Angela Merkel - Leader of the free world

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Albion

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
mindlight said:
No The Eastern empire was the rich bit. The rumours of Romes fall were premature. It was a consolidation.
Click to expand...
No no no. It was essentially a different empire.

It was glorious in its way, and it was long lived. Amazingly so. But it still was not the empire that the barbarian Germans and Huns brought down except in a technical sense. And I also acknowledge that Rome had been undermined from within. Still, the point made in the previous post is on target. :)
 
Upvote 0
Paradoxum

Paradoxum

Liberty, Equality, Solidarity!
Sep 16, 2011
10,712
654
✟28,188.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Post Tenebras Lux said:
What? I'm British and everyone I know has a tremendous amount of respect for Germany and Merkel.
Click to expand...

Sure, but we'd rather think or the US or ourselves as the leaders, if we could. And we tend to see Germany in the light of WW2 to some extent.
 
Upvote 0
S

SoldierOfTheKing

Christian Spenglerian
Jan 6, 2006
9,230
3,041
Kenmore, WA
✟278,566.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
TheNorwegian

TheNorwegian

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2015
595
523
Norway
✟89,276.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
mindlight said:
I said willingness and ability. Germany is in no position to lecture America when the hollow structures of its military render it so dependent on American protection. If a leader cannot even protect their own peoples freedoms how can they speak for the whole free world!
Click to expand...

I think there are historical reasons for why Germany has not built up their military in the last decades. However, if NATO is dismantled, I am convinced the Germans will start to build up their military. Not sure why the rest of the world would want that. But with the financial strength and technological expertise in Germany, they would be able to do so without a doubt. In the short term Germany would probably join the strength with other European nations. Together with France they would be strong, even if the UK and Canada did not join a new alliance. A new "NATO" without the US would be able to withstand any other military force, except the US. A conflict with Russia would be nasty, but not obvious that the Russians would win. So, realistically the only military force that is a real threat to Germany is ... the US.
 
Upvote 0
mindlight

mindlight

See in the dark
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
13,624
2,675
London, UK
✟823,617.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
TheNorwegian said:
I think there are historical reasons for why Germany has not built up their military in the last decades. However, if NATO is dismantled, I am convinced the Germans will start to build up their military. Not sure why the rest of the world would want that. But with the financial strength and technological expertise in Germany, they would be able to do so without a doubt. In the short term Germany would probably join the strength with other European nations. Together with France they would be strong, even if the UK and Canada did not join a new alliance. A new "NATO" without the US would be able to withstand any other military force, except the US. A conflict with Russia would be nasty, but not obvious that the Russians would win. So, realistically the only military force that is a real threat to Germany is ... the US.
Click to expand...

In essence what you said is that Germanys not worried cause it reckons its friends will do all the fighting so it does not have to bother. Is that the attitude that one would expect from the defender of the free world!!

The German military is in a very poor state. Basic equipment e.g night goggles is loaned from one unit to another so that fully equipped units canbe deployed for NATO requirements. But worse than that is the handicaps imposed on soldiers by politicians. In essence they deploy soldiers to dangerous places like Afghanistan and then confine them to base for fear that they may actually do their jobs and shoot bad guys. So the soldiers have little real experience, their equipment is missing or second rate and since the abolition of conscription they often do not have the manpower. How can such soldiers fight against a determined and uptodate opponent like Russia for example?! If Germany is dependent on its friends for its own defence then it is not a leader- period - however capable Merkel may be.
 
Upvote 0
ViaCrucis

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,458
26,890
Pacific Northwest
✟732,195.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
timewerx said:
It's about maintaining good relations with the Muslims as many rich Muslim nations are major trading partners.
Click to expand...

Oh, is that why nations are taking in Syrian refugees, to keep good relations with evil dictators like Assad who is murdering them.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0
timewerx

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,274
5,903
✟299,820.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
ViaCrucis said:
Oh, is that why nations are taking in Syrian refugees, to keep good relations with evil dictators like Assad who is murdering them.

-CryptoLutheran
Click to expand...

Did you carefully read that one liner you quoted?

When I said "many rich Muslim nations are major trading partners" do you actually think I meant Assad??:swoon::swoon:
 
Upvote 0
TheNorwegian

TheNorwegian

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2015
595
523
Norway
✟89,276.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
mindlight said:
In essence what you said is that Germanys not worried cause it reckons its friends will do all the fighting so it does not have to bother. Is that the attitude that one would expect from the defender of the free world!!.
Click to expand...

