5 ms·

>that didn't just go out and kill a couple dozen million people in an attempt to conquer the world. Every country that has been a world power is pretty much gu

>that didn't just go out and kill a couple dozen million people in an attempt to conquer the world. Every country that has been a world power is pretty much guilty of this. Why aren't we picking on the English for the old empire or the thousands of wars and skirmishes on the continent between these powers? Or on the crusades? Picking on Germany is stupid and more Yanis Varoufakis-like hysterics. His over-the-top rhetoric and calling his own lenders "terrorists" is what's wrong with the world, not what's right. Apparently, Greeks are willing to say or do anything except actually collect taxes and cut public spending. Thus far, Greece has been on the receiving end of historically generous loans.

jrcii 11y ago
The Crusades were hardly an attempt to "conquer the world". For the most part it was an attempt to counter already occurring aggressive, violent Islamic expansion.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mikeash 11y ago
It's nothing to do with "picking on" Germany. Merely pointing out that immediately after they went out and did this, and destroyed their own country in the process, they got really favorable terms to rebuild. And now they're insisting on harsher terms for others. Why did Germany deserve better terms after their adventures? Or if it's not a matter of deserving them but just a purely pragmatic question of those terms being useful to avoid a future catastrophe, why doesn't that pragmatism apply here?
- lmm 11y ago
  > Why did Germany deserve better terms after their adventures? Or if it's not a matter of deserving them but just a purely pragmatic question of those terms being useful to avoid a future catastrophe, why doesn't that pragmatism apply here? It was even more "pragmatic" than that; it wasn't about preventing German civilians from starving or anything so humanitarian, it was the US wanting to stop the spread of communism. There's no similar "threat" in Greece today. Maybe if IS starts getting recruits near Greece the calculus will change.
  - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
    I respectfully disagree. 50% of the impetus to "save Greece" has a lot to do with not letting Greece fall into Putin's sphere of influence and potentially losing a strategic NATO ally. Tsipras has visited the Russian embassy many times and has flown to Moscow a couple times as well. These weren't social calls and the agenda was kept secret for a reason. Greeks admire Marxism and the old USSR and probably wouldn't mind moving into a Russian sphere of influence, either, especially if Russian taxpayers foot the bill for their unaffordable social programs. EU negotiators are dealing with a lot more than just pensions and lack of tax collection here. They're dealing with a potential Russian base, missiles, AA, subs, warships, etc permanently on their border and aimed at their capitals and civillian centers. The Ukrainians are a good example of what happens when the Russian military is your neighbor. Allowing Russia to trivially attack their borders and put up a Mediterranean blockade is unacceptable to the EU/NATO, but Tsipras is probably crazy enough to make this happen unless he gets the terms he demands. That said, the firing of Yanis Varoufakis probably means Tsipras is serious about cutting down the stupid Greek extremism that has made these talks impossible and probably wants to stay in the EU/Eurozone/NATO and will play ball on some level. I guess we will see.
    - elorant 11y ago
      Exiting the Eurozone, which is what Grexit is all about, doesn’t mean we’ll exit the European Union too. We have no reason to do this and no one in Europe has ever made a hint about it. And then even that wouldn’t be enough for Russians to get a base here. We’d also have to exit the NATO alliance which we’ll never do because it ensures that Turkey can’t attack us since they’re a member too. And on top of that we’d also have to ask US to leave the naval base they have in Crete. All in all, we’d have to alienate pretty much everyone in the western world to allow Russians to get a foothold here. And besides, what’s the point? We don’t trust Putin and he certainly doesn’t have the money to bail us out.
- ucaetano 11y ago
  It wasn't immediately. In the years after the war, Germany was pillaged of any industrial infrastructure, Germans were put into slave labor to "compensate damages", population was mostly left to starve.
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    > Germans were put into slave labor to "compensate damages" Can you supply some documentation for this claim?
    - ucaetano 11y ago
