Well, now, what have we got here? Why, it's Andreas Rinke writing in today's issue of Germany's leading financial newspaper, Handelsblatt, and regretting the repulsive anti-Americanism that's become the leitmotif of German discourse this past while.

His op-ed is entitled "Der gute Deutsche" ("The good German"), and in it Rinke takes his fellow citizens to task for their arrogance and their ignorance. It should be noted here, however, that it is Rinke and his colleagues who have done most to fan the flames of America hatred over the past two years. But it's not just the German media that's acted abysmally. The lead come from the very top, and it should not be forgotten that it was Chancellor Schröder who drummed up the latent German resentments about America during the last general election, and that it was only by his cynical Bush-baiting that he managed to cling to power.

"It is with astonishing nonchalance that the ordinary German judges the moral deficits of the superpower," Rinke writes. "Responsible for this, is a mixture of schadenfreude, political rejection and cultural arrogance." The key graf:

"And that, by the way, is why it is so presumptuous to boast about the apparently better ability of the Germans at "nation building". Here the torturing US soldier, there the school-building German army — this contrast is consciously cultivated. But, on the one hand, what is being suppressed here is that Germany itself is a successful example of the American ability to build democracies. One the other hand, people are being brazenly diverted from the fact that the German army cannot and will not do anything else: it is only because the Americans and the British did the "dirty" work in the war on terror that the schools can be built in Afghanistan."

It's about time someone of the stature of Andreas Rinke spoke out about the dangerous stuff that's bubbling to the surface in Germany these days. But it's too little, and it's too late. A look at the disgusting cover of the 11 March issue of the mass-market Stern proves this. The evil propagandists of the 1930s would have been proud of such a collage. The people responsible for it are members of the same profession as Andreas Rinke.

.... sometimes people are really getting tired of these discussions on anti-americanism; why can´t one take criticism on us - government without immediately referring to the whole country? by the way, we are talking about anti - us-americanism, if we really wish to put it correctly ....

I am actually seeing it the other way around. What I see is that Chancellor Schröder gave a political opinion/ criticism on the US based on a reason not on the blatant reasoning of "because they are Americans". The latter behavior, where Americans are represented in a negative way just because they are Americans has been way more present in the media than in politics. I have noticed several articles in the magazin 'Stern' that I would call 'Anti-US-americanism' or with tendencies of such. Chancellor Schröders position on the Iraq war was none of that.

Similar sentiments exist in Australia too. Although those attitudes are more accurately defined as "anti-George Dubya" than "anti-American". Is there a similar feeling in Europe?

Lest this get too far, the phrase "anti-US-Americanism" would only be understood by English-speakers who also speak German. Or vice versa. In no sense is that phrase better English. If you're referring to other countries in the Americas, you're talking about things like "anti-Canadianism," "anti-Guatemalanism," "anti-Bolivianism" or whatever.

arrogance and ignorance?
Is it not arrogant and ignorant to invade a country without feeling the need to brief the soldiers about the culture of the people living in that country?

How much hatred could have been spared if US troops had known beforehand about the cultural differences between Iraq and the US? If the hearts shall be won one should try not to offend the general public.

Noone said that this would be easy. But being ignorant or neglectant about difficulties other than military obstacles is arrogant, isn't it?

People who opposed that war are judged in a black and white scheme: If you are not for us you are siding with Saddam.

Well, it is not that easy.
Maybe some opponents of this war just had reason to believe that is would be an ill-prepared action.

Others have thought that Mr. Bush was giving fake reasons for the war. I think the Stern-cover addresses that. The combination of the pic of NY and what I think is a burning Bagdad should probably show two things:
1. That Bush decided immediately after 9/11 to conquer Iraq
2. That evidence linking Saddam to Al-Queda was not as clear as the US government made everyone believe.

All of that is not America-bashing in itself.
However, there are a few people with a lot of hatred for the US in Germany, yes. There are some people in the US whith the same feeling as well. Lunatics exist all over the world.
Most Germans - I am sure about that - just want different government action. But because it is so easy and convenient, this is regarded as anti-Americanism because it would be too unpleasant to engage in a rational argument. It is not anti-americanism for the most part but angry disagreement with current policies or current policy makers.
Clinton was engaged in war as well... No sizable anti-Americanism here.

Maybe it is just Bush's policy choices that make people angry. Increasingly in Germany but not only here. All over the world.

But instead of implying that there is a new quality of irrational hatred all over the world one should ask the question whether Bush could have done something different and have a acheived a better result.

I am not talking about the question of whether or not going to war. That is a separate issue. Let's assume that the war was inevitable. Preparing the soldiers on what to expect not only on the field but in Iraqi society might have helped in setting up a peaceful democratic Iraq.
I mean, this is top priority, isn't it?

But maybe Bush can still pull it off and bring democracy to Iraq. It is just harder than it could have been if the emphasis would have been put more on winning the hearts even if that meant to put it less on winning the oil-fields.

doug, this is part of the semantic problem; I did not try to offer a better English but a better understanding on what the notion "america" does or does not contain.
besides, your comment proofs the need to do so ....

Eamonn,

notwithstanding some stupid satisfaction among some Germans/German press that, for once, Germans aren't the banner holders of the military evil for a news-cycle and a half, Schroeder did not win the election because of Iraq but because of the floods in East Germany and a clumsy Conservative candidate unable to carry a single sand-bag. Schroeder won because he - again - won those over who believed that only the SPD could make the changes needed, because only in government it would be forced to win over its loony left. That's why he won, not because of Iraq.

I suppose you remember that I suggested more than most commenters last year that the root problem is one of different styles of communication and that American rethoric should be assumed to be domestically driven. Most people cannot understand this.

So far I have only read an "I told you so" story by Eric Alterman. But pretty much everyone could write one. I think America is being handled with silk gloves by the world's press these days, actually, I think much more modest than the US admin is handled by the American press. I mean, yesterday the NY Times stated they're sorry to have believes this lying administration. May not matter that much to the bible Belt, or to Flyover country, or to authoritarian conservatives, but it likely will promote the rift between authoritarians and libertarians (ie the economic and non-economic right) in the Republican party this year.

I'm not yet entirely convinced Bush will lose his second term, but it has already become much harder for Bush than anticipated? Even if you assume that Michael Moore is a "self hating American", and that his portrait is as skewed as anything Andrea Dworkin could write about love, this administration's legacy is a disaster in pretty much every possible respect.

