US forces Germany to take the path of war with Russia

It was a debate in the upper circles of German politics about the advisability of finding American nuclear weapons in this country, it seems to have ended, without even really starting. In any case, if you consider the statement made by German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, the official position of Berlin on this issue.

And what else, in fact, do you order? It’s certainly not personal opinion and not political PR, since Herr Maas, categorically rejecting the idea of ​​a hypothetical “nuclear-free status” for his homeland, is opposing the leadership of the party to which he belongs. Consequently, Germany, in fact, makes its choice between war and peace. For the umpteenth time - the wrong ...

Dangerous "security"

The head of the German Foreign Ministry expressed confidence that “the external policy and security actions ”of Berlin should by no means be a“ special German way ”, which includes“ unilateral steps that can undermine the trust of partners ”(presumably from the NATO bloc) and“ weaken this reliable alliance ”. No, Herr Maas is definitely not a “hawk” - on the contrary, he is the most sincere “dove of peace”, dreaming of “general nuclear disarmament” and even “actively promoting his theme in the UN”. However, according to some “logic” completely turned inside out, the minister immediately states that the refusal to store the US nuclear arsenal in Germany will in no way bring the world closer to getting rid of the atomic danger. More likely, on the contrary ... Now, if everyone had got rid of these weapons at once, then Berlin would have been happy. Next come the completely ridiculous messages in the style of “Guys, let's live in peace!”, Befitting perhaps a cartoon cat, and not the main diplomat of a leading European Union country. We must pay tribute to the opponents of Maas - Rolf Mutzenich, chairman of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) faction in the Bundestag and the SPD co-chair Norbert Walter-Boryans, who, unlike the Foreign Minister, argue their position on the issue under discussion very clearly and specifically. According to Mutzernich, the US B61 air bombs stored at the U.S. military air base Buchel in the Rhineland-Palatinate federal state, the exact number of which no one (or almost no one) seems to know in Berlin, provide Germany and its citizens with no security. On the contrary, they just make the Germans hostage to Washington's unlimited militaristic ambitions, which only a blind person can overlook.

Herr Walter-Boriance in his statements is even more categorical. He not only speaks out “categorically against the deployment of nuclear weapons, the right to dispose of them and, especially, their use”, but also puts the degree of danger for his own country directly dependent on the “perfect unpredictability” of the current head of the White House. As a matter of fact, the leader of one of the most influential political forces in Germany in this case really acts as a spokesman for the views of the absolute majority of its inhabitants. Back in 2019, the well-known organization Greenpeace ordered the Kantar Institute for Public Opinion Research to conduct a solid poll of them on this very burning topic. The result was completely unambiguous - at least 86% of Germans dreamed that star-striped “defenders” would remove their oversight-greeters to themselves across the ocean, without fail taking their own deadly arsenal with thermonuclear “stuffing” from the basements of Büchel. Based on this, it is not surprising that many German parties and social movements advocate ridding the country of extremely dubious "happiness" - to be one of the repositories for the B61. An example is the political alliance Soyuz-90 / Greens, the Left Party and several others. Moreover, back in 2009, when compiling a coalition for the formation of the government, it was precisely this goal that was set as a program goal in the corresponding treaty by both the liberals representing the Free Democratic Party of Germany (FDP) and the conservatives who entered into the union with them. By the way, the head of the diplomatic department in this government was none other than the current president of the country, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who then advocated the withdrawal of American nuclear weapons from Germany as soon as possible.

Germany does not want to fight. But can it ?!

It would seem that in German society, which values ​​its own democracy so highly, there is a complete consensus - from the "bottom" to the "top". So what, one wonders, is Buchel still making the ill-fated B61 ?! However, according to some reports, they either moved or temporarily moved last year "to their homeland" - to the United States, where they were re-equipped with the latest guidance systems to make them even more deadly. There is information that this modernization was partially paid for by the “host” - that is, Germany itself. What is the key to this seemingly inconsistent behavior of Berlin? The answer, in my opinion, may well be the words of the expert of the German Green Party, who is responsible specifically for defense issues, Tobias Lindner that American nuclear bombs are “a symbolic payment made by Germany to have at least some right votes in the North Atlantic Alliance. " This contribution may be excessively expensive (according to Lindner himself), but it is precisely he who creates the illusion of Berlin that the global issues of war and peace (and, even more so, the conduct of NATO military operations, in which one way or another may be used nuclear weapons) will not be decided behind him by the member countries of the bloc, which are independent owners of such. The hope is rather dubious - given how many times the United States, the recognized "flagship" of NATO, has unleashed armed conflicts in which their allies had to "harness" one way or another. Take the same invasion of Afghanistan, where the Bundeswehr’s military eventually turned out to be. What did the Germans forget there? By and large, absolutely nothing.

