The policies now being implemented — from massive rearmament to the escalation of conflict with Russia — are not rooted in a cold pursuit of German national interests, but in their negation
I think you are skipping over valuable lessons of European history, if you dismiss local competition.
Germany has since WW II been bascially a vassal of the US on a continent that was basically still militarily occupied, including Germany, deliberately disarmed and kept under it's thumb, while Britain and France, on the victorious side in WW II were more armed, and even have nuclear weapons.
Now not only is the US scaling down its presence, but what is happening? The us is platforming slavic countries like Ukraine and Poland to be its military bulwarks in Europe. The US even stripped Germany of its cheap Russia gas via the Nordstream. Now Norway is the energy powerhouse in Europe, and its gas terminal on the contient is......Poland.
These are countries that Germany traditionally considered to be its inferiors.
Germany is now determined to be armed and to, as its leaders keep saying "take its rightful place in Europe".
But yet Germany can never dominate a nuclear armed Russia that has a close alliance with China, although Russia is given as the supposed excuse. So ultimately what we are left with its a more belligenrent and armed Germany seeking to show its nearby neighbours that IT is the top dog around here. And that's under the so called German centrists, who are inevitably going to be shoved out of power by a growing AFD. Sounds familiar? Do we know how this ends?
It's absolute folly and overlooking history to ignore when Germans start using such terms and rearming. As a famous philisopher once said: history maybe doesnt repeat exact lines, but it sure rhymes a hell of a lot!
Europe thought that the U.S. would honor its commitment to Article 5, an attack on one member is an attack on all. However Trump doesn’t respect any agreement and he wants to attack other Nato members himself.
Under Clinton, when the Cold war was over, Lockheed Martin's guy named Bruce P. Jackson (son of William Jackson, National Security Adviser under Eisenhower) spent millions of dollars on the committee for NATO expansion in order to push a bunch of Eastern European countries into NATO. BTW, the same guy bankrolled the committee for the war in Iraq.
"Were the Soviet Union to sink tomorrow under the waters of the ocean, the American military-industrial complex would have to remain, substantially unchanged, until some other adversary could be invented. "
The piece contains interesting points, in particular, on the material and above all manpower constraints on the planned German re-armament.
However, as the piece itself acknowledges, Russia’s actions have created the “new post-Ukraine geopolitical reality’. Chancellor Scholz may have failed to act upon his proclaimed Zeitenwende, but this does not mean that a Zeitenwende has not occurred, and the piece does not deny it. Could one seriously maintain that, in the new geopolitical conditions created by the invasion of Ukraine,a cold-blooded pursuit of German national interest would suggest relying on the self-proclaimed peaceful intentions of Russia (actually, not even self-proclaimed, as there is no lack of voices in Russia calling for an expansion of the ‘Russian world’)?
I am afraid that if the two main premises of the piece - inescapable new post-Ukraine reality and unfeasible German conventional rearmament- are correct, then the implicit suggestion is that Germany should consider nuclear armament.
"Could one seriously maintain that, in the new geopolitical conditions created by the invasion of Ukraine,a cold-blooded pursuit of German national interest would suggest relying on the self-proclaimed peaceful intentions of Russia (actually, not even self-proclaimed, as there is no lack of voices in Russia calling for an expansion of the ‘Russian world’)?"
Yes. There is absolutely zero threat of Russia invading Germany, in my view. Russia was provoked by the US and NATO, and responded accordingly, sticking to the Russian allied portion of the longtime Russian state in the Ukrainian civil war prompted by the CIA assisted 2014 coups. The threat inflation by the West has been ludicrous, with Russia being belittled at times and at other times portrayed as a threatening monster. In reality, Russia unilaterally withdrew from East Germany, Poland, Romania, and other east European countries so that it could focus on its own society and government. Germany should stop its ineffective intervention in Ukraine and do likewise, in my opinion.
We are presented with two conflicting narratives at the same time: On the one hand Russia is so powerful and aggressive that it threatens NATO countries if it gets Ukraine and on the other hand that Russia is too weak and afraid to take on NATO, should Ukraine get under the NATO umbrella.
Only one narrative can be true and the fact that both are used to justify the support for Ukraine is testimony how weak the arguments are.
Yes, what about the Baltics? IMO, they're self destructing in a similar fashion to Ukraine with NATO assistance. All the Baltic countries have a lot of ethnic Russians and it would be sensible to treat them as first class citizens, as well as to cultivate good relations with their neighbor that granted them independence 30+ years ago. Instead, the Baltics are unnecessarily stirring up hatred, following in Ukraine's suicidal footsteps. If they think Lindsey Graham is their friend, as he has "helped" Ukraine, their being fooled by the US-led empire.
I think you are skipping over valuable lessons of European history, if you dismiss local competition.
Germany has since WW II been bascially a vassal of the US on a continent that was basically still militarily occupied, including Germany, deliberately disarmed and kept under it's thumb, while Britain and France, on the victorious side in WW II were more armed, and even have nuclear weapons.