I still think that it would have been possible to make a serious case for war in Iraq (it would not have been my case, though), but Paul Wolfowitz characterized this administration's attitude towards Democracy and the American public apparently pretty accurately when he stated that they had to opt for one! argument, the WMD thing. In a way, the message had become the medium.

The long term consequences may not be so dire though: If this American administration has demonstrated one thing clearly to all the world, it is: GOVERNANCE MATTERS, particularly, BAD GOVERNACNE MATTERS. This will activate more people than ever, even in the US. There seems to be a certain spirit, that, in order to take the res publica back from the boys from Houston, much more effort is needed than most people were aware of in the past. A lesson learnt (for the time being).

By the way, there's a lot of people, if not most people, saying "America" when they mean Bush, or the American administration - just think of the instances where "Germany" is used in a technically incorrect way. So please stop claiming that everybody is unfair to Americans these days, because it's just not true. Why not rebut some of the less valid criticisms without resorting to arguments of other people being unwilling to listen. I even had a very interesting discussion with a Texan Republican recently. And I think he enjoyed it, too.

It is GWB's left arm on the Stern cover,
by the way. And America, oops, the American administration, *did* lie - that is, it never told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Or did it?

Interesting is it not that once opinions come to the fore that the President is presented for a whupping and not much else? It is a minority opinion, but let it ride. W Bush has not been what the majority of us would have liked. He should be shotl Shroeder has been a constant dissapointment; let him be shot. History however will intervene its ugly head and summarize the accomplishments of both. Bush has at least a foreign attack on his hands from HH. His later attempts to control and eradicate that influence are open to discussion about their morality or effectiveness, but his was a reaction to the greatest act of war on American soil since Pearl Harbour. Schroeder has the distinction of being the first "Statesman" to deny another commrade the benefits of Article 5(2) under the NATO Treaty--perhaps they werent blond enough. He has ensured that for the next 20 years Germany, as is its due, will not receive a SC position. For God's sake, the man is leading you to shite and you seem happy in 1960s grade filth? and why? Germany is the fulcrum of Europe and you abdicate due to incapacity. The only goodwill Germany has ever experienced outside of Europe is the US -- Germanic americans make out above 40% of the population. But you dont do shite do you? where is the fucking Goethe Institut in Madison? We have an innate desire to promote you desires but it is not fast.

Excuse me Joe, I think you are missing something.

Germany doesn't do shit? German troops in Kosovo, German troops in Afghanistan, German humanitarian aid all over the world, German money to rebuild what was destroyed.

Hey, the US deserve our gratitude for the way they helped Germany to rebuild the country after WW2 and for the protection of our young democracy.

What I don't get is that people of THE country which sybolizes democracy cannot take criticism on a particular policy. What happened to democracy and civil liberties if we can't argue over the right policy to address a problem?

Marco von Mueller:
the three to five thousand troops who engaged in Afghanistan and Kosovo did not fight on the front lines. If I am not mistaken, the clear majority of them were and are non-combant troops. The message is not what have you done (which is very little), but an appropriate response; what are you able to do? Not much militarily or politically. The point polemical as it now exists revolves aroung the inability and unwillingness of Germany to ascend to its position as a leader or the leader if they prefer of Europe. This is not a knee-jerk reaction to any criticism of our foreign policy, but a recognition of Germany's patent impotence in foreign polciy theatres. It is fine to criticise as a fellow, but Germany does not have an army of note, there are no air-planes of transport, no readily prepared force on hightened alert; nothing, but 19 year-olds drafted to the bundeswehr protesting by drinking pils every day all day. No one contests Germany's right to complain about policy, but to introduce positive policy when your country has no ability by force, lawful combat or law to care them out is objectionable? Schroeder especially with his last interviews about writing a novel of the Iwaq War and Joschka's prior stage shows at the UN are interfering with our internal politics. If this keeps up it will just embitter both sides with articles in the NY Times about the crimes of the Suedentenland germans and their willful and cowardly use of the Alien Tort Claims Act to deprive the czech reupblic of money? Or the potential liability due to negligence of the immigration officers of Hamburg in allowing the admittance and continual residency of potential terrorists, who were documented by INTERPOL and the federal constitutional police. The advice is not to shush, but wait until you have an aircraft carrier and the will to commit troops. Then your advice might well be taken-- such as Great Britian.

The legacy of the Bush administration is a disaster in pretty much every aspect? Let's review...

- The Bush administration pushed through immense tax cuts which have propelled the country out of an economic downtown he inherited from the previous administration (check out the economic statistics - they were already in decline when he took office) which was further exacerbated by an unprecedented terrorist attack. Those tax cuts have led to the strongest economic growth *in the world*. Shall we compare Germany's (or even Europe as a whole) economic growth..or should I say lack thereof...due to the policies enacted there? Since results are what really matters which objectively has a better track record on economics?

- The Bush administration faced down the Chinese government over their attempts to kidnap our pilots and achieved their safe return without a shot being fired by either side. Sounds like pretty good diplomacy to me...The ones who are whining the loudest are the ones who are supposed to be our friends, and somehow this is our fault? Better check the mirror...

- The Bush administration finally called the North Koreans to task for their ongoing efforts to develop nuclear weapons and export that technology. Where was Europe while North Korea was exporting missiles and nuclear technology? They still haven't taken a single step to solve that problem while the US takes the lead *again*, and they want to criticize Bush?

- The Bush administration's pressure on Pakistan has led to the dismantling of AQ Khan's nuclear know-how network, the first hopeful signs of peace between Pakistan and India over Kashmir, and the ongoing effort to root out Islamists all along the Afghan-Pakistan border. Must be doing *something* right....

- The Bush administration has protected its domestic soil well enough to prevent another terrorist attack. Not too shabby considering every terrorist on the planet considers the continental US target #1, huh? Meanwhile Europe suffers terrorist attacks on its soil...hmmm...

- The Bush administration's invasion of Iraq scared Qadafi of Libya enough (see his comment to Berlusconi which I paraphrase "I saw what they did in Iraq, I'll do anything they want") to give up his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction entirely. Do you think his fear of German retaliation was responsible?

- The Bush administration's military actions mean that 50 million people in Afghanistan and Iraq now have the opportunity to determine their future - whatever future it is they choose for themselves. How many people have the Europeans taken the initiative to free in the last...I don't know...forever? Have you figured out your own mess in Bosnia yet? Oh that's right...you didn't even want address that problem til the US forced the issue and you still can't figure it out...and that's in your own backyard...

- The Bush administration has proved that Saddam was trying to develop chemical weapons and had the network to start production on short notice. Sarin gas was used against our troops recently, and just where do you think the chemical weapons that were going to be used in Jordan came from? Could it be that the European press keeps moving the goalposts?

- The Bush administration has proved that Saddam had missiles which violated the UN resolutions...The parts for which were supplied by German, French and Russian companies...Which German policy prevented that from happening? Oh that's right...it didn't...

- The Bush administration is responsible for whatever shred of respectibility the UN still has. A third-rate tinpot dictator flouted its dictates and bribed any number of French, *German*, Russian, and *UN* officials to keep his hold on power - but only the Bush administration had the spine to stand up to the corruption so evident to everyone else. If not for the spine of the US, every future Security Council resolution could be safely bribed and ignored as well - now how many do you think will ignore a resolution the US supports? As for the vaunted credibility of the UN, can you say Oil-For-Food scandal?

There's more, but I think it's pretty clear that in making such a ridiculous statement, you only show your anti-American bias...not any knowledge or comprehension of the facts...

Let's look at how Europe has done by comparison, shall we?

- Has France settled down its former colonies in Africa that it sent troops to unilaterally without even so much as consulting the UN? How about the UN and the various places that its "peacekeepers" are deployed - are they safe and peaceful 100% of the time for 100% for all their inhabitants? No? Why not? If the Bush administration should be taken to task for Iraq who are you holding responsible for the messes you got yourselves into and still can't solve? Or doesn't that count if you don't have the big, bad Americans to blame?

- Chirac remains a free man only because his party passed a law that grants him immunity from prosecution. And France is Germany's closest friend - even to the point of speaking for each other...Where is the outrage at France? Bush has broken no laws and faces no criminal indictment - yet Bush is the problem? Take the blinders off and look closer to home...

- Where is the German defense budget for defending itself? Oh that's right...it doesn't have one big enough to handle any serious self-defense - it relies on the Bush administration to defend it against any large scale attack...Kind of like biting the hand that feeds it, isn't it? We in the US, call it just plain ungrateful while we spend billions of our dollars and send our boys and girls overseas because Germans have grown too fat and happy to be grown-ups about their own defense....

- Where is the German leader's popular support? Last time I checked his party was getting crushed at the polls...Sort of tells you that the German public doesn't like how he's leading this country either. So where's the triumph of German policy?

I tire of this incessant self-righteous anti-Americanism. Bite the hand that feeds you if you must, but you need America far more than it needs you...It might grate on your nerves and upset you to admit that we are moving forward while Germany can't get out of neutral. That's not our fault. You are no better than the Arab leaders who distract their people from their own internal problems by telling people to blame the Jews...

It makes me sick....

To several respondants to this article:

We in America have no problem with criticism of our country's policies. Disgustingly, what your press has been offering is not criticism, but out-and-out slander. Propaganda. Untruths by those that know what they are writing is false, but do it anyways.

It can't be possible, can it, that the US took a look at the very same intelligence information that _every other_ Western intel service had, and came to a different policy conclusion? No, talking about that might actually lead to real criticism, and it's so much more fun to simply say "It's all about oil!" or "Bush lied!".

The "all-about-oil" crowd have mostly gone silent (with the exception of some loathesome cartoonists), as it becomes more and more obvious that, well, it wasn't about oil.

The "Bush lied!" group is just as disgusting, constantly repeating these same debunked claims:

- That Bush knowingly presented false information to provide a casus belli. In fact, the information presented was consistent with - actually, nearly identical to - the estimates made by the governments of every major intelligence service. Presenting evidence in good faith, even though that information may later turn out to be wrong, is not lying, and you people guilty of claiming he lied know this. You will still say he lied anyways.

- That Bush tried to link Saddam Hussein with 9/11. The administration has said repeatedly, in no uncertain terms, that while Iraq did have some connections with Al Qaeda, there is no evidence that Iraq was complicit in the attacks on the twin towers. The government has never, ever said that there was.

Marco,

There are so many issues and inaccuracies in your post I don't know where to begin....

How about the US deserves gratitude for *continuing* to protect Germany? This isn't past history...It's what is still happening today. Do you think the reason you're not speaking Russian right now is because we thought it was a good idea to send our people over there for a Bavarian vacation? You have grown so used to having safety provided for you that you take it for granted in the same way that children who always have dinner on the table never worry about how hard their parents have to work to make ends meet and then do nothing but complain about how much they hate their parents because they can't stay out late...

How many thousands of our troops are *still* there and how many Germans are employed on American bases today pumping money into your moribund economy - helping to keep Germany from a full-on recession?

Don't you think we'd have more troops for Iraq and could have gotten the situation under control more quickly if we didn't have to keep Europe safe too? Since neither Germany nor France can even keep their fiscal commitments to the EU they so desperately want to build and control, how can they be counted on for matters of life and death - especially when they won't even take responsibility for matters of life and death in their own countries?

This childish behavior being displayed by "old Europe" reeks of the attitudes of spoiled brats...Grow up, get your economy out of the tank, clean up the corruption in your governments, take responsibility for your own defense, then maybe...just maybe...you will have moral standing to comment on Iraq...It doesn't work trying to do it in reverse...

In America, voters (read: those who decide to take sides in political arguments) have to the responsibility to educate themselves on the issues *before* they vote (read: make an argument). It's quite evident that you either haven't taken the time to educate yourself about the topic.

In the US, if you're going to step up to the plate you better be ready for the high fastball. You want a democratic debate? You got one...

Is the entire media run by Baader-Meinhoff sympathizers?

--But maybe Bush can still pull it off and bring democracy to Iraq.--

Marco, we already have. Do you have any idea how many elections have been held? The beliefs of the people being elected?

How much Iraq is already running itself? How many ministries have been transferred???

What have you found out yourself about Iraq by using the net?

And Marco?? It's not angry disagreement w/current policies, it's angry disagreement w/our 200 y.o. vision. Because it works. Americans who are paying attention know the game.

And as a white oppressor global capitalistic EEVVIIILLLL company says, "Just do it."

You guys think you can do it better? We've been waiting in Kovoso. It's been 7(!) years and we had to go back in. The Sudan could use some pacifying and your enlightened mediation. Time for Europe to walk its' talk.

Be our guest, show us how it should be done. We've been waiting a long time.

We've been listening to our "enlightened betters" nattering nabobs for decades. It's time to put up or shut up.

After all, we're only giving our input and our vastly more successful experience in capitalism and "democracy" for your own good. You're heading for the cliff. And I'm popping the popcorn. If W wins on 11/2 - it's going to get fun. 25% of frogistan's already on tranqs. Let's see if we can up it.

