Germans accuse U.S. of Stasi tactics before Obama visit
reuters.com
reuters.com
That falls a bit short of "occupation" in my book. There has in fact been at least one technothriller based on the US military fighting its way out of Germany, based of course on the Anabasis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabasis_(Xenophon) Xenophon and 10,000 Greeks fighting their way out of the Persian Empire).
A great success for US board of tourism?
/j
Right there you start going astray, a lot of them are doing logistics of one type or another, including our largest overseas military hospital, the top level hospital for serious GWoT theater injuries.
More directly, it would all depend on why they were there.
The U.S. attacking Germany is even more paranoid than chem-trail mind control agents, I'm just throwing that in to go along with the hypothetical.
That would depend on whether they were there with U.S. government permission, wouldn't it?
It is not like we are in Germany to sack the villages and take slaves, or dictate policy
http://askakorean.blogspot.com/2012/12/quick-thought-about-p...
Yes, the US are in fact occupying South Korea, and South Korea does not like it.
"The London and Paris Conferences were two related conferences in London and Paris in September–October 1954, that decided about full sovereignty of West Germany, ending of its occupation, and its admittance to NATO."
The Anabasis has inspired more than a few: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabasis_(Xenophon)#Cultural_in..., and if you're read it the words "the sea, the sea!" never fail to inspire.
Everytime they leave somewhere it's usually a source of great concern and not at all something to celebrate.
- Bavaria in fear for five US bases
http://www.merkur-online.de/aktuelles/politik/bayern-bangt-f...
- Effects for Bamberg: withdrawal of US troops brings about employment worries
http://www.radio-plassenburg.de/default.aspx?ID=7054&showNew...
(18,000 employees and a giant market in the surrounding areas are affected at the biggest US base in Grafenwöhr - after all, 15,000 family members of the troops live in the communities around the base.)
- Mannheim expects loss of 6 million Euro after pull-out of troops
http://www.t-online.de/regionales/id_42073640/mannheim-rechn...
No, in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter at all, the wider German economy would not be affected, not to any kind of noticeable degree, but for the local community it would be devastating. Akin to the bankruptcy of some huge employer.
My parents are living a few dozen kilometers from one of the bases (so actually pretty far away, all things considered) that has actually been growing (as others were closed down more and more was moved there and centralized). It’s in the middle of nowhere, there is nothing else there.
My dad, a civil engineer, planned and executed quite a few infrastructure projects for the base. The base is also notoriously short on living space, so people working there have been spreading all over the region, renting apartments and houses. Heck, new houses have been built not half a kilometer from my parents’ home to house people from the base. (My parents own several houses and very nearly rented them or apartments in them to Americans several times. For some reason or other it always didn’t work out in the end but the demand is very obvious.)
This tiny version of suburbia was also recently built (by a German company) to provide more living space (cost: €200m).
Shopping and going to restaurants is also huge. No, those people in the base do not want to stay there all the time. They will go to the next bigger city or two and buy and eat stuff there. Or get drunk in some club. Frequently. More and more city marketing in the region is specifically targeting Americans.
Where my parents live the impact of this base closing down would already be negligible. We probably know one or two people who would lose their job because of it or would make noticeably less money – but the close you get the more devastating the impact would be.
Those most directly affected by the base – those who see it every day – are the least likely to want to close it, mostly for economic reasons.
As far as public opinion goes, this is a complete non-issue, and I strongly suspect that if public opinion turned so far as to make it an issue, the US would withdraw their troops before entering into a war with a powerful western nation that would almost inevitably turn into another world war. This is really not what I'd call an occupation.
Besides, germany wouldn't really have a chance. The few nuclear rockets we control would probably not be ready in time. The USA could just bomb germany down, like it was planned in case of a war with the UDSSR.
Nobody said anything about motive because there is no realistic motive. These 'assumptions' you're seeing are wholly in your own head.
There is, however, real deterrence, and it's interesting to explore its shape.
