It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

german president stands down

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
news.bbc.co.uk...

he was rightly criticized after basically stating that people have to get used to soldiers being used to secure trade routes...he hasnt backed down however due to this statement..that it was wrong and immoral to kill for profit....he has backed down because he thinks he shouldnt be criticized...theres a lack of respect for his position...

just to give a bigger picture....he was the ex boss of the IMF and a member of the trilateral commission.

[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]




posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque
news.bbc.co.uk...

he was rightly criticized after basically stating that people have to get used to soldiers being used to secure trade routes...he hasnt backed down however due to this statement..that it was wrong and immoral to kill for profit....he has backed down because he thinks he shouldnt be criticized...theres a lack of respect for his position...

just to give a bigger picture....he was the ex boss of the IMF and a member of the trilateral commission.

[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]

.

Just to clarify for people who aren't familiar with German Politics: The "president" (Bundespräsident) of germany is the nominal head of the state, not the acting head of the state. It is an important position, but the chancellor is the one calling the shots (Merkel).
"PResident" is more of a representative post, a bit like the queen in England.

Also... What Köhler said has to be seen in the context of german history... He didn't mean that the germans should better get used to making war for profits, what he meant was that Germany has interests and responsibilites in the world and that he thinks its time to stop the pacifist-bitchy mindset that has ruled germany since 48. It's not like he's a warmongerer or so; what you are seeing now is the last stage of an endless debate about the maxim of "nie wieder Krieg" (no more war) that was once considered they main purpose of the new german federal republic created in 48.

[edit on 31-5-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Originally posted by alienesque
news.bbc.co.uk...

he was rightly criticized after basically stating that people have to get used to soldiers being used to secure trade routes...he hasnt backed down however due to this statement..that it was wrong and immoral to kill for profit....he has backed down because he thinks he shouldnt be criticized...theres a lack of respect for his position...

just to give a bigger picture....he was the ex boss of the IMF and a member of the trilateral commission.

[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]

.

Just to clarify for people who aren't familiar with German Politics: The "president" (Bundespräsident) of germany is the nominal head of the state, not the acting head of the state. It is an important position, but the chancellor is the one calling the shots (Merkel).
"PResident" is more of a representative post, a bit like the queen in England.

He didn't mean that the germans should better get used to making war for profits
[edit on 31-5-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]




sorry...but yes he did...thats EXACTLY what he said...he said that people need to understand..and that they are slowly understanding...that sometimes the military needs to be used to protect trade routes and other 'interests' that may have negative effects on the jobs market at home....and..that this 'understanding' is a good thing...

basically...he said people need to understand that some wars need to be fought for profit and jobs....

odd though..i thought that was a conspiracy theory?



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque




sorry...but yes he did...thats EXACTLY what he said...he said that people need to understand..and that they are slowly understanding...that sometimes the military needs to be used to protect trade routes and other 'interests' that may have negative effects on the jobs market at home....and..that this 'understanding' is a good thing...

basically...he said people need to understand that some wars need to be fought for profit and jobs....

odd though..i thought that was a conspiracy theory?


Do you speak german? Have you listened to or read his comments in german? I have. There is no doubt about what he said or how he meant it.

I think you are disregarding the context of what he said. It seems you are not aware of the current debate in germany that has been going on forever - his statements are only intelligable in that context.

[edit on 31-5-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque


basically...he said people need to understand that some wars need to be fought for profit and jobs....



In a way yes. But your sentence sounds like he wants to wage war for profits. What he is saying is that the basic position of "no more war" has to be given up, that there are circumstances that will force Germany into conflicts on the globe without being attacked at home. That is a HUGE step in german foreign political thought - this would have been tabu only 15 years ago.

He doesn't mean they need to wage war for profits. What he is trying to say is that Germany has interests and a role in the world that it must be able to defende, and that it must be willing to defend them when their interests are concerned.
Not that they will necessarily have to wage wars in order to make profits. Just that they will have to be prepared to use force to secure their interests, a big taboo in german politics. This is basically a debate on the role of the german army. Köhler has a different view on that than the people and the founders of the german federal republic have had, and that's why his statements were so controversial.

hope that cleared it up. It is a comment that has to be read in the context of the national debate on the role of the army - a very hot topic, you know, Adolf and all that.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Originally posted by alienesque




sorry...but yes he did...thats EXACTLY what he said...he said that people need to understand..and that they are slowly understanding...that sometimes the military needs to be used to protect trade routes and other 'interests' that may have negative effects on the jobs market at home....and..that this 'understanding' is a good thing...

basically...he said people need to understand that some wars need to be fought for profit and jobs....

odd though..i thought that was a conspiracy theory?


Do you speak german? Have you listened to our read his comments in german? I have. There is no doubt about what he said or how he meant it.

I think you are disregarding the context of what he said. It seems you are not aware of the current debate in germany that has been going on forever - his statements are only intelligable in that context.


yes i do speak german...and i understand what he said perfectly.



heres what he said in german:

"In meiner Einschätzung sind wir insgesamt auf dem Wege, in der Breite der Gesellschaft zu verstehen, dass ein Land unserer Größe, mit dieser Außenhandelsabhängigkeit, auch wissen muss, dass im Zweifel, im Notfall auch militärischer Einsatz notwendig ist, um unsere Interessen zu wahren - zum Beispiel freie Handelswege, zum Beispiel ganze regionale Instabilitäten zu verhindern, die mit Sicherheit dann auch negativ auf unsere Chancen zurückschlagen, bei uns durch Handel Arbeitsplätze und Einkommen zu sichern. Alles das soll diskutiert werden - und ich glaube wir sind auf einem nicht so schlechten Weg." Bundespräsident Köhler auf dem Rückflug von Afghanistan nach Berlin gegenüber dem Deutschlandradio, 21.05.2010

a rough quick translation:

'' its my opinion that..in general..large portions of the population are starting to understand that a country as large as ours...with its dependence on exports that we have...must in times of emergency and uncertainty use military action to secure its interests...for instance keeping trade routes open or stopping areas of the world becoming instable in such a way that it would cost jobs and income at home....we need to talk about these things and i think we are on the right track...

again..thats just a rough translation i did quickly but it sums up perfectly what he said...

thats a far cry from being involved in wars for purely humanitarian reasons...

the fact that he quit because he feels he shouldnt be criticized is...frankly...amazing...thats almost as disgraceful as his comments in the first place...



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Originally posted by alienesque


basically...he said people need to understand that some wars need to be fought for profit and jobs....



That is a HUGE step in german foreign political thought - this would have been tabu only 15 years ago.



and rightly so..its sad that this sort of thing has become so 'normal' that a president can talk about it as if its nothing..and then complain and quit when he gets a bit of flack..


its wrong....war should not be fought for jobs....



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
He just said to much, - the truth. So he is is politically dead.

Armer Horst.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by alienesque
 





dass ein Land unserer Größe, mit dieser Außenhandelsabhängigkeit, auch wissen muss, dass im Zweifel, im Notfall auch militärischer Einsatz notwendig ist, um unsere Interessen zu wahren - zum Beispiel freie Handelswege, zum Beispiel ganze regionale Instabilitäten zu verhindern



You do see that this preceeds the part about economics, right? This is what I said: Germany has a role in the world and it needs to be able to defend that role if it wants to prosper. So the role of the army has to be redefined. What Köhler wants is an army that has operations like Afghanistan as its main role, while the traditional strategic outlook for the Bundeswehr was solely defending Germany from invasions. He is not making the case for war for profits. He is making the case that the german Army has another role to play in defending germany than simply securing german territory.

Maybe I got the gist of your OP wrong. I just find the claim the he wants "war for profit" a bit jumping the shark.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by cushycrux
He just said to much, - the truth. So he is is politically dead.