And as to another Bush success? Check out Nick Kristof's column.

You guys can't even handle Iran and it's nuke program.

But we will and you won't like it.

We're getting tired of cleaning up your messes. We strongly urge you to take a step back and take a good long hard look at your priorities and who the real enemy is. Some Americans think we'll have to go back into your areas in about 25 years or so.

Your "constitution" does not breed confidence.

Mark Steyn puts it so well, as usual.

...And, after months and months of experts telling them that they didn't have enough troops in Iraq, Washington will realise all the extra troops they needed are sitting around twiddling their thumbs in Europe, guarding against enemies who no longer exist on behalf of allies who are no longer allies.

Such a world would be a more dangerous place, but not necessarily for Americans. It is Europe that's closer and more vulnerable to terrorists, dysfunctional states and other enemies. That is why I'm a relatively relaxed hawk. The US may be forced to suffer the perception of defeat, but it is Europe that will live with the consequences. Be careful what you wish for.

... more neocon bullshit straight from Limbaugh's fan letters.

those that defend the german "policy of delusional fools"-
Germany- you do not seem to realize that with the extreme degree of intellectual retardation, cowardice and child-like diplomacy prevalent across the board with the clowns who govern your fully crippled society- that so many of us here in the US simply laugh at the hypocrisy, fumbling, and in-effectiveness of both your government and your so called "military" (who run like rabbits to hide in Kosovo- a DISGRACE in a modern world).
Germany wants a seat on the UN security council?? AHHAHHAAHH!!!!!! Based on WHAT capabilities?????!!!! Based on WHAT contributions??? Do you think the US, or even a portion of the world (other than the primitive arabs)would want the german ideologies and economic stagnation imported across the globe? What is it that germany has EVER "secured, developed, or contributed" to either the world or at the very least to the european continent?? Not one damn thing other than multiple failed attempts to take over the entire continent. Since the fall of the wall 15 short years ago the world has watched your country fall apart more quickly than it was re-built by US blood, effort and monies. You now have NO successes or contributions to the world even after "being made whole" again. What does that tell you about your abilities or policies?
You in germany have shown your true modern face, and you have shown your true modern ideologies and you have proven to the US that not one damn thing has changed for you since 1930.
One short decade after the US effort brings down the wall, re-unites germany under the security blanket of blood and money of the US men and woman, and just 60 years after the US SHOWS YOU DEMOCRACY and a constitution we are once again, re-introduced to the crusty german minds identical to yours.
Neither of you seem to be aware of the immense amounts of WMD all across the middle east the Iraq war has exposed. Why is that so difficult for you? Are you even aware of germany's role in these weapons you imbecile?
You are in some type of psychotic state of denial to current times and with regard to history.
This time this psychosis will kill you again and the US will stand back and 300 million people will laugh out loud at your pathetic selves as your country governed by those with your flintstone/neanderthal mind set collapses.
The burden of proof of any non-alignment with terror was upon Saddam and he failed. Saddam was chased from power and then found un-shaved in a little rat hole. Germany played no role in the toppling of the 21st century's greatest dictator, a guy one notch below the german leader Hitler. The German contribution to his fall was simply petty obstructionism and cheap child-like comments that your's mirror so well. The US left the Iraqi borders open during this war to allow for the eu jihaidis and the virgin-seekers from around the world can come to Iraq to "play" with the US troops and then be beaten into the sand. The US is achieving these goals substantially on a daily basis.
Do NOT refer to germany as an "ally" of the US as that relationship DIED 15 years ago. If the US had another opportunity to provide food, money, and goods via an airlift to your country- we would now drop NOTHING but 10's of 1000's of pounds of horse szhit on your heads.
The country of germany was and IS a breeding ground for those who attacked spain and the US. What is it about life in germany that these middle easterners come to accept your housing, welfare monies and "hospitality" yet spend a few short years in your stifling cities and turn around and want to blow up all the is western? Can you provide an answer to that question?
CAN you answer that? And when the flea-brained hippy Fischer, speaking with what sounded like marbles in his mouth said to Rusmfeld last year- "I am not convinced"- was he referring to the german intelligence reports given to Powell regarding mobile chem labs that have proven to be bad intel?
You would show that you possess an active neuron or two if you would simply shut down your keyboard, close your damn mouth, and permit the US to bring to the middle east the same conditions it brought for a constitution and a democracy after your country germany brutalized YOUR continent for one century.
It is obvious to the US the fact that germany has NO capabilities, and THAT is what truly keeps germany holding on to the "policy of fools- via bumbling sophomoric in-action" that is expediting the fall of your country.
The only "cycle of ignorance" evident here is completely within the minds germany herself.
A recent interview with Victor Davis Hanson in Front Page magazine that describes well what a majority of americans feel about the "eu" and "modern" day germany.
FrontPage magazine: Some of our European allies stooped to a pretty low level in the Iraq war. The French are quite a case study. What is their problem? Has anti-Americanism become so pathological there now that they think Saddam is Mother Theresa? It’s like George Bernard Shaw prostrating himself before Stalin. Give us your perspective.

Victor Hanson: Funny, isn't it? Europe is to New York and Boston like the latter are in turn to Boise and Bakersfield--affluent, elite, culturally aristocratic, and largely ignorant that the rest of the world does not operate on the premises of The Hague or Geneva. But why this European hobbits-in-the-Shire fantasy?

We've protected them for 60 years. They spend almost nothing on defense. And they see this wild, dynamic and utterly democratic popular American culture everywhere---and wonder why would the world want that crassness over French film or a German play? Who would prefer Starbucks to Vienese coffee, after all?

Once we withdraw some troops, once they begin to fathom the jam they've gotten themselves into through appeasing Middle East dictators and large, unassimilated Islamic minorities, and once-- terribile dictu--terrorists divert their attention to such easier targets, they will slowly and ever so insidiously began to talk about NATO, the Atlantic alliance, and the friendship of the United States.

The irony? George Bush was the best friend that the Europeans ever had. He really believes in making sacrifices for Western Civilization and promoting, not just talking about, our shared vision of liberal democracy that after all began in Europe.

His muscular action and courage to address the corrupt status quo in the Middle East (whether Arafat, Saddam, or the Taliban) allows Euros to triangulate like never before, playing good cop to our bad, and touting their soft power as the civilized alternative to us. The Euro diplomats and elites I've talked to are more worried about our growing pique than promulgating their own.

FP: Anti-Americanism is just skyrocketing throughout the world now. What’s going on?