No, I said nothing of that sort. Where do you get that from!? You seem very obsessed by military and fighting

I said Germany will work together with allies - whether the US wants to continue being an ally or not. Germany alone is not as weak as some want to portray it as, and together with the French and others they are strong. A very important part of being a good leader is the ability to work together with others. If you 'only' have the capacity to kill the others because you have more weapons then them you may be powerful, but you are not a leader
 
  • Like
Reactions: LionL
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
mindlight

mindlight

See in the dark
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
13,624
2,675
London, UK
✟823,617.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
TheNorwegian said:
No, I said nothing of that sort. Where do you get that from!? You seem very obsessed by military and fighting

I said Germany will work together with allies - whether the US wants to continue being an ally or not. Germany alone is not as weak as some want to portray it as, and together with the French and others they are strong. A very important part of being a good leader is the ability to work together with others. If you 'only' have the capacity to kill the others because you have more weapons then them you may be powerful, but you are not a leader
Click to expand...

No you are not getting this so I will rephrase.

First 3 things we can agree on:

1) it is better to be alive than dead
2) it is better to be free than oppressed
3) it is better to be rich than poor

But since 2) and 3) are not possible without 1) Security trumps economics and democracy.

In other words the first responsibility of government is to defend its citizens. Their freedoms and prosperity are not possible without that.

Since the German army could not defend Germany by itself against for example Russia. It is dependent on its friends ( with or without the USA for that defence ).

Therefore the Chancellor of Germany is not even an effective leader of her own country protecting her citizens.

Therefore she cannot be considered the leader of the free world.
 
Upvote 0
TheNorwegian

TheNorwegian

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2015
595
523
Norway
✟89,276.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
mindlight said:
No you are not getting this so I will rephrase.

First 3 things we can agree on:

1) it is better to be alive than dead
2) it is better to be free than oppressed
3) it is better to be rich than poor

But since 2) and 3) are not possible without 1) Security trumps economics and democracy.

In other words the first responsibility of government is to defend its citizens. Their freedoms and prosperity are not possible without that.

Since the German army could not defend Germany by itself against for example Russia. It is dependent on its friends ( with or without the USA for that defence ).

Therefore the Chancellor of Germany is not even an effective leader of her own country protecting her citizens.

Therefore she cannot be considered the leader of the free world.
Click to expand...

I do get what you are saying, I just think you are wrong. You apparently have no idea of what leadership is. I will not waste more time on somebody who is obsessed with warfare
 
  • Like
Reactions: LionL
Upvote 0
mindlight

mindlight

See in the dark
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
13,624
2,675
London, UK
✟823,617.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
TheNorwegian said:
I do get what you are saying, I just think you are wrong. You apparently have no idea of what leadership is. I will not waste more time on somebody who is obsessed with warfare
Click to expand...


Si vis pacem para bellum
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
ananda

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟186,371.00
Marital Status
Private
TheNorwegian said:
The UK based newspaper The Independent recently had an article saying that Angela Merkel is now "The leader of the free world". You know it is serious when the British say something like that about a German leader. I do think it is a fair reflection on how people outside the US sees this, though. For decades POTUS has been called "the leader of the free world". How bad/good is it for the US that this perspective has changed throughout the world?

Angela Merkel is now the leader of the free world, not Donald Trump
Click to expand...
I think they meant that she was the "leader of the free stuff world" ... free stuff for enemy invaders.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mindlight
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Similar threads

essentialsaltes
Richard Grenell is Trump's globe-trotting shadow secretary of state, meeting far-right leaders and undermining the Biden Administration
Replies
5
Views
434
American Politics
essentialsaltes
essentialsaltes
Christsfreeservant
The Free Gift of Grace
Replies
3
Views
181
Daily Devotionals
AlexB23
AlexB23
NxNW
The Church of Trump
Replies
36
Views
915
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
SarahsKnight
SarahsKnight
essentialsaltes
Trump says Jewish Democrats ‘hate’ their religion and Israel
Replies
14
Views
487
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
JustOneWay
J
orbiter
When we were children, were in bondage under the "elements" of the world ("Egypt")...
Replies
0
Views
94
Exposition & Bible Study
orbiter
orbiter
Top Bottom
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply