German Opinion (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L23109558.htm)

BERLIN, July 23 (Reuters) - Almost one in three Germans below the age of 30 believes the U.S. government may have sponsored the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington, according to a poll published on Wednesday.

And about 20 percent of Germans in all age groups hold this view, a survey of 1,000 people conducted for the weekly Die Zeit said.

It also said 68 percent of all Germans felt the media had not reported the full truth behind the attacks, in which some 3,000 people were killed when hijacked planes were crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

After the September 11 attacks, there was an outpouring of sympathy from Germans for the United States. Despite misgivings, Germany joined a military campaign against the al Qaeda network that Washington blamed for the attacks.

But as the United States geared up for war against Iraq, relations soured bady as Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder expressed vocal opposition to the plans.

Although the United States took strong offence at Berlin's attitude, Schroeder's anti-war stance was popular in Germany and helped him to snatch victory in last September's elections.

Asked whether they believed that the U.S. government could have ordered the September 11 attacks itself, 31 percent of those surveyed under the age of 30 in the poll answered "yes", while 19 percent overall gave the same answer.

Die Zeit said widespread disbelief about the reasons given by the United States for going to war in Iraq and suspicion about media coverage of the conflict had fostered a climate in which conspiracy theories flourished.

"The news is controlled," 17-year old Kenny Donaubaur was quoted as saying. "You could see that in the Iraq war. It doesn't seem to me thet you get the full truth."

Wow. That's pretty wacky.

Asked whether they believed that the U.S. government could have ordered the September 11 attacks itself...

Well hell, Belgium could have ordered the attacks, but they probably didn't. The wording on that (assuming the article mimics the poll) is questionable at best. A 20 year old in Germany knows what news access we have over here? And US kids are considered under-educated...

That's the thing with europeans.

We automatically assume we know everything about america because we're bombarded by it's media and culture.


//Kiv

BELGIUM!!! DAMMIT why didn't I think of them before!

The heading of this post:
1/3 of German youth think US sponsored 9/11...

Then the actual "news"
Almost one in three Germans below the age of 30 believes the U.S. government may have sponsored the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington, according to a poll published on Wednesday.

Creating a nice atmosphere are we? Start with "bending" what was actually the news and posting a lie.

And after that you come with a poll taken about what % of the German population between what age groups? in what Area's? Following what political party? etc etc ....

But anything to make you hate them Germans a little bit more .. since they are European too.

Leave Belgium alone, some of the best beer in the world is made there!

Trappist monks, Duvel beer, the Lindenman's and other Lambic stuff....

It is my nirvana. I hope to go on a beer tour there someday.
Pity I can't really drink anymore.

Esbat

But anything to make you hate them Germans a little bit more .. since they are European too.

The poll was taken for a German publication "Die Ziet".

Makes you wonder what that particular publication's motivation was in using that particular wording.

But anything to make all Americans out to be staunchly anti-Euro eh Ytrok?

Wow, it took you 1 hour and 38 minutes to respond Ytrok! You must be slipping!

Obviously this poll is worded very poorly, and very vague about it's respondents, hence is pretty much crap. I posted it because I was bored at work and wanted to see how long it took you to come a'flamin.

I've just seen you post useless/crappy information/polls such as this for no other discernable reason than to garner flames, I'm guessing for your own amusement, so I thought I'd try it and see how it went. Wasn't as fun as I thought it would be.

Oh well, return to your normal flamage fests. Those are at least entertaining.

*shrug*

I generally avoid polls since they I suspect they are usually slanted in wording to get the outcome the pollster wants. Even if the results are accurate in this case, it simply means Germany has it's fair share of morons. You can get equally dim witted results in the US or anywhere else for that matter. Morons are ubiquitous throughout the world.

Ytrok talking about bending words around.

Haha thats fucking rich. Just made my day with that one. :lol

Don't engage Ytrok. Just, don't engage.

The poll was taken for a German publication "Die Ziet".

Makes you wonder what that particular publication's motivation was in using that particular wording.