Hanson:I don't think it is. The strange world of intellectual journals, CNN pundits, state radio andTV, etc. is perhaps comfortably anti-U.S., but the real world of immigration, fascination with U.S. products, mimicry of American culture, desire to visit and study in America is quite different.

Jamie, what do Bin Laden, President Musharref, Hanna Ahsrawi, the Saudi Royal Family, Iranian mullahs, Hans Blix, the German ambassador to the U.S., etc all have in common? Their kin are either in or were in the Great Satan to study, work, or play. Of course, boutique anti-Americanism is cheap, pyschologically satisfying (envy being a powerful emotion), and sort of hip--especially when the current U.S. president has a drawl, is Christian, from Texas, says “nuclar,” cares little for the NY Times op-eds, and pretty much thinks Crawford is a nicer place than Beacon Hill or Paris.

FP: But Mr. Hanson, because Saudis study in the U.S. does not mean they love the U.S. They exploit the U.S., and coming to the U.S. only escalates their hatred of us. The very fact that bin Laden was Westernized shows the great danger of anti-Americanism, no? Surely you are cognizant of the fact that many who come to the West seek to destroy it, exploiting our tolerance and freedom to ultimately suffocate it? Look at the Islamists in France and Europe.

Hanson: Of course, I understand that. But again you miss my point. Their hatred arises precisely out of desire--fascination with our wealth, freedom, tolerance, and liberality that turns to envy and finally to hatred (both for us and themselves)-when they ultimately realize that their own allegiance to fundamentalism, statism, autocracy, and sexual apartheid are responsible for their own misery.

So again, it is an Alice in Wonderland phenomenon of a pampered bin Laden with his video technicians and cell phones, or jet-setting Saudis with Mayo Clinic doctor visits-entirely parasitic yes, but also instructive because their own actions belie their rhetoric.

They do sense that they have failed and want the West they hate. It is our duty not to facilitate that hatred by appeasement or multicultural goobly-gook, but instead offer the carrot of reform and help-and the stick that lets them know in no uncertain terms our ancestors didn't die at Gettysburg, Iwo, or Pusan to give into their pathetic Dark Age fantasies. They must accept that the next regime, rogue nation-call what you will- who has any remote connection with those who commit a 9-11 like attack on the United States will learn that their complicity is synonymous with their utter destruction.

FP: Mr. Hanson, your new book also contains some material on one of your key interests: the strange connection between affluence and privilege and venom. True enough, ever since the counter culture, we see many of the most privileged people in the world full of rage and hating their own society. Tell us a bit about this phenomenon.

Hanson: What to call it? Prep-school populism? Isn't it grating to hear a Howard Dean of Park Avenue, Al Gore of a swanky DC hotel, John Kerry of Beacon Hill, or various endowed professors and spoiled millionaire actors screaming about economic justice and "the people"?

Do they think their education, money, travel, or class has given them some special "insight" into the machinations of a George Bush who has pulled the wool over all us yokels in places like Fresno? Are we all suffering from false consciousness and slavish consumerism that need the morality and wisdom of a Sean Penn, Gore Vidal, Tim Robbins, or Al Franken to free us?

Aristocratic angst is not new, but reminds me a lot of the sophists at Athens who were upset that their rhetoric--a product of investment in very expensive "thinkery"- did not always win praise for wisdom.

So we have this strange, rather sick idea in the United States-should we call it "Clintonism" or even "Gorism"?-that an 'educated' person from the Ivy League or a product of prep school, who can spin a sophisticated argument, replete with all sorts of sarcastic asides, smug name-dropping, and allusions to esoterica, is de facto either a genius to be listened to, courageous enough to follow, or moral enough to admire.

The fact is that since 9-11 those who have saved this culture--Army Rangers sleeping in the Afghan Mts., marines in the Sunni Triangle, millions of ordinary Americans who cleaned tables and poured cement, tough policy makers who endured terrible invective like a Puall Wolfowitz or Don Rumsfeld, and of course the President himself did so through skills other than verbage. Thank god for all of them in this hour of crisis.

FP: So how do you see the war in Iraq and the War on Terror in general right now? What course must we take? In what objectives and tactics in victory rooted?

Hanson: Beneath the hype? In less than 3 years we took out the world's 2 worst regimes--and fostered consensual government, not dictators in their place. Al Qaeda is on the run. No more 9-11-like attacks so far--knock on wood. Europe is learning that the US is really its best friend, but that Europeans' own cheap rhetoric and triangulation is a suicidal policy that will leave them alone and defenseless while we move on.

Libya is coming clean. Pakistan is helping hunt down OBL and revealing its nuclear roguery, a far cry from its pre-911 behavior. Iran is worried about a revolution and an unpredictable US. Soon no more troops in Saudi Arabia. Arafat is lord of his rubble heap, not in the Lincoln bedroom each month. So despite the tragic sacrifices of 600 American dead overseas, many hundreds wounded, billions spent, and perhaps a trillion committed to security and economic recovery from 9-11, America is doing pretty well and turning the corner.

We must press on in Iraq. Continue the pressure on the Saudis to join in the war against al Qaeda and embrace reform--or end up on the wrong side of a very angry US. We will not win until terrorists feel that they cannot live in Syria, Lebanon, and Iran. Those countries must change and they have a choice between voluntary radical domestic reform (unlikely), revolution by a democratic opposition (preferable) or military confrontation with the United States (the turmoil in Afghanistan and Iraq will not last for ever).

Victory will come when Americans accept that terror is but a method, not an enemy. We are at war with Islamic fascists who out of conventional military impotence employ terror, along with their autocratic patrons that either actively abet them or knowingly ignore them.

We will win when such regimes either fall or at least choose the Khadafy option of compliance (we will see whether it is genuine). That goal of ending the pathological landscape that gave us 9-11 is accomplished by military action, promotion of local reformers, and a massive ideological campaign to explain Western civilization and its transcendent values- not only to Arabs but to our own citizens who so often, almost criminally so, take it for granted or have not a clue about what allows them to prosper as we do.

All this can be done-but only if we learn from the past wages of appeasement, have confidence in our ability to defend our culture intellectually and spiritually, and never give into our fears.

FP: Mr. Hanson, thank you, our time is up. It was an honor to have you here. We hope you can visit us again soon.

When the facts fail you, go straight to the ad hominem attack, right? Thanks for making my point for me...

In follow up to Sandy P's point, *once again* the Bush administration has acted while Europe did nothing in Sudan.

http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=5/30/2004&Cat;=4&Num;=005

The money quote?