      After the war, instead of being repatriated , millions of German POWs were put into forced labor by the former Allies. Some were kept by the soviets until the mid and late 50's. Millions are still officially listed as missing, mostly sent to slave labor camps in Siberia. http://www.stern.de/politik/geschichte/kriegsgefangene-viele-kamen-nicht-zurueck-3548272.html http://www.stern.de/politik/geschichte/kriegsgefangene-viele... Also, civilian Germans in the territories occupied after the war were also put to forced work. There's plenty of data on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_labor_of_Germans_after_World_War_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_labor_of_Germans_after_... Also, international humanitarian aid to Germany was initially forbidden. There were mass rapes (some estimates put victims at 2 million German woman) and massive famine (people going through winters with 1000-1500 calories per day). The general idea after WW2 was to completely obliterate Germany, so it would never rise again. The change in mindset only came when Western countries realized that a strong Germany was the only effective defense agains Soviet expansion. In the meantime, Greeks are worried that their fat retirement funds and unemployment insurance will be cut...
      - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
        >Western countries realized that a strong Germany was the only effective defense agains Soviet expansion. This makes no sense. The atrocities you list were almost all done by the Soviets, yet you somehow blame the West? The West invested into West Germany from the beginning (Im not arguing this, it takes time to ramp up rebuilding and yes there was a real lag period of post-war crazyiness, fatigue, and lack of money. We had our own dead to bury and our own economies to fix up first) and tried to build Berlin as a model Western city. Yeah, the Soviets did fuck all, but the western side was a totally different story. Also, there's nothing wrong with forcing soldiers to rebuild what they broke. Oh you guys thought you could drop bombs and mortars endlessly and just go back home? This story should be a message to the young people clamoring for war today. If you lose, its not all hugs and sunshine. Its years of back-breaking work to undo the damage you have done.
- Xylakant 11y ago
  There's a whole geostrategic reasoning behind that. It was the start of the cold war, germany was supposed to be the buffer zone against the russian tank armada. In the region where I come from, all bridges have dedicated manholes to plant charges to bring them down, something my classmates still trained in the army. The mountains are riddled with nuke bunkers that had nuclear weapons aimed at German territory. French nukes had a maximum range that would have them smack down right in German territory. Having a struggling economy situated right at the iron curtain would have been a problem. Making enemies of the german population would have created issues. There's other reasons a second debt relief for Greece is a hard sell. They basically asking for new funding of about 50 Bil EUR while at the same time asking for a haircut. They're also asking for funding from economies that are much worse of and went through similarly bad recessions[1]. So at the moment the general stance (not only in germany) is quid pro quo - do your reforms and we'll fund you. Then there's the argument that extending the payment deadlines is actually a debt relief in all but using the word. The debt gets devalued at the inflation rate. [1] Edit: obviously I'm not talking about germany here, but the east european members of the EU.
  - Amezarak 11y ago
    > So at the moment the general stance (not only in germany) is quid pro quo - do your reforms and we'll fund you. Which is insanity that will never work. You will just end up in an endless cycle of the Grecian economy worsening, the Grecian debt rising, and more pleas for debt relief, as has already been happening. > They're also asking for funding from economies that are much worse of and went through similarly bad recessions[1]. These same destructive austerity policies have destroyed most economies in Europe. Look at the number of European economies that have not even reached their pre-2008 GDP due to these policies. Many are only beginning to recover now as austerity tapers off. In several the debt actually worsened because of falling GDP and rising unemployment. Austerity policies have achieved nothing except for needlessly higher taxes, the rollback of parts of the welfare system at the expense of prolonged recessions and minimal (or no) debt reduction or debt increase. And yet, people think more austerity is the solution for Greece? How can this be? How many times do troika GDP estimates have to be radically and totally wrong before people realize austerity is only destructive?
yk 11y ago
Two things, first we do not 'pick on Germany.' We acknowledge that Germany had the most murderous government in all of history. And no, Britain did never set a explicit policy of extermination and it did not construct factories of death. [1] And second, Greece was not only on the receiving end of loans, but also on the receiving end of a completely boneheaded 'rescue' policy. [1] Yeah, these are technical terms. See Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands, 2010 for definitions.