But anything to make all Americans out to be staunchly anti-Euro eh Ytrok?
Mukaz .. I referred to the topic (posted by the poster) and the actual news (by Die Zeit).

The poster goes for the Anti German action where Die Zeit gave a "notification" on how some germans may feel about the 911 incident.

I figured you could tell the difference.

Anyway ... have a ball with this one since it was created just for me and since it must mean a lot to some shit for brains to post stuff to get me to "flame" on.
Kinda sad, but funny in a disturbing way.

Lambic = nasty

Seems to me that European media isn't any more accurate than our own.

I figured you could tell the difference.

Actually Ytrok I can tell the difference, or more precisely, the lack of difference between that poll and most American polls. Designed to return weighted results that the publication in question can then use to inflate and twist for whatever reporting agenda they happen to have.

My issue isn't with that. The post was an obvious troll. You know it, I know it. Yet you responded anyway and in the process insisted on implying that it was intended to stir up anti-German or anti-European sentiment amongst the American rabble.

Stop responding to the obvious trolls and there will be much less of the Euro vs. America crap you claim to be tired of.

Then we can get down to the brass tacks and flame each other over political views ya flamin' pinko socialist tax-monger. :p (yes, that's really meant to be tongue-in-cheek)

Bah everyone knows you dont know shit till after thirty years old anyways. lol

have a ball with this one since it was created just for me and since it must mean a lot to some shit for brains to post stuff to get me to "flame" on.

It must feel terrible when people treat you the way you treat them.

some shit for brains

I can honestly see no reasonable point to this phrase being added. It adds nothing to the discussion. And you know nothing about me, so I highly doubt you are qualified to comment on my intellectual ability, based on one post.

The only reason I can see to add that derogatory phrase is to incite anger and hatred, and thereby start a flame fest. This seems to me to be the main point to nearly all of your threads/posts in this forum.

I honestly hope that you have learned a little bit from this, and maybe realize the effect that you have on others, manipulating them into flames as you do. In the future, well thought out posts without name calling will serve your cause better, whatever it may be (I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that you have a nobler cause for posting such things beyond starting flames).

Be well. Hopefully with less hate, the world will be a happier place.

Jensae sank your battleship....Lol.

Jensae said: I posted it because I was bored at work and wanted to see how long it took you to come a'flamin.

and then took offense when Ytrok called him/her shit for brains

Get off your high horse Jensae, resorting to the tactics of trolls doesn't solve the problem of trolling, if in fact you find it a problem as you insist. Object lessons often fail when wrapped in bitterness. Ignorance, not difference of opinion, is the real enemy here.

Kivorn and Carabella, please don't use the term "European" in this way, as Europe is a collection of separate and distinct nations.

One question... who the fuck asked you, Germany?

well since the CIA sponsored osama bin laden very long time and also saddam a long time and also the saudi arab regime a long time ( most terrorist came from saudia arabia) its easy to come to the conclusion that the armericans sponsored 9.11. , isnt it ? ;) maybe not if you fill your brain with bullshit info the whole day ...

i know the us stopped support for saddam and osama some years ago , but they still helped them out to develop their ideas and they helped them to stay in power.

well but that supereasy to read, there is lots of books and also various search engines give a lot info about that topic.

<blockquote style="padding-left:0.5em; margin-left:0; margin-right:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; border-left:solid 2"> there is lots of books and also various search engines give a lot info about that topic.</blockquote>

And every single one disproves the shit you just said Hartmut.

My god you are one stupid fuck. Stop reading those tabloids and watching those scat flicks. They aren't good for you.

ok.. i was looking for some reading for you and picked 2 examples :

the msnbc osama FAQ

www.msnbc.com/news/627355.asp?cp1=1#2 (http://www.msnbc.com/news/627355.asp?cp1=1#2)

scroll down a bit :

The United States used the ISI(pakistan intelligence service) in the 1980s to fund, train and arm the Afghan mujahedin, including bin Laden, in its fight against the Soviet Red Army.

especially about the CIA operations in afganistan is a lot books and info on the net available , often called as one of the biggest CIA operations ever. the funny thing is after the russians left the muslim extremists raised by the CIA stayed in afganistan ... until they got kicked by the US and british.

--------------------------------

Saddam key in early CIA plot from United Press International

www.upi.com/view.cfm?Stor...0214-6557r (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030410-070214-6557r)

just a small story how saddam was supported by the US back many years ago . of course a lot other nations supported him aswell , the americans are not alone. well he has nothing to do with 11.9. but still with the current 3rd gulfwar.

ok please prove me wrong . if possible not with mindless flames created by a 10 year old boy who is unable to type a full sentence without an insult ;)

some germans think now the americans created the problem themselfes ... there was a lot coverage about the background of osama and saddam in german media , i think its not all propaganda , it reflects a certain view, but media is different organized in german than in america. there are a few big state/federal owned TV and radio networks with almost ZERO advertisment , so they pretty independent( not depended to government money, money to run the stations is raised different and not depended on stock money or advertisement money income) and of couse a lot private networks and press organisations. btw the poll you refering to was printed in "die Zeit" (the time) newspaper which is owned by the axel springer Verlag AG , which is by far the most rightwing and PRO-american newsorganisation in europe and the biggest printmedia company in europe aswell. part of their codex is to write nothing bad about america and israel btw ;) . so i consider this poll taken out of context.

Hartmut, I'll start giving you lengthy sentances lacking insults when you actually fucking deserve them.

I used to give a shit about trying to enlighten you and yours, but I've since realized my time is better spent making small model penises out of match sticks.

In other words Zehn .. you can't proove Hartmut wrong ...

What he is saying is that if you did not support those groups the incident may have been prevented because the people you brought to power may have not been in the position they were in when they started to "aggro" against the US.

There is a lot of may have in there but that does not mean it can or should totally be waved away as impossible .. that's all.

Personally I think it's a person with fucked up mind who caused it all (Osama) but that does not mean I can sort of understand that if you help a terrorist forward that the one who provided the "baby food" will be considdered the parent and maybe also responsible for the kid ....

The thing is that the USA has a history of supporting certain groups of dissidents aka terrorists to help them achieve there political goals.
Some examples of these are the Afganistan vs Russia conflict and the Iran vs Irak war.
They supporterted certain groupes without good screening , all these groups had to say that they wanted to defeat the enemy's of the USA and they would get funds, wheapons training etc....

So the theory that the USA MAY have sponsorred 9-11 is not that far fetched. They have supported Osama in the past to fight against the Russians.
The fact that they though Osama all he knows is a strong supporting factor of the theory.
the fact that they stopped funding him a long time ago is a strong opposing factor.

I personally don't believe one single moment the USA supported the 9-11 attacks.
I think they made a grave error in judgement 25 years ago in training terrorists over which they had no control whats how ever.

The conflicts are over and what is left is a group of highly fanatical terrorists without a cause.
Over which the USA has no control whats however they are just a bunch off renegade idiots, with a lot of training and no enemy to fight.
So what they do is find one or invent one.
The USA being the only remaining super power is a very logical enemy since noone likes to be dominated, or even the threat there off.
People are simply afraid of others with power, that can potentially make you do whatever they want.
So the old allies of the USA are now turning against them and using religion as a reason.
Which is a very strong one cause with "god" on youre side, supporting you're cause, how can you loose?

Just my opinion.

Listen..

The world is what it is.. You can look deeply into things for minutia and ignore the monolithic if it helps you sleep well at night.

Abraham Lincoln once said that "America is the last hope for a dying world". And for a while.. he was right..

But the world is okay now... But for 50 years Americans kept this planet from a nightmarish existance.

nazism was evil
communism is evil.

never forget that it was Americans who stood at the walls, at the Walls of Berlin, at the 49th Parrell, In Vietnam standing up against communist spread in Asia.
You never saw Soviet Tanks in your town Ytrok because of America.
And Hartmut... your free to go anywhere in Berlin because America never left, because we challenged Communism at every step.. and we won.

Has America fucked up on occasion? Sure.. Nobody is infallible..
If you want to say that Supporting Saddam in the War on Iran was wrong... sure.. Ill buy that.. it was a fuck up and a big miscalculation. But like hartmut said.. lots of nations had dealings with Saddam..