"Under pressure from Washington, the government and the Sudan People's Liberation Army signed agreements on Wednesday on how to share power and manage disputed strategic areas, lifting the last hurdles to a full peace deal.

On Friday, the government and the two main rebel groups fighting in Darfur agreed to allow international observers to monitor a cease-fire."

I read the article several times...I didn't find any mention of help from the EU...go figure...Is anyone actually surprised by that?

Once again it is left to the US to lead while spoiled children around the world cry about being left behind...And I'm supposed to care what they think about our foreign policy? or anything else?

Those who hate Bush suffer from thinly disguised envy for our leadership role in the world and rail against their own impotence.

The truth gets more painful for them all the time...More salt for the wound, anyone?

What I find European hypocrisy on Iraq most humorous:

Kosovo/Serbia - bombed, killing civilains, without UN authorization (Russia would have vetoed.)

reason? supposed mass graves. how many found? well, a few thousand...not the hundred's of thousands we were promised (LIES LIES LIES) Heck, there are more mass graves in Iraq!

Kosovo after so many years is not back with Serbia, and still being occupied....LOL. Yet, Euros are screaming that Iraq must be sovereign within a year or so of invasion and the two big powers in Europe, Germany and France, don't even offer troops. The US should demand 50,000 troops before allowing them any voice.

How can two countries with 140 million or so population cannot offer even 50,000 troops to do anything?????

(Oh we are in Afghanistan and Kosovo...yeah, let me know if that is over 20,000 trooops...)

An amazing amount of bile is being spilt here. As someone with one foot on each side of the divide (my mother is German, I spent my childhood there and I have many family members to whom I an close there), it seems to me that German romanticism, (Sturm und Drang und Gedankenfreiheit), if you will, which recently seems to have taken a pacifist turn, is again leading Germany to some terrible decisions. There are still some voices of reason but they are not given much attention. One of the best analyses of the Iraq situation that I have seen on either side of the Atlantic is by Prof. Joachim Krause of the Institut für Sicherheitspolitik of the Uni Kiel: "Die Krise um den Irak und die internationale Ordnung" (http://www.isuk.org/de/pdf/IrakAnalyse.pdf). For those who can read it and are willing to invest the time, it's well worth the time. BTW, thanks to David's Medienkritik for first posting the link to the paper.

Rob,

I agree with you in a lot of what you say. Schroeder's book deal proposal must have been sparked by a Pils too mucha and the constant fear of being replaced by Franz Muentefering. After all, he could be on hotjobs.com any minute if Franz M. decides he would make a better Chanvellor...

As for the Bundeswehr. There have been elite troops fighting with the US in Afghanistan around Tora Bora. But they were largely given unimportant side operations by the US commanders in charge and finally sent home.

I'm sorry, but given the importance of post combat dealings ("winning the peace"), non-combat, policing, pioneering, nation-building troops are more important than ever. The US is currently paying the price for its ignorance on precisely this matter.

These troops are what is keeping Afghanistan from once again falling apart while the US is slowly withdrawing troops and leaving behind CIA operatives who are intervening with the local powerstructures like they have always done.

Here, as in Iraq, the lack of strategy becomes apparent. Getting Saddam out could have been a worthwhile goal if it had not been for the fact that Condoleeza Rice admitted even before the war that it might be necessary to replace one authoritarian governance structure with another.

Take that and the fact that still nobody *really* knows what made Bush go there (was it Iran of all possibilitis), I think his presidency is currently being spared most of the criticism it rightly deserves.

>Then your advice might well be taken-- such as >Great Britian.

Excuse me??? When has British advice been taken into account by this administration? Michael Moore may be wrong on many accounts but he's certainly right to claim that no one has ever been able to explain Blair's position sufficiently... What about Poland? Or Spain. In the case of Spain at least, Aznar had the opportunity to have a private pint with the President. Clearly worth it all...

This administration is asking for open protest because it does not take other forms of disagreement into account.

Di - if you're referring to me, I was right when I was born and I'm right now.

Like "cowboy" neocon isn't an insult.

Just do it.

--
--When has British advice been taken into account by this administration?--

At least 2x where we got our asses handed to us on a platter, because we listened to Tony. UN come to mind?

As to Iraq, there are many reasons, pick one or 2 or 3. Doesn't matter, we won't know the end result for decades. Look at Germany, such a disappointment. All our blood, sweat, tears, money, and this endless fascination w/communism/fascimism, any ism which just sets them back because they just can't adopt anything which seems remotely American because it means we might be right on something.

Sandy P.,

>because they just can't adopt anything which >seems remotely American

You are kidding, right? Can't adopt anything *because* you (who is "we" in that context) might be right? Liberty. Rock'n'Roll. Hollywood. From Coca-Colonization to Dirty Dancing. I had a Top Gun phase myself. In February 1989 I told my mum that I am sure I have more in common with American kids of my age than with East German ones. I am pretty sure I was right then. Now East Germans will probably say the same.

Come to Germany and you will find a general admiration of America, mixed with sometimes justified sometimes unjustified Euro-sytle cultural arrogancy. But these days, the is a more fundamentalist strain becoming visible in the US that is different from the America we thought we know - it has unfortunately largely disappeared from the public realm with the end of the Clinton Presidency.

I've been reading business sections for 20 years Tobias. You're talking superficials. You've NEVER known us. But we have 1000 years of your and what was once our history to "know" you. 200 years and you still don't get US.

-- But these days, the is a more fundamentalist strain becoming visible in the US that is different from the America we thought we know - it has unfortunately largely disappeared from the public realm with the end of the Clinton Presidency.--

No, Tobias, it was 9/11. What Europe fails to realize almost 3 years later. IT WAS 9/11. And the 60s generation starting to move up the food chain and fighting like hell to hang on, but the tide is against them. They were the European strain. There's a book called Generations, IIRC, about the 13 (?) generations since the founding of our country. It's on my to purchase list. Should also be on yours.

It's not that we've changed. It's that we're going back to our roots. It's just that no one's seen them in 60 years. Europe is also going back to its' roots. This time, however, we might not be as generous with our blood and money.

Our millenial generation is paying attention. They are destined to be our next greatest generation if we and they have the guts. Difference is frankenreich might not be worth the effort this time around. The Channel just might be the dividing line, as one out-of-the-box scenario. These kids live and breath the web. They decide to surf to Le Monde's cartoons or Der Stern on a consistent basis, they might not like what they see and adjust their opinions accordingly.

