The US Government Is Now Pushing Germany To Use Its Military In Syria. This Is All Helping To Revive German Militarism

By Theodore Shoebat

The United States, through its sodomite Ambassador Richard Grenell,  is now pressuring Germany to deploy troops into Syria. As we read in a report from Spiegel Online:

Under pressure from the United States, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her defense minister have signaled an increased willingness to take military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in case of a chemical weapons attack. But their options are limited by domestic reality.

Richard Grenell is a man of many faces. The new American ambassador in Berlin mostly comes across as the imperious proconsul of a superpower, and sometimes as Donald Trump’s loyal mouthpiece, but rarely as a diplomat.

On Thursday morning, the American decided to take on a new role. At a breakfast hosted by the Middle East Peace Forum breakfast, he opted for the role of placating politician.

The group of lawmakers and political insiders met at a pricy Italian restaurant in Berlin and agreed to keep their discussion confidential. Grenell initially contented himself with discussing trade policy, capitalism, human rights and the common values that bind Germans and Americans together. Only later did he broach the subject with which he has dominated the headlines for the past three days: How will the West react if Syria’s dictator Bashar Assad once again crosses the red line and deploys chemical weapons in the upcoming attack on Idlib, the final rebel stronghold?

“Already there is a strong coalition,” said the American, “and it will be stronger than the last one.” In April, after the poison gas attack in the city of Douma, only the French and the British took part in Washington’s retaliatory strikes against Assad. This time, the U.S. hopes to include as many countries as possible. The Canadians have been approached as have several countries in the Middle East and a number of NATO member states in Europe. Germany is among them.

“We aren’t begging for other countries to take part,” said Grenell before making clear what exactly he wants from Berlin. Germany, he insisted, needs to signal to Assad with a “strong voice” that he cannot use poison gas. “Don’t do it,” he believes should be the message. A threat. It is the least the Americans can expect from their German allies.

Before last week, it seemed unthinkable that Germany might take part in a retaliatory strike against Assad, but now a discussion about a German deployment in the Middle East has flared up. And, as is always the case when a military mission is discussed, the debate has centered around Germany’s role in the world.

…

Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen was more forthright, saying that the global community “cannot acknowledge with a shrug” the use of chemical weapons. She also said that the global community wasn’t some sort of abstract entity and isn’t just made up of the Americans. “The global community is all of us, including us Germans.” Diplomacy, she said, is paramount: “but it also needs credible deterrence.”

This is quite a convenient scenario for the German militarist lobby; the United States is telling them to deploy troops into the Middle East, and for the lobby for war in Germany, there is no better condition than the most powerful country in the world telling you to get militarily involved. Whats also interesting is Richard Grenell. For one, he is a sodomite, which means he is of the party of death. Thus, it is of not surprise that he is pushing for Germany military activity while at the same time lobbying for the head of the nationalist Austrian People’s Party, Sebastian Kurz. As we read in a report from the Guardian:

Grenell has expressed his admiration for Austria’s young conservative chancellor Sebastian Kurz, describing him as “a real leader in Europe”, and cheered the appointment of the German health minister, Jens Spahn, the leading challenger to Merkel’s liberalising course within the ruling CDU party.

Here we have an American sodomite pushing for Germanic nationalism and militarism, and knowing that he is a lobbyist for such evils, this should be of no shock to us. The advancement for Sodom and the lobbying for Germanic nationalism and militarism, are all intertwined, and this is reminiscent to the SA of Adolf Hitler most of the members of which were homosexuals advancing Nazism.

And if one thinks that Nazism is simply history, the Austrian People’s Party was once led by Kurt Waldheim, a major SS Nazi officer who served the Third Reich, who led a successful presidential campaign in the 1980s, and who served as Secretary General of the United Nations from 1972 to 1982.

Eli M. Rosenbaum, the principal deputy director of the Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations, which prosecuted suspected Nazi war criminals, obtained documents that revealed the Nazi past of Waldheim. The documents showed that Waldheim served the “Prince Eugen” division of the Waffen-SS, “perhaps the most notorious of all of Hitler’s Waffen-SS units.” This same Waffen-SS had numerous Muslim divisions as well. 

In 1986, when Waldheim was running for president in Austria, John Tagliabue, a foreign correspondent for The New York Times, wrote an article exposing the Nazi activities of Waldheim. The story made it on the front page and was distributed all over the Austrian press. But, the Austrians did not care, and even voted Waldheim into office. If Austrians then were willing to vote in a leader of the SS, then today is no different, and still they are willing to vote in politicians whose parties are rooted in Nazi ideology. Many Austrians even got upset with the World Jewish Congress, an organization that led the investigation on Waldheim, even condemning the group and accusing them of an international conspiracy against their president.

For example, when it came out that Waldheim served as an SS officer in Croatia, the Austrian newspaper, Wochenpresse, played the fact down by saying that his medals were not that significant and that he was merely given a position in an intelligence branch. Rosenbaum responded by writing:

“Waldheim was not merely ‘assigned’ to the Intelligence/Counterintelligence Branch; one could properly infer that he was the primary aide to the chief of intelligence for all of Army Group E, a force of more than 400,000 troops having dominion over nearly the entire Balkans.”