But if you try to draw an analogy between Osama Bin Laden and Al-Queda and American responsibility... your on pure fucking crack.. and have ZERO knowledge of who and what these people are.
Go to your sites with their political agendas.. and see what distortions of facts they can come up with..
But reality is what it is.
And always will be.

"But for 50 years Americans kept this planet from a nightmarish existance."
Nope, just USA and their friendly/commercial partner countries.

But, that's not that bad, at least they are doing something. Maybe not always the "best" way (imho of course), cutting the arm when one finger is rotten for example, but they still try. I guess USA like to "demonstrate" they are helping, some other countries stay more... discret.
If you need wars to show to the dying world that USA is there to save it, poor american soldiers won't be at home for christmas!
I believe in that every "weathly" countries are contributing in a way or another to make this world better (washing debts, commercial preferences, base health/scholarship helps), and it will only be with a global cohesion that we can reach ... something (don't ask the naive what tho ;) ).
Like you said L2, one can fail, one can fucked up, one can miss... Force comes from union right? As hard as one union can be built...
/violin off

2 last things :
Winter, ahah, that's funny once again, but please stop referring America as a country/nation, because it's not.

L2, again the "we saved your ass" argument?? Oh btw... Remind how long it took USA to come to "save our ass"? Yeah I know, atlantic is wide.

Edit : Viva la typo!

heh .. many of the big "caretakers" like the nazis or the communists in history felt like old abraham lincoln , but the outcome was mostly millions of dead people .
if everyone would just try to take care of himself the whole world is saved imho ;)


btw america has yet to attempt china and they still communists and they will absord in a close distance future all investment money which flows to america at the moment. just look the today situation , china is sucking more investment money today than all other asian country in the region together like , vietnam,korea,indonesia, philipines,thailand etc ... like 5 years ago china was equal in the amount of investments to these "tiger-states".
what i would like to point out is the enemy has a new name and the mission "destroy communism at all cost" was not accomplished.

btw i had a goooood laugh when i read your point of view about the fall of the berlin wall.

the whole movement was initiated by millions of joe smiths and not by america .got that ?
the system collapsed of course for many economical reasons , but the regime didnt slaughter the people when they where uprising and thats quite unique in the history and that has nothing to do with america at all.
btw i grown up in eastgermany and i can say: live wasnt bad when i was young and i seen the system collape and how it collapsed and after the life was even better ;) . there was no american on my side of the wall , just russians ) , it happen VERY suddenly , back in these days russia, france and america where very suspicious and many western politicians where AGAINst the fall of the wall . onces gobatchev( the russian president back in these days) gave his ok to release the gates there was no turn back.
btw there was not only a wall in berlin ;) germany is a little bigger.
i agree the communist regimes collasped mostly for economical reasons , some had also to do with the american dominance. but times change .... the new europe and china are a new challenge .

btw like ytrok pointed out i think you are responsible for your actions ,so if you support the bad boys you have to live with the consequences ...
and dont interpret me wrong please i tried to explain how that point of view of the german youth in that questioning has to be interpreted, if you dont know the background of german news coverage you can easyly say these people all idiots, but they arent since they have a good and quite logic story in the background . its not that someone tells the people all day "hey americans sponsored osama, you know they so stupid now they got a BIG problem" ... i mean there was a lot coverage about osamas background , political , economicaly and about his family , so the kind of education the people received make them believe certain thing and lead to certain conclusions.

i mean you believe for instance that communism is bad and all that stuff, but you know a lot of reasons why ... because someone told you, explained a lot background otherwise the story wont fit for long in the heads of the people.

short said the USA have a BIG image problem.

I love polls that ask what people THINK happened.

Does it ask WHY these morons THINK the U.S. was behind it?

Do they actually have any facts,or are they just hyped up on making retared uninformed votes on a poll?


On another note,i read that the mmorightyeeww tribe in Africa did a poll, and only 20% think the U.S. was behind 9/11.

So we must not have been behind it because 20%+33% is only 53% which is and even number if added together.