You're not winning their and our hearts and minds, Tobias. Maybe you guys should start looking to "root causes." If W wins by more than 5(?) %age points, are Europeans going to ask themselves why the Amis hate them?

Or do we do the adult thing, agree and do business when we can, part ways when we can't?

But we will not tolerate those assholes like Coûteaux advocating giving the ME even more nukes than Iran already has. If Europe is trying to avoid using nukes, then maybe you shouldn't start spreading them around. Because 1 or more will find their way here, the black turbans of Iran already said so.

They have told us too many times to count that they intend to kill US and have been at it 25 years now. Do you honestly think we're going to take that sitting down? You want to be a dhimmi, go right ahead. But you're not taking US w/you and you're not feeding us to the alligator hoping it will eat you last. It's going to eat you either way, your European sophistication and payments to your Pali proxies will not stop them. You have 4 choices, US, islamofascists, Chicoms and/or Indians.

3 years out and Europe is still part of the problem, not the solution.

You can start w/Dafur.

I've been reading business sections for 20 years Tobias. You're talking superficials. You've NEVER known us. But we have 1000 years of your and what was once our history to "know" you. 200 years and you still don't get US.

-- But these days, the is a more fundamentalist strain becoming visible in the US that is different from the America we thought we know - it has unfortunately largely disappeared from the public realm with the end of the Clinton Presidency.--

No, Tobias, it was 9/11. What Europe fails to realize almost 3 years later. IT WAS 9/11. And the 60s generation starting to move up the food chain and fighting like hell to hang on, but the tide is against them. They were the European strain. There's a book called Generations, IIRC, about the 13 (?) generations since the founding of our country. It's on my to purchase list. Should also be on yours.

It's not that we've changed. It's that we're going back to our roots. It's just that no one's seen them in 60 years. Europe is also going back to its' roots. This time, however, we might not be as generous with our blood and money.

Our millenial generation is paying attention. They are destined to be our next greatest generation if we and they have the guts. Difference is frankenreich might not be worth the effort this time around. The Channel just might be the dividing line, as one out-of-the-box scenario. These kids live and breath the web. They decide to surf to Le Monde's cartoons or Der Stern on a consistent basis, they might not like what they see and adjust their opinions accordingly.

You're not winning their and our hearts and minds, Tobias. Maybe you guys should start looking to "root causes." If W wins by more than 5(?) %age points, are Europeans going to ask themselves why the Amis hate them?

Or do we do the adult thing, agree and do business when we can, part ways when we can't?

But we will not tolerate those assholes like Coûteaux advocating giving the ME even more nukes than Iran already has. If Europe is trying to avoid using nukes, then maybe you shouldn't start spreading them around. Because 1 or more will find their way here, the black turbans of Iran already said so.

They have told us too many times to count that they intend to kill US and have been at it 25 years now. Do you honestly think we're going to take that sitting down? You want to be a dhimmi, go right ahead. But you're not taking US w/you and you're not feeding us to the alligator hoping it will eat you last. It's going to eat you either way, your European sophistication and payments to your Pali proxies will not stop them. You have 4 choices, US, islamofascists, Chicoms and/or Indians.

3 years out and Europe is still part of the problem, not the solution.

You can start w/the Sudan and Chad. Hell, start w/Kosovo, but start something.

Tobias- you flatter only yourself with your current observations of the US. "coca-cola-colonization" you say??!!%^&*!! Are you out of your mind?
It is odd that that your truly boring "site's" name was nicked off of a cowboy clint eastwood movie called a fistful of dollars.
You damn fool. Your comments above make you out to be a cultural thief, dont they?
Please now explain why so many muslims came to your country to take your welfare monie, live among you, and then turn around and want to destroy all that is western? What is it about life in germany that makes these people want to kill after experiencing the "west" in GERMANY? Or was it just simply their collective experience with Germans that made them hate the west? What role did YOUR GERMAN "security" servies play in letting the Hamburg cell do their planning?
by the way- what is "justified euro arragance"?
You pathetic fool- the brightest minds left europer over the last few centuries leaving nothing behind but half-wit intellectual imbeciles such as yourself.
"I had a "top gun phahse" myself" Oh, and that means what and to whom??? you damn fool. Glad you kept your SS dreams a secret.

Maybe this will help:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005126

And this should give you pause: Do the research on the University of Wiscosin in Madison and you will see why this article is a high water mark:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/laney/cst-edt-laney31.html

I think that the "fundamentalist strain becoming visible in the US" is more in the minds of media looking for a cheap story and people willing to gobble it up readily. I mean GWB is vilified for many things that Europeans are themselves guilty of. For example, none of the major European nations will come anywhere close to fulfilling their share of emissions reduction - yet GWB is the "Kyoto killer". GWB is an arrogant unilaterilst, but it is OK to cozy up with Chirac who wants new Europe to shut up.

The bigger war than the one happening at Iraq is the war that Europeans need to confront themselves about America. At way too many places there is this superior feeling that Americans are greedy, violent, macho, cultureless, selfish, obese McDonaldized clone. The good news is that the normally dismissive Americans have started to feel the sting, and in the process have also launched the necessary anti-revisionism that basically says "Guys Americans aren't as bad as our media makes them to be".

As part of the editorial team may I ask for a respectful discussion that excludes name calling and things like that? I think we are grown-ups here and can discuss based on facts and do not need to revert to name calling.

Thank you.

Also, has Europe ever considered it might take a fundie to defeat a fundie?

And mock our spiritual beliefs all you want, your spiritual beliefs have been transferred to the state. The state is your religion and your savior.

Except deep down inside you know the state is failing you. Your proposed constitution provides for many things, yet "liberty" isn't one of them.

The state failed under the Nazis, monarchy and USSR. Yet like a moth drawn to a flame, if you just keep at it, you'll get it right. Got to prove us wrong. That is the most important thing.

Wanting to sell armaments to China and give the ME nukes. Fine job you've done w/Iran, BTW. Another mess we're going to have to fix at great cost to ourselves. If the tech was there to build a bubble and let the rest of you go at it while we're protected, we'd do it. We'd dig down deep inside and do it. Become totally self-sufficient. And let you have the rest of the world to implement your competing visions of utopia, whether Western, Asian or Muslim.

And I do apologize for the duplicate posting, thought I caught the 1st in time.

As much as a lenghty answer to the criticism of my opinion seems appropiate, at first I would like to point out that the topic of this thread used to be the thesis that a new quality of Anti-Americanism has emerged in Europe.