jrcii 11y ago

The Crusades were hardly an attempt to "conquer the world". For the most part it was an attempt to counter already occurring aggressive, violent Islamic expansion.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

mikeash 11y ago

It's nothing to do with "picking on" Germany. Merely pointing out that immediately after they went out and did this, and destroyed their own country in the process, they got really favorable terms to rebuild. And now they're insisting on harsher terms for others. Why did Germany deserve better terms after their adventures? Or if it's not a matter of deserving them but just a purely pragmatic question of those terms being useful to avoid a future catastrophe, why doesn't that pragmatism apply here?

lmm 11y ago
> Why did Germany deserve better terms after their adventures? Or if it's not a matter of deserving them but just a purely pragmatic question of those terms being useful to avoid a future catastrophe, why doesn't that pragmatism apply here? It was even more "pragmatic" than that; it wasn't about preventing German civilians from starving or anything so humanitarian, it was the US wanting to stop the spread of communism. There's no similar "threat" in Greece today. Maybe if IS starts getting recruits near Greece the calculus will change.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  I respectfully disagree. 50% of the impetus to "save Greece" has a lot to do with not letting Greece fall into Putin's sphere of influence and potentially losing a strategic NATO ally. Tsipras has visited the Russian embassy many times and has flown to Moscow a couple times as well. These weren't social calls and the agenda was kept secret for a reason. Greeks admire Marxism and the old USSR and probably wouldn't mind moving into a Russian sphere of influence, either, especially if Russian taxpayers foot the bill for their unaffordable social programs. EU negotiators are dealing with a lot more than just pensions and lack of tax collection here. They're dealing with a potential Russian base, missiles, AA, subs, warships, etc permanently on their border and aimed at their capitals and civillian centers. The Ukrainians are a good example of what happens when the Russian military is your neighbor. Allowing Russia to trivially attack their borders and put up a Mediterranean blockade is unacceptable to the EU/NATO, but Tsipras is probably crazy enough to make this happen unless he gets the terms he demands. That said, the firing of Yanis Varoufakis probably means Tsipras is serious about cutting down the stupid Greek extremism that has made these talks impossible and probably wants to stay in the EU/Eurozone/NATO and will play ball on some level. I guess we will see.
  - elorant 11y ago
    Exiting the Eurozone, which is what Grexit is all about, doesn’t mean we’ll exit the European Union too. We have no reason to do this and no one in Europe has ever made a hint about it. And then even that wouldn’t be enough for Russians to get a base here. We’d also have to exit the NATO alliance which we’ll never do because it ensures that Turkey can’t attack us since they’re a member too. And on top of that we’d also have to ask US to leave the naval base they have in Crete. All in all, we’d have to alienate pretty much everyone in the western world to allow Russians to get a foothold here. And besides, what’s the point? We don’t trust Putin and he certainly doesn’t have the money to bail us out.
ucaetano 11y ago
It wasn't immediately. In the years after the war, Germany was pillaged of any industrial infrastructure, Germans were put into slave labor to "compensate damages", population was mostly left to starve.
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  > Germans were put into slave labor to "compensate damages" Can you supply some documentation for this claim?
  - ucaetano 11y ago
    After the war, instead of being repatriated , millions of German POWs were put into forced labor by the former Allies. Some were kept by the soviets until the mid and late 50's. Millions are still officially listed as missing, mostly sent to slave labor camps in Siberia. http://www.stern.de/politik/geschichte/kriegsgefangene-viele-kamen-nicht-zurueck-3548272.html http://www.stern.de/politik/geschichte/kriegsgefangene-viele... Also, civilian Germans in the territories occupied after the war were also put to forced work. There's plenty of data on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_labor_of_Germans_after_World_War_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_labor_of_Germans_after_... Also, international humanitarian aid to Germany was initially forbidden. There were mass rapes (some estimates put victims at 2 million German woman) and massive famine (people going through winters with 1000-1500 calories per day). The general idea after WW2 was to completely obliterate Germany, so it would never rise again. The change in mindset only came when Western countries realized that a strong Germany was the only effective defense agains Soviet expansion. In the meantime, Greeks are worried that their fat retirement funds and unemployment insurance will be cut...
    - drzaiusapelord 11y ago
      >Western countries realized that a strong Germany was the only effective defense agains Soviet expansion. This makes no sense. The atrocities you list were almost all done by the Soviets, yet you somehow blame the West? The West invested into West Germany from the beginning (Im not arguing this, it takes time to ramp up rebuilding and yes there was a real lag period of post-war crazyiness, fatigue, and lack of money. We had our own dead to bury and our own economies to fix up first) and tried to build Berlin as a model Western city. Yeah, the Soviets did fuck all, but the western side was a totally different story. Also, there's nothing wrong with forcing soldiers to rebuild what they broke. Oh you guys thought you could drop bombs and mortars endlessly and just go back home? This story should be a message to the young people clamoring for war today. If you lose, its not all hugs and sunshine. Its years of back-breaking work to undo the damage you have done.
Xylakant 11y ago
There's a whole geostrategic reasoning behind that. It was the start of the cold war, germany was supposed to be the buffer zone against the russian tank armada. In the region where I come from, all bridges have dedicated manholes to plant charges to bring them down, something my classmates still trained in the army. The mountains are riddled with nuke bunkers that had nuclear weapons aimed at German territory. French nukes had a maximum range that would have them smack down right in German territory. Having a struggling economy situated right at the iron curtain would have been a problem. Making enemies of the german population would have created issues. There's other reasons a second debt relief for Greece is a hard sell. They basically asking for new funding of about 50 Bil EUR while at the same time asking for a haircut. They're also asking for funding from economies that are much worse of and went through similarly bad recessions[1]. So at the moment the general stance (not only in germany) is quid pro quo - do your reforms and we'll fund you. Then there's the argument that extending the payment deadlines is actually a debt relief in all but using the word. The debt gets devalued at the inflation rate. [1] Edit: obviously I'm not talking about germany here, but the east european members of the EU.
- Amezarak 11y ago
  > So at the moment the general stance (not only in germany) is quid pro quo - do your reforms and we'll fund you. Which is insanity that will never work. You will just end up in an endless cycle of the Grecian economy worsening, the Grecian debt rising, and more pleas for debt relief, as has already been happening. > They're also asking for funding from economies that are much worse of and went through similarly bad recessions[1]. These same destructive austerity policies have destroyed most economies in Europe. Look at the number of European economies that have not even reached their pre-2008 GDP due to these policies. Many are only beginning to recover now as austerity tapers off. In several the debt actually worsened because of falling GDP and rising unemployment. Austerity policies have achieved nothing except for needlessly higher taxes, the rollback of parts of the welfare system at the expense of prolonged recessions and minimal (or no) debt reduction or debt increase. And yet, people think more austerity is the solution for Greece? How can this be? How many times do troika GDP estimates have to be radically and totally wrong before people realize austerity is only destructive?

yk 11y ago

Two things, first we do not 'pick on Germany.' We acknowledge that Germany had the most murderous government in all of history. And no, Britain did never set a explicit policy of extermination and it did not construct factories of death. [1] And second, Greece was not only on the receiving end of loans, but also on the receiving end of a completely boneheaded 'rescue' policy. [1] Yeah, these are technical terms. See Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands, 2010 for definitions.