Armer Horst.


its not the truth....its not the truth that wars HAVE to be fought to secure jobs at home....its the truth that some wars ARE fought to secure jobs..

theres a HUGE difference..he thinks its ok to fight wars to secure jobs....and thus he needs to go...



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque

Originally posted by cushycrux
He just said to much, - the truth. So he is is politically dead.

Armer Horst.


its not the truth....its not the truth that wars HAVE to be fought to secure jobs at home....its the truth that some wars ARE fought to secure jobs..

theres a HUGE difference..he thinks its ok to fight wars to secure jobs....and thus he needs to go...


You are right. But this is how politicians think, but nobody has the eggs to say it. But he does. For me, this is not ethically correct, but it's the damn truth. The Countries starting wars all over the world for money.

USA - Iraq? Sure, to free the people from Saddam - and what idiot believes this? Right.

Also doch armer Horst. "Or Naive"



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by alienesque
 


Again I would seriously object to interpreting his statements as saying that "germany MUST fight war for profits". He didn't say that. Something along those lines was implied; but he certainly isn't a warmonger for profits. He just wants germany to have the same possibilities that the US and others takes for granted. It's about the basic ideas behind the german army, not about waging war for profits....



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by cushycrux

Originally posted by alienesque

Originally posted by cushycrux
He just said to much, - the truth. So he is is politically dead.

Armer Horst.


its not the truth....its not the truth that wars HAVE to be fought to secure jobs at home....its the truth that some wars ARE fought to secure jobs..

theres a HUGE difference..he thinks its ok to fight wars to secure jobs....and thus he needs to go...


You are right. But this is how politicians think, but nobody has the eggs to say it. But he does. For me, this is not ethically correct, but it's the damn truth. The Countries starting wars all over the world for money.

USA - Iraq? Sure, to free the people from Saddam - and what idiot believes this? Right.

Also doch armer Horst. "Or Naive"


i know this is how politicians think..and it was honest of him to admit it...that doesnt make what he said 'right'..

its not right under ANY circumstances to kill people for jobs....kohler thinks it is...



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin
reply to post by alienesque
 


Again I would seriously object to interpreting his statements as saying that "germany MUST fight war for profits". He didn't say that. Something along those lines was implied; but he certainly isn't a warmonger for profits. He just wants germany to have the same possibilities that the US and others takes for granted. It's about the basic ideas behind the german army, not about waging war for profits....


he is actually saying that germany MUST fight wars for profit and jobs under certain circumstances..that is actually exactly what he is saying...hes saying this..and hes saying its good that people are starting to understand this..

terrible....truly evil...i do not want a job that was gained by some other person being killed...



[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]

[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque


he is actually saying that germany MUST fight wars for profit and jobs under certain circumstances..that is actually what he is saying.



No he's not. It's not about jobs per se, the job part comes qualified tied to buzzwords like "stability" and stuff.

I tried to explain it before. What he is saying is that operations of the type like those in Afghanistan (he made those statements to Soldiers in Afghanistan) exrpess the new role of Germany in the world. If Germany wants to continue to prosper, they will have to be ready to engage in these kinds of operations, since stability and peace are prerequisites for German prosperity.

It's just that you make it sound as if he's saying " If anyone closes a business that hurts germany's profits we'll wage war on them". That's just not the case.
His case is that the role Germany plays in the world has changed and that now the prosperity of Germany is directly linked to its willingness to go on peace-keeping missions and such. What he tried to do with those comments was establish the the Army has a legitimate role to play in this global context - a role that in the end is a guarantee for german prosperity. It is not an example of an aggressive mindset like " we need oil, we'll make war to get it" but rather something like " we have a new role in the world and if we don't live up to it we will not be able to prosper.

Don't you think I have a point? Does this sound so wrong to you? The history of the German army is a subject that I graduated in so I'm kind of confused to see this strong reading ofhis comments being accepted as the norm, since it isn't the way they were meant when you look at them in the larger context.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I think it's time for both Germany, Japan, and Europe in general to get over 1939-1945 and get with the times. War sucks, people die - that's just how it foes. But sometimes those wars need to be fought.