I disagree with that. Anti-Americanism has been there for decades. There is nothing new to it. You find Anti-Islamism, Anti-Christianism, Anti-Jewism, Anti-Germanism, Anti-Frenchism, Anti-Whateverism all over the planet as well. This is something you can't eraze completely.

However, it is true that America is an easier target for hatred or envy than some other countries/groups because it is so high profile.

I mean, the more one is involved in conflicts all over the world the easier it is to make enemies.

Now, this is not meant as an advice to become low profile. Do what you feel you have to do. I won't criticise that in itself.

No, I just would like to draw your attention to the fact that any action might be followed up by criticism. It is natural that not all people share the same opinion. It becomes Anti-Americanism only when it is based on the irrationale.

It is part of democracy to allow other opinions. If you forbid different opinions because they don't come from someone with equal spending on defense, it implies that you believe in a class electoral law. In Prussia this kind of system was in place till 1918. The American Constitution however favors general elections where every vote has equal weight last time I checked.

In any case, the answer to why German military is weak in comparison lies in history, of course.

After WW2 everyone, especially the military victors, wanted to make sure that Germany would never have a strong army again, an army that would be capable of starting another world war.

Look at the Morgenthau plan for example:
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Morgenthau%20plan
It wasn't adopted but still post war Germany should never have a strong army again. Until 1990 it didn't even have full sovereignty. The Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany will give a little insight to that:
http://www.usembassy.de/usa/etexts/2plusfour8994e.htm
Being comitted to this treaty was the requirement by the Allies to alow re-unification. Article 7 gives Germany full sovereignty again. Article 3 of that same contract limits the military capacity of united Germany forever. (Total number of troops, no WMD, etc.)
The whole point was that Germany could not possibly become a fierce enemy ever again. Well, I think Germans learned from their history and don't want it anymore either.

Article 6 of the cited contract allows Germany to form alliances or to remain in them. Meaning we could stay in NATO. Questions of German national defense are therefore NATO questions, since - again - Germany was not supposed to be able to take care of its defense itself.

NATO membership comes with responsibilities. That is why Germans are active with humanitarian help and police forces. It can't be active with combat troops. It would breach Article 2 of the contract. (stating that only peace will emanate from German soil.)
So in fact, fighting in Kosovo, or in Afghanistan is highly questionable under this contract and the constitution. There seems to be a gray area, however. So that armed police forces are ok or AWACs planes are ok, but no offensive troops.

So in summary, feel free to ridicule Germany and opinions voiced from within on account of its mediocre army. Just don't be surprised that no warmongering will come from here.

Germany turned form an aggressive agitator into a peaceful mediator. You don't want the old Germany back, do you? The new Germany is the result of allied post-war policy.

@Sandy

The old administration in (pre-unification-) Germany didn't see enough to whether German companies would export weapon technology to war zones.

I don't know if that is what you were referring to in your comment on Iran. Germany would not be alone in that, however. The US even used weapon proliferation as a tool to fight the cold war.

Did you mean that Germany wants to sell nuclear weapon technology to China?
Germany is considering whether it can allow Siemens to export civil nuclear technology to China since it will not be needed anmore overhere. (Germany has decided to drop nuclear power altogether)

Marco-
Thanks oy ufor your thoughts. However, it would be best for you to note that this nuke reactor you mention is not wanted by germans, as opposed to "not needed" as you state.
Germany was selling something it's own citizins felt was too dangerous, to the country of the Tianemann legacy.
Now who would clean up that mess if things were to go sour with the chinese govt?
With german soldiers running like rabbits back into barracs in Kosovo and the military being a "non-offensive" organization- WHO would be forced to step in to clean up this nuke mess in china? Germany has just killed NATO and is now on it's own. And I thought I heard someone, somewhere mention Germany should be a perm member of the UN security council. A concept that would be absolute rubbish. Germany can ensure the security of the world as much as Sudan can promote Human Rights on behalf of the UN.

Umm, Marco?

Are you saying there was less anti-Americanism about our 1st 100 years when we had a lower profile? Did the frogs coin the term "Americanization" around the time of our Civil War? Wouldn't doubt it.

Do you get a lot of nose bleeds?

As to whether or not a more aggressive Germany is good, depends on where you aim it.

It's coming whether you like it or not.

@ pato

You are implying that the civil nuclear technology that might be sold to China would help China to assemble nuclear weapons, right?

Otherwise I don't get your point:

If Germans think that nuclear power is too dangerous because of possible accidents, why shouldn't we give our spare material to another country with less fear of these accidents?

Germany doesn't force nuclear power plants on anybody. Please correct me if I am not well informed, but I think Germany would be the first major industrial nation to abolish nuclear power altogether.

So basically, the whole world around us wants it, we don't, so we can give it to them.

Now, if it was weapon technology I would see your point of non-proliferation. I don't remember that to be fact, however.

@ Sandy
"Are you saying there was less anti-Americanism about our 1st 100 years when we had a lower profile?"
yes. Not among the ruling elites of absolute Monarchys, perhaps. But among the general public... yes, I am saying there probably was less anti-Americanism. It is very plausible.

"Did the frogs coin the term "Americanization" around the time of our Civil War?"
I don't know when that term was established. Frogs? You mean the French, uh? Come on, the French aren't frogs, Germans no krauts and Americans no Texas Bill, Al Bundy or J.R. or whatever. Let's not get into name callings.

(Btw, I had a good laugh about freedom fries. America sure is the country with my favorite comedians. Very good joke!) ;-)

"Do you get a lot of nose bleeds?"
never.

"As to whether or not a more aggressive Germany is good, depends on where you aim it."
ok, so if the NAZIs just had tried to beat Stalin, leaving the West alone while still setting up this Arian oriented regime including the discrimination of Jews but staying just short of death camps... would that have been ok? Where is the border line?

If you say it is where individual liberties are at stake or human rights... well where is the border line here? How much violation of individual civil liberties and human rights is ok in trying to establish the same set of liberties in the whole world?

Is the end of all liberties inherent in a war fought to establish liberties? (I know this is a philosophical question. I am not convinced of this statement myself. I am curious to find out, though. So if you wish, let's talk about it.)

make network 9.2, recommended..

available. to The situations,.

implementations. a routers, at.

They identified and asterisk.

programming, live do accounts,.

Konsole, an scanner. Batman.

and Takeover and Checking.

to the of one.

interface features. there and.

can free he is.

, Figure and to.

pool these excerpt already.

de-select writing is as.

math whole solely good.

large developed sponsor is.

file have have way.

XBox", version useful where.

Even the to Without.

in jocks. the some.

way an set accurate.