..."The Hague Invasion Act,[3][4] since such freeing of US citizens by force might only be possible through an invasion of The Hague, Netherlands, the seat of several international criminal courts and the seat of the Dutch government."
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pro...
e.g. The UK had plans involving "shooting guards at American nuclear weapon stores in England if they proved uncooperative"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/in-the-eve...
M.A.D. still exists by the way. It's still why all major nations are at peace and why the EU gave so much flak to the US a few years ago when Bush wanted to install a nuclear shield. He later had to back down or serious stuff would've happened. (afaik)
Also, according to wikipedia, Europe has 150 to 240 nuclear warheads. Plenty enough to destroy all US major cities.
But... but... what about childish power fantasies and world conquest?
In all seriousness though, the EU does not currently extend to defense; it is currently only a political and economic union. France and Germany have proposed extending the EU to include common defense, but as of today it had not yet been ratified by either the European Council or the member states. See, e.g., the Treaty of Lisbon. (Note that the Treaty of Lisbon technically removes the unanimity requirement in place of a "double majority" threshold (meaning >55% of vote from >65% of countries) beginning in 2014.)
Fun factoid: France lets Switzerland use part of its territory to defend Geneva. And also let it fly its plane over FR territory because CH is so small that it's not practical for pilots training.
The US military has a policy of being forward deployed around the globe, so it negotiates agreements with may countries around the world to station troops in strategic locations.
The military bases are there as a result of legal agreements and treaties, not because they would forcibly resist any attempts to expel them, and there is no sentiment in the US whatsoever to change that policy and begin fighting to establish bases in friendly countries.
For a parallel, look to Uzbekistan where the US operated an airbase after 9/11. In 2005, there was a massacre by Uzbek government forces, and the US said there ought to be an international investigation. Uzbekistan replied by rescinding the agreement for use of the airbase, and the US left. No shots were fired.
Technically that doesn’t matter at all because all through the cold war West-German and US interests were very tightly aligned (and when interests diverged a bit the US did give West-Germany enough freedom, though they hardly ever diverged much).
I mean, West-Berlin was most certainly occupied until 1990. It’s just that that was an occupation hardly anyone had a problem with.
The US still has some of its largest overseas bases in Germany; see http://militarybases.com/overseas/germany/
The Japanese could certainly ask us to leave, and we would. But they don't, because except for a vocal minority they do want us there.
And Afghanistan is a war zone. I wouldn't consider that anything but an occupation. Which, I might add, they brought on themselves, so I don't have much sympathy.
Nonsense. That's as clear a case of self defense as you're going to find.
Interestingly, though, Germany never signed a peace treaty with the US. It only signed a "cease-fire" with the US to end the war. :)
(I just googled it and I see it's deactivated on april 1st 2013 actually)
[NB This is not because I have anything against the USA, just that I've got rather bored over the years with Russia/China being the enemy of choice for authors].
It's not exactly occupation anymore. Plus the US brought in the big money through the Marshall plan, starting a big economic boom. Even nowadays companies can get cheap loans from KfW bank that is essentially Marshall plan money.
I live and grew up near on of the military bases. If I would not have met some people stationed there and had the chance to visit them I would only have known there is a big area which is well guarded.
There is and was no incident I am aware of involving someone from the US military which could have put them in a bad light.
Even people I know, who are strictly against military forces and war, do not really care.
From my point of view, and I think I am not alone with this one, it is pretty simple. They live there, do their jobs, do not cause trouble and provide jobs. Without considering taxes and other things it is like a branch of an American company.
Everything you do, buy, places you visit, people you socialize, your interests, opinions, everything you say, etc. is under surveillance. Funny how East Germans would risk their lives just to escape their Stasi-controlled world.
American surveillance (literally: compulsive checking) goes definitely to far if
it interferes that much with the privacy of internet users. Something like this is
unthinkable here. I thought we had overcome this era with the downfall of the DDR.