The reason why we have to do all the fighting is because you people won't ... even if it is a just cause. The sooner you all take up the burden for your own defense the better. Stop spending all your money on useless welfare crap and provide for your own defense. Enough is enough, it's not the job of the US to defend the world. Grow up and defend yourselves already.

[edit on 31-5-2010 by ChrisF231]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Originally posted by alienesque


he is actually saying that germany MUST fight wars for profit and jobs under certain circumstances..that is actually what he is saying.



No he's not. It's not about jobs per se, the job part comes qualified tied to buzzwords like "stability" and stuff.

I tried to explain it before. What he is saying is that operations of the type like those in Afghanistan (he made those statements to Soldiers in Afghanistan) exrpess the new role of Germany in the world. If Germany wants to continue to prosper, they will have to be ready to engage in these kinds of operations, since stability and peace are prerequisites for German prosperity.

It's just that you make it sound as if he's saying " If anyone closes a business that hurts germany's profits we'll wage war on them". That's just not the case.
His case is that the role Germany plays in the world has changed and that now the prosperity of Germany is directly linked to its willingness to go on peace-keeping missions and such. What he tried to do with those comments was establish the the Army has a legitimate role to play in this global context - a role that in the end is a guarantee for german prosperity. It is not an example of an aggressive mindset like " we need oil, we'll make war to get it" but rather something like " we have a new role in the world and if we don't live up to it we will not be able to prosper.

Don't you think I have a point? Does this sound so wrong to you? The history of the German army is a subject that I graduated in so I'm kind of confused to see this strong reading ofhis comments being accepted as the norm, since it isn't the way they were meant when you look at them in the larger context.




i know where you are coming from..honestly
...its just that..when it comes down to it..he is saying people need to accept that some wars need to be fought to secure jobs at home...strip it all down and that is what he is saying....and i find this totally unacceptable..



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChrisF231
I think it's time for both Germany, Japan, and Europe in general to get over 1939-1945 and get with the times. War sucks, people die - that's just how it foes. But sometimes those wars need to be fought.

The reason why we have to do all the fighting is because you people won't ... even if it is a just cause. The sooner you all take up the burden for your own defense the better. Stop spending all your money on useless welfare crap and provide for your own defense. Enough is enough, it's not the job of the US to defend the world. Grow up and defend yourselves already.

[edit on 31-5-2010 by ChrisF231]


hmm...so...'thats just how it is' is a reason for it to carry on..its a reason that everyone has to accept it?

well...i guess old men rape children...come on..thats just the way it is...get over it....dont complain..dont say its not right...just accept it..no..more....join in...thats just the way it is and always will be....grow up....come on...thats just the way it is...



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Politicians never dare tell the truth because the public rips them apart. They`d like to tell the truth, they`d like to share what really goes on but this is what happens then - he was publicly pressured to step down.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Politicians never dare tell the truth because the public rips them apart. They`d like to tell the truth, they`d like to share what really goes on but this is what happens then - he was publicly pressured to step down.



again..he wasnt simply telling the people whats going on...he wasnt simply telling the truth......if hed said 'well..its my opinion that some wars are fought for dubious reasons and thats not ok'...THAT would have been the truth....and most people know that already....he didnt however....he was saying its ok to go to war for such reasons and that its good that more and more people are understanding this......and that is wrong..its not right..in my opinion..to go to war for these reasons....never..under no circumstances.

people are mixing things up here.


look...lots of people have been saying for decades that countries sometimes go to war for reasons that are immoral...profit..oil..jobs etc...and have more often than not been called conspiracy theorists....kohler is trying to make such beliefs..such ideas seem ok..to make them ok..to make them acceptable.

thats VERY dangerous...its not ok to kill for profit...NEVER..and the day people accept this is a very sad one...

[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]

[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]

[edit on 31-5-2010 by alienesque]




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join