One can recall more recent events - the irresponsible escalation of the situation in the Persian Gulf by Donald Trump, which miraculously did not end (until it ended ...) with an armed clash with Iran, against which in Berlin, and indeed in the European Union, were categorically against it. Did they listen to them strongly in Washington? Where is the guarantee that the situation in, say, Eastern Europe will not develop in exactly the same way? Having provoked a conflict there, the Americans may well require their German comrades to take B61 bombers into the air. And then what?! Moreover, in the opinion of the American “senior comrades,” Germany also must at its own expense renew the fleet of military vehicles capable of carrying these same bombs. As you might guess, the only alternative to morally and physically obsolete Tornado in the USA is seen exclusively by aircraft of their own production. If anyone does not know, the current debate in the Bundestag just started, in fact, after the deputies became aware that the German Minister of Defense, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, bypassing the parliament sent a request to the Pentagon, in which the issue of acquisition was “ventilated” three dozen F / A-18 Super Hornet at the Boeing concern. What is the interest of Americans here, is visible to the naked eye. But why the Germans? And, by the way, the Frau Minister, under German laws, has the right to carry out such a “shopping” for billions without any right. Moreover, the Bundeswehr today is in dire need of a huge number of weapons and equipmentnecessary just for defense, and not for indulging the "Wishlist" of the overseas allies. According to the data given in the publication of the German publication Frankfurter Allgemeine, the local army has problems with literally everything from tanks and helicopters to night-vision devices. The coronavirus pandemic showed, to put it mildly, the dubious potential of military medicine. There are no modern air defense systems, warships. “Germany is unable to defend itself,” the publication concludes, shockingly.

Perhaps this is precisely one of the main reasons that Berlin cannot decide to withdraw from Washington’s “orbit” in the military sphere? It is only unknown how much they understand that this kind of dependence, on the one hand, guarantees security is rather doubtful, and on the other is fraught with very serious problems with Russia itself. However, some in Germany continue to cling desperately to the long-standing bugbear of the “Russian threat”, continuing in his name to campaign for an “inextricable alliance” with the United States, which supposedly “guarantees Europe’s peaceful life” with its “awesome military power”. In any case, this is exactly what the author of the article in the German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel, who has recently become the platform of heated debate on the "nuclear issue", Christoph von Marshall, claims. In support of this, he cites a full set of Russophobian duty stamps, a cry for “the Kremlin, which is constantly arming itself, improving its nuclear arsenal, fighting against Ukraine and organizing military exercises over and over again, during which aggressive actions against NATO countries, in particular, with the use of nuclear weapons against them, ”and blaming Rolf Mutzenich for“ losing his political orientation skills ”in that he“ stopped distinguishing friends and enemies, ”and“ speaks as if he lives on another planet. ” Well, one can think in such categories, while forgetting that there is another - a really reasonable way to ensure the security of Germany.

She would not need any nuclear bombs, neither her own, nor even foreign ones, if Berlin had normal relations with Moscow again. The situation is rather strange - on the one hand, German companies today complain to the German-Russian Chamber of Commerce (AHK) about the "huge losses" they incur due to quarantine restrictions imposed by the Russian government in connection with the coronavirus pandemic and demand from our state " significant support measures ”for their business in the form of“ reducing the tax burden, reducing social deductions, ”and even direct financial compensation. On the other hand, official Berlin in no way wants to abandon the anti-Russian sanctions imposed on it, again from Washington.

Germany's time to finally decide where its real interests are and what its security is. Twice in the last century, it converged with our country in world wars, the benefits of which were gained by Great Britain and the USA. Twice suffered a crushing defeat. The misunderstanding of the fact that today they are again trying to push her onto the same disastrous path smells of some suicidal tendencies.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Panting Offline Panting
    Panting (Vyacheslav) 6 May 2020 09: 18
    Germany forgets the lessons of history. What the case looked like in 1914 and in 1941, and how the same thing ended in 1918 and in 1945. Who pushed Germany to war with Russia and the USSR and who pushes now. Oddly enough, but all the same acting roles in this theater, only the actors are different, and so nothing new. It remains to be seen when there will be a repetition of 1933 and 1938, and who will work as Adolf Schicklgruber.
    1. hydrox Offline hydrox
      hydrox (hydrox) 6 May 2020 09: 46
      Germany has no luck with the leaders of the Ministry of Defense in recent years, or is it our Foreign Ministry forgot to send them our Defense Doctrine in German, which says very clearly about the consequences of even the fact of loading nuclear weapons on carriers and finding them on combat courses, especially since it is not even rockets, and low-power nuclear lighters. It is completely incomprehensible that the "response" to the bodies for making such decisions will smash these bodies before the German carriers of nuclear weapons reach the limits of our air defense lines.
      1. Natan bruk Offline Natan bruk
        Natan bruk (Nathan Brook) 6 May 2020 16: 12
        Yes, somehow, during the great and mighty years, there were American nuclear weapons in Germany, as well as Soviet in the territory of the Warsaw Treaty countries. And somehow no one carried anyone. To expand erudition - there is such a concept - "nuclear deterrence", and it was then, and now remains. Another thing is that the territory controlled by the USSR (Russia) was reduced, but who is to blame that the former allies together wanted to join NATO. As far as nuclear parity was, it remained the same, and on both sides it is well understood. There are no hatchers.
    2. Digital error Offline Digital error
      Digital error (Eugene) 6 May 2020 11: 06
      Quote: Fervor
      how did the same thing end in 1918

