Good question. I suppose that means maybe a few weeks, as long as needed to win a single tough fight? I didnt found a defination of "short period". But I think important is the limitation of time in the term "short period".
Hehe, I agree with with you :lol:
Funny ;-) but I didnt want to confirm historical stereotypes. My intention was to reveal a historical feeling in Germany during the cold war. That it was difficult to live under such conditions for us and thats why many Germans are more pacifistic.See, you guys always could put the boots to heads
I am surprised, especially of your historical argument! What do you personelly excpect from this? As far as I know, the US soldiers are considered to be the best in the world.
I dont know any alternative for a democracy.
Heck, you have extreme ideas :lol: Actual I thought Canadians wouldn't be so hostile against the USA.
For sure, I hope you know that your ideas are undesirable and not to realise. The US market is irreplaceable. Apart from this, all other markets in Southamerica, China, India and so on have their own dangers for the Canadian and European economy, partly much more as the US. Furthermore, most of all goods are priced in US Dollar. So no one can ignore the US economy.
Canada with his population of 30 Million cannot replace a market with 300 Million customers. And of course, Canada and the EU are dealing today. In every better German supermarket, you find canadian maple honey. They looking good, but I dont know if they are produced without any chemical additives. I am sure that there are more canadian products, but I dont know them, apart from ATI graphics chips. Sometimes you find even some AdLib Cards ;-)
No, I didnt think so. It wouldn't be the same dispute, because in the European Union we have the same political objects. So with the same political objects you dont have such a tough controversial, like this with the USA. Without this, it would be much easier to find a solution about the troop deployment.
But thats only a vision.
Hehe I believe they dont have a choice ;-) Thats the same with Germany: Both countries invests only 1.2% from their GDP in the army. In the eyes of our NATO partner is that too less. Because with this low military budget our support is not "adequate" enough for them.
You are not fair. The idea of the Bush administration is to export democracy and capitalism (in the way of the western culture) in the world and to import security. That is well-intentioned, because the Neorepublicans think that the other countries also profits and become wealthy and liberty from this changes, but it is naiv, too. Peter Huntington described this well in his book "clash of culture" as a imperialism, wohe is dangerous for the peace, in cause of the different cultures or civilizations (i dont know the right English term) I think also.
I dont know anything about the russian and american activities in your arctic. But I would say that is Canadian territory. So it is in the responsbility of the Canadian government to arrange the refineries so, that they are eco-friendly and that the Canadian economy also profits from this ressources.
Hm I didnt know how the US threatens Canada. If you mean the possibility of a terrorist attack, so you are on the same side, like the German government. We also think that the US policy with the war on terror, was not helpful. Quite contrary it increased only the danger.
But Germany is not in the same situation like Canada. Canada is surrounded by the USA, the only super power on earth. We are surrounded by smaller and weaker countries, except France. All of them in a economical and political Union, so I think they dont want to be dangerous for us. I am really optimistic that we will have a peaceful and prosperful future.
Oh, you are right! I didnt know that. I thought the Canadians are part of EOF forces. With this information, its my opinion, the Canadians are right to demand reinforcements. In my eyes thats really disconcerting for Germany and maybe the NATO, too.
But I am afraid so, that Germany and the other NATO partner will not help in a substantial way before 2009, in cause of the reasons I wrote in my postings before. It seems so, that the Canadians will bleed for the political controversy between the US and some European countries. Thats really sad and shameful.
First I thought that France will mobilize reinforcements for Kandahar, for the political assist from the US, that they can establish a new military base on the Persian Gulf in the United Arabic Emirates. President Sarkozy suggested this for a few days. But now they are make also demands. They want that french Generals gets in the highest military NATO commando structures like the American. Otherwise they don will rejoin the NATO. Thats a problem for the US, because then would US forces are under command of foreign officers. In the past the US always rejects this. Some US military said in the past days that this would be "neonapoleonism". We will see what happens.
Btw, do you know how the situation is in the Canadian sector? Can the Canadian handle the uproars or are they in real danger? If not, do you think it is possible, that the Canadian goverment threats to withdraw his troops, because they want to help the USA in a political way and to make more pressure on the European nations?
The League of Nations is not a good analogy for the NATO. Because its the forcaster of the UN. In contrast to the League of Nations are in the NATO only countries with the same values. The actual problems are more result of the unilateral policy of the Bush Administration and their crimes against the human-rights in Guantanamo and Abu Ghreib. I am optimistic that this will change with a new US President.