Now not only is the US scaling down its presence, but what is happening? The us is platforming slavic countries like Ukraine and Poland to be its military bulwarks in Europe. The US even stripped Germany of its cheap Russia gas via the Nordstream. Now Norway is the energy powerhouse in Europe, and its gas terminal on the contient is......Poland.
Poland is also now the biggest army in Europe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_military_and_paramilitary_personnel
https://www.polskieradio.pl/395/9766/Artykul/3403981,poland-ranks-third-in-nato-for-military-strength-aims-to-be-top-in-europe
These are countries that Germany traditionally considered to be its inferiors.
Germany is now determined to be armed and to, as its leaders keep saying "take its rightful place in Europe".
But yet Germany can never dominate a nuclear armed Russia that has a close alliance with China, although Russia is given as the supposed excuse. So ultimately what we are left with its a more belligenrent and armed Germany seeking to show its nearby neighbours that IT is the top dog around here. And that's under the so called German centrists, who are inevitably going to be shoved out of power by a growing AFD. Sounds familiar? Do we know how this ends?
It's absolute folly and overlooking history to ignore when Germans start using such terms and rearming. As a famous philisopher once said: history maybe doesnt repeat exact lines, but it sure rhymes a hell of a lot!
Europe thought that the U.S. would honor its commitment to Article 5, an attack on one member is an attack on all. However Trump doesn’t respect any agreement and he wants to attack other Nato members himself.
Europe has no choice but to defend itself.
Under Clinton, when the Cold war was over, Lockheed Martin's guy named Bruce P. Jackson (son of William Jackson, National Security Adviser under Eisenhower) spent millions of dollars on the committee for NATO expansion in order to push a bunch of Eastern European countries into NATO. BTW, the same guy bankrolled the committee for the war in Iraq.
youtube.com/watch?v=t0DLNDAgAwU
That's classic Fascism. Corporatism+Militarism
Ask Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin (ex Raytheon executive) or the new "Kanzler" of Germany (ex BlackRock executive) how it really works..
Over 75% of Trump's budget is for military/police:
rumble.com/v6tew1p-trump-wants-75-of-all-funding-to-go-to-military-and-police.html
___
"Were the Soviet Union to sink tomorrow under the waters of the ocean, the American military-industrial complex would have to remain, substantially unchanged, until some other adversary could be invented. "
-George F. Kennan, 1987
"Israel is doing our dirty work"
-Friedrich Merz, German Chancellor and ex BlackRock executive
___
youtu.be/SuNHt1-uWjE?t=317
BTW, look up who Merz's grandfather was..
The piece contains interesting points, in particular, on the material and above all manpower constraints on the planned German re-armament.
However, as the piece itself acknowledges, Russia’s actions have created the “new post-Ukraine geopolitical reality’. Chancellor Scholz may have failed to act upon his proclaimed Zeitenwende, but this does not mean that a Zeitenwende has not occurred, and the piece does not deny it. Could one seriously maintain that, in the new geopolitical conditions created by the invasion of Ukraine,a cold-blooded pursuit of German national interest would suggest relying on the self-proclaimed peaceful intentions of Russia (actually, not even self-proclaimed, as there is no lack of voices in Russia calling for an expansion of the ‘Russian world’)?
I am afraid that if the two main premises of the piece - inescapable new post-Ukraine reality and unfeasible German conventional rearmament- are correct, then the implicit suggestion is that Germany should consider nuclear armament.
"Could one seriously maintain that, in the new geopolitical conditions created by the invasion of Ukraine,a cold-blooded pursuit of German national interest would suggest relying on the self-proclaimed peaceful intentions of Russia (actually, not even self-proclaimed, as there is no lack of voices in Russia calling for an expansion of the ‘Russian world’)?"
Yes. There is absolutely zero threat of Russia invading Germany, in my view. Russia was provoked by the US and NATO, and responded accordingly, sticking to the Russian allied portion of the longtime Russian state in the Ukrainian civil war prompted by the CIA assisted 2014 coups. The threat inflation by the West has been ludicrous, with Russia being belittled at times and at other times portrayed as a threatening monster. In reality, Russia unilaterally withdrew from East Germany, Poland, Romania, and other east European countries so that it could focus on its own society and government. Germany should stop its ineffective intervention in Ukraine and do likewise, in my opinion.
We are presented with two conflicting narratives at the same time: On the one hand Russia is so powerful and aggressive that it threatens NATO countries if it gets Ukraine and on the other hand that Russia is too weak and afraid to take on NATO, should Ukraine get under the NATO umbrella.
Only one narrative can be true and the fact that both are used to justify the support for Ukraine is testimony how weak the arguments are.
What about the Baltics? Also a portion of the longtime Russian state?
Yes, what about the Baltics? IMO, they're self destructing in a similar fashion to Ukraine with NATO assistance. All the Baltic countries have a lot of ethnic Russians and it would be sensible to treat them as first class citizens, as well as to cultivate good relations with their neighbor that granted them independence 30+ years ago. Instead, the Baltics are unnecessarily stirring up hatred, following in Ukraine's suicidal footsteps. If they think Lindsey Graham is their friend, as he has "helped" Ukraine, their being fooled by the US-led empire.