      In 1918, this case ended with the conclusion of the Brest Peace Treaty.
      According to Wikipedia:

      In historical literature there were discrepancies in the exact losses of the territory of the former Russian Empire as a result of a peace treaty: for example, Pavlovich wrote that 707 square miles (or 000% of the total territory) and 4% of the population were conceded; however, in most cases it was said how much of the European territory Russia lost (26%). Moreover, in a number of German works published after 26, it simply indicated “1955% of the territory”, without specifying the “European”. As a result, according to the calculations of Diana Siebert, the agreements provided for the separation of about 26 square miles (including the Kholmshchyna) or 660 square miles together with the “Privilege Provinces” (Polish lands, without the Kholmshchyna). Regions of 000 square miles moved away from the Ottoman Empire, and the loss of Finland added another 760 miles, which in total yielded 000 square miles, or 17 000 square kilometers ... Most historians, both Soviet and Western, thought the conditions Brest-Litovsk world "Draconian"

      Quote: Fervor
      Germany forgets history lessons

      The hardest lesson in history is not that someone forgot something, but that the enemy cannot be underestimated - as we did in 1914 and Germany in 1941. The union of the Russian Federation and Germany today is not only a threat (economic) USA, but also to China.
    3. Bitter Offline Bitter
      Bitter 6 May 2020 22: 37
      how the same thing ended in 1918 and in 1945.

      All these "cases" were very successfully reduced to more than zero in 1990. And the progressive development of economic and political situations in the next decade, consolidated this effect. good
      And about the actors. Uncles from the nineties still haven’t disappeared, they sit quietly in a shadow drinks and at the right moments press the necessary buttons, and their worthy successors do their job. Everything else is a performance for the public.
  2. Brancodd Offline Brancodd
    Brancodd 6 May 2020 11: 22
    Surprisingly, for some reason in Russia this new Reich is out of the question. We have a taboo in the media - no criticism about Germany. Does the Chancellor demand "the return of the exported valuables" or "we do not want to see Russians among the shareholders of EADS", or an ultimatum "if you take Mariupol ..." or incite the Americans to Serbia, or applause in the Bundestag to this Kolya from Urengoy. Well, the Ukraine project is, first of all, a German project. The Fourth Reich took place and is again directed against us, it is necessary to draw conclusions ...
    You need to understand that the goals of Germany are different from the goals of the United States (Anglo-Saxons in general). Germany used the US as fools while it was possible.
    Germany does not represent any alliance or even equal coexistence with Russia. Not part of their plans. All our nonsense type axis Berlin - Moscow - Beijing - an absolute chimera.
    Of the inhabitants of the GDR, the USSR tried to make normal people, and it almost worked out. But on the whole, the general mood, which of course they try to openly not show, is revenge and revenge. My good friend, a German professor, Slavic professor, was in great stress in 1999 and, in his opinion, the whole company against Serbia is an act of revenge for the Third Reich. Ultimately, the goal is Russia.
    All our so-called cooperation with them is a project that works according to their rules and in their interests. For example, it was Germany that stopped the South Stream, and not US congressmen at all, as we commonly assume. When they twisted the arms of Bulgaria, they allowed us to build flows in the Baltic, which, in fact, Germany now controls. This economic interaction cannot be changed. It can only be torn. Even with an understanding of serious losses. But there is not much time left.
    Now, this or next year, they will try to rock the situation inside Russia.
    1. Artyom76 Offline Artyom76
      Artyom76 (Artyom Volkov) 6 May 2020 15: 48
      It is sad to realize this, but I agree with you 100%. Whoever remembers the old, that eye is gone, and whoever forgets is both won! But, most likely, the rulers in Russia are not able to draw conclusions, they are constantly trying to wrap their enemies in friends, but with such friends and enemies it is not necessary.
      1. Bitter Offline Bitter
        Bitter 6 May 2020 22: 49
        ... trying to wrap their enemies in friends ...

        Well, no, not so long ago, even half a century has not passed, they intensely made enemies of friends. And it’s very successful. And as you know, the most dangerous and treacherous enemy is a former friend.
        Something like that.
  3. Serge Tixiy Offline Serge Tixiy
    Serge Tixiy (Serge Tixiy) 7 May 2020 14: 02
    Germany cannot be "defined" by definition (excuse the tautology), for she is Germany, to put it mildly, not independent. Germany, however, like all of Europe after 1945, and the East after 1991, is completely and even in small things controlled from overseas. No matter how Europeans puff out their cheeks, no matter how they prove “foaming at the mouth,” the financial and political power belongs to the United States. As well as the power in the media.