Waldheim sentenced entire villages to destruction. In Christian Orthodox Crete he chose two villages, Iraklion and Karpenission, as worthy of destruction. Waldheim was also behind the mass deportation of thousands of Greek Jews to Auschwitz, where most were exterminated. Waldheim himself ordered a group of British commandos to be executed. 

That Austrians are voting for a party a past leader of whom was a Nazi mass murderer, should tell us that the beast of Nazism never died, but it only masqueraded itself under the guise of modern politics, and its rising back up.

Pope Pius XII, in 1943, predicted that after World War Two there would be talk of peace in a new world order, but that such would not last, and what took place in the Second World War would happen again:

“But perhaps it is time to turn our eyes to the future, instead of the past; what lies before us? Those who hold the fate of kingdoms in their hands assure us that, once the bloodthirsty discords of the present moment have been laid aside, they will introduce a new order of things, based on a foundation of justice and economic settlement. But is it really to be different, is it really to be (what is more important) a better and happier age? At the end of this war there will be fresh pacts, fresh arrangement of international relations. They will be conceived in a spirit of justice and fairness all round, in a spirit of reconstruction and peace, or will they disastrously repeat our old and our recent failures? Experience shews it is but an empty dream to expect a real settlement to emerge at the moment when the conflagration of war has died down.” (Pope Pius XII, Darkness over the Earth, ch. v)

The Norwegian general Jens Stoltenberg, agreed with Trump that Germany must increase its military spending, and said that European countries are already boosting their defense spending thanks to his exhortations:

“SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG:  First of all, it’s great to see you again, Mr. President.  And good to have you here for a summit.  And we are going to discuss many important issues at the summit.  Among them is defense spending. And we all agree that we have to do more.  I agree with you that we have to do make sure that our allies are investing more. The good news is that allies have started to invest more in defense.

After years of cutting defense budgets, they have started to add billions to their defense budgets.  And last year was the biggest increase in defense spending across Europe and Canada in that generation.

PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Why was that last year?

SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG:  It’s also because of your leadership, because of your carried message.  And —

PRESIDENT TRUMP:  They won’t write that, but that’s okay.”

So, there are Europeans who are happy about Trump pushing Germany to spend more on its military, including the Germans themselves. In fact, just recently Germany’s Defence State Secretary Peter Tauber said that Germany’s current defense spending plan is not enough, stating: “Further increases in defense spending should follow in the next years … to meet the Bundeswehr’s (military’s) needs”. Trump encourages this further when he said in Brussels that NATO countries need to increase their spending by 4% of their GDP.

Imagine Germany spending 4% of their GDP on its military; what a difference this would be from what they are spending now. But this is exactly what the Germans want, because they want to bring back their reich. Last year, the German politician, Andreas Nick of the Christian Democrats said that he wanted to increase defense spending to 3% of German GDP. But Trump is giving the Germans more than this, saying that they should spend 4%. Germany is in glee knowing that the Americans are pushing them towards military independence. Turkey and Germany are both receiving the green light to make their plowshares into swords.

But we cannot discuss what has been taking place in the Middle East and Europe without talking about America’s foreign policy. The toppling of Saddam in Iraq led to a power vacuum that sucked in the horrifically violent instability that the world witnessed under both the Bush and Obama administrations, with jihadist groups unleashing a reign of terror on the populace. Apologists for the war would argue that the United States invaded Iraq to bring democracy and defeat terrorism. But there is no democracy in Iraq, and terrorism still has a very strong presence. They said that they wanted to remove Saddam because he had some connection to the 9/11 attacks. But many of the voices lobbying for the invasion of Iraq did not even care if this allegation was true or false. This was made evident in a letter made by the Project of the New American Century (PNAC), addressed to president Bush, which declared that “even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.”

So it didn’t matter to the lobbyist for war if Saddam was or was not involved in the 9/11 attacks. They just wanted him removed. Removed, for what? For 9/11? That didn’t matter, because they wanted him removed regardless. They said it was about WMDs. But shortly after the invasion of Iraq, and after it was revealed that there were no WMDs, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Israeli Knesset released several reports showing that the intelligence Israel gave to the Bush administration was false. 

So going beyond the justifications of “democracy” and the “war on terror,” the reasoning behind the war in its totality is not fully comprehended. As journalist George Packer writes: “it still isn’t possible to be sure, and this remains the most remarkable thing about the Iraq war.” Richard Hass, the director of policy planning in the State Department under Bush Jr., said that he would “go to his grave not knowing the answer.” At least for now, in our time, the true reasons for entering Iraq have not been completely revealed. But maybe, in the chaos of it all, we find the answer that we seek. Perhaps the reason for invading Iraq was chaos, chaos to help the most powerful of countries bring more chaos in the name of order. The Iraq War left the power vacuum that Turkey is now filling.

Why is Turkey invading Syria and Iraq? Why is Germany working to becoming a powerful military force again? The answer may lie in the conclusion the historian David Fromkin gave to the question of why Germany invaded her neighbors and ignited World War One:

The decision for war in 1914 was purposeful; and the war itself was not, as generation of historians have taught, meaningless. On the contrary, it was fought to decide the essential questions in international politics: who would achieve mastery in Europe, and therefore in the world, and under the banners of what faith.” (Fromkin, Europe’s Last Summer, ch. 51, p. 296)

They will bring up ‘terrorism,’ but at the end of the day, its all about supremacy.