I agree that the story is overblown, although the concern about the whole thing in Germany and all of Europe is obviously very real and hopefully will turn into a greater concern over what our own governments are doing. I hope a lot of conservatives are caught finger pointing in the next few days, if nothing else just to see them squirm when they're supposed to wave through the next set of laws curtailing internet freedom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasiland
as an account of various people who lived under the Stasi. Also, The File:
http://www.amazon.com/The-File-A-Personal-History/dp/0679777...
The (again, factual) story of someone uncovering their own file and researching its history.
To anyone considering watching this, if not for the history, watch it for the movie's sake. You will not be disappointed at all.
Definitely worth watching!
[1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Leben_der_Anderen#Deutsche_...
the inaccurate/ridiculous part is that he couldn't do what he did because every one of them had another agent(s) on them precisely to prevent such occurences. they spied on and controlled each other just like they did on citizens. other than that - great movie, and depiction of the strong influence such agencies had on personal lives (to make someone or destroy someone) is accurate.
you can also check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_%282012_film%29 with a bit similar theme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lives_of_Others#Reception
Slavoj Žižek, reviewing the film for In These Times, criticized the film's perceived softpedaling of the oppressiveness of the German Democratic Republic, as well as structure of the playwright's character, which he thought was not very likely under a hard communist regime.[23] Anna Funder, the author of the book Stasiland, in a review for The Guardian called The Lives of Others a "superb film" despite not being true to reality. She claims that it was not possible for a Stasi operative to have hidden information from superiors because Stasi employees themselves were watched and almost always operated in teams
Okay, it's not Merkel herself who said that. But she sits still while people do, right?
I remember seeing some random youtube video of Merkel giving a speech during an election campaign, talking (nay, bragging) about video surveillance of inner cities (something she basically gives the CDU credit for, which "fought" for that), saying roughly: "some people say that's only useful to catch parking violations, but if you don't deal with parking violations, you don't have to be surprised if it gets worse."
To have Merkel be indignated on my behalf is a DISGUSTING idea. She's opportunistic and spineless, she stands for exactly nothing (other than "Security and Prosperity" of course; just like Kohl she wouldn't recognize what makes life great for decent people even after she squashed it). She, Obama, and all the other people who had their chances, in some cases decades of them, should consider just kindly shutting the fuck up, and sticking to their own, hopefully doomed, bandwagons.
Back then there was no need to preselect his audience. Tens of thousands just came to celebrate him. It will be interesting to see how he is greeted by the German public this time. In Berlin. At the Branderburger Tor. Will he talk about freedom?
Not doing anything against the abduction of Kurznatz by the CIA. "Opposing" the Iraq war, but allow the US air fields to operate. It goes on and on and on. This is just a little rethorics. See also: Isle "facebook" Eigner.
Meanwhile, the same conservative party added biometric photos and fingerprints to official documents (mandantory on some, optional on others); happily sends over flight and banking data to the US (they were in favor of the SWIFT agreement); established their own flavor of communication data ("metadata") retention policies ignoring both arguments and protects; collect traffic data "for street charge purposes only"; now want to use both for tracking down increasingly minor offenses (despite originally arguing that this wouldn't ever happen, and opponents to those laws are paranoid when assuming so much).
So yes, it's great that they oppose PRISM (if only to keep the topic in the media). But it's probably just out of jealousy because their own implementation is so much weaker.
Unlike the Nazis, who were homegrown, the DDR was a locally administered occupation government backed by a foreign power. It was terrified of its own people and it collapsed the moment the threat of Red Army tanks rolling down the streets quit being credible.
The story is one of those unrealistic "protagonist acts against all odds and succeeds" that make up a good movie, but the backdrop (Stasi's - sometimes not very - subtle omnipresence and the fear this evokes in society) is painfully realistic.
To be honest I am not sure if any of these governments is trust worthy in this regard.
It's not like your entirely blameless here either Germany, your banks made the questionable decision to lend money to those lazy bums so they could buy back German goods.