it?

Not every person is part of a hive mind like the Republican party.
All Americans don't dislike France no matter much name changing we seem to do to the food. All Britons don't like the movie Donnie Darko.

This article surprises no one.