I did a poll and 90% of people said if it's even is untrue.

But the world is okay now... But for 50 years Americans kept this planet from a nightmarish existance.

nazism was evil
communism is evil.

never forget that it was Americans who stood at the walls, at the Walls of Berlin, at the 49th Parrell, In Vietnam standing up against communist spread in Asia.

For fifty years, Americans kept parts of the world from a nightmarish existence where it was in their/our direct interest. No one can deny the valor of those who bled on the front lines, but you overstate the nobility of the cause.


You never saw Soviet Tanks in your town Ytrok because of America.
And Hartmut... your free to go anywhere in Berlin because America never left, because we challenged Communism at every step.. and we won.


L2, I'm sorry, but your argument is flawed. Just read The Liberators (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0241106753/qid=1060014061/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-8578379-6876922?v=glance&s=books). It tells about the Soviet "liberating force" invading Czechoslovakia in 1968 and how/why it was farcically ineffective. It might lose a bit in translation, but it is nevertheless a great read.

And as for Hartmut: great thinking. You're up there with Lyndon LaRouche (who, if I recall his latest headlines correctly, claims that Cheney ran the 9/11 attack...)

"But for 50 years Americans kept this planet from a nightmarish existance."
Nope, just USA and their friendly/commercial partner countries.
What? That makes no sense. While its true that 2 democratic/capitalist nations have never gone to war with each other, and while other nations have lent support to such orginizations as NATO.. it is clear who was behind the OVERWHELMING majority of aid, support and manpower.
I guess USA like to "demonstrate" they are helping, some other countries stay more... discret.
I call bullshit.. Everyone knows what other countries are doing with their money.. You cant say that other countries are lend "discret" aid that nobody knows about.. thats ludicrious. We arent demonstrating.. or showing off.. we are just doing it, because it had to be done.. and nobody else was there to do it.

If you need wars to show to the dying world that USA is there to save it, poor american soldiers won't be at home for christmas!
Nobody "NEEDS" war.. nobody wants war.. These are our friends, our family, or neighbors who are dying. But we are proud of the people over their, because the sacrifice is not in vain and thier lives mean something.. Because the world is a better safer place without Saddam in it. Without the Taliban in Power.. with a dozen other acts that had to be done.

I believe in that every "weathly" countries are contributing in a way or another to make this world better (washing debts, commercial preferences, base health/scholarship helps), and it will only be with a global cohesion that we can reach ... something (don't ask the naive what tho ).
Welfare never made anything better... a minority of the people cannot support the majority of people on this planet.. Look at the US Social Security System for a example of why this doesnt work. Give a man a fish.. he eats today.. teach him to fish and he eats for life. Developing nations need to do just that.. develop, in their own time and by their own people.. What the world needs to do is leave them alone, except in emergency, or when they threaten the peace of a region. Keep trade lines open and free, keep the peace. Independance is freedom.. if these poor developing nations depend on other countries, it is the preamble to slavery.

Like you said L2, one can fail, one can fucked up, one can miss... Force comes from union right? As hard as one union can be built...
/violin off
Not so much as that.. but the thing is the right decision today can be a horrible decision tomarrow.. nobody can foresee the future.. or calculate every angle.. All we can do.. nations as well as individuals.. is do the best we can to make the best decision today.. and live with it.
Force comes from a lot of places.. not just union.. or Mob Rule... Over and over in history we have seen the fates of billions determined by the will of a single man.

L2, again the "we saved your ass" argument?? Oh btw... Remind how long it took USA to come to "save our ass"? Yeah I know, atlantic is wide.
Its not that argument.. its "we saved you ass" Its..
We were there for you..
We offered ourselves to you in friendship, giving our lives to help safeguard yours..
Helping you when you were down.
Now.. you no longer need us.. you malign us.. you attack us, you accuse us of all sorts of evil in the world and try to make US into the badguy.
Thats what drives us nuts..
Its like when a old man has fallen.. and you come to help him up, pull him out of traffic, dust him off, then he curses you and hits you with his cane.

heh .. many of the big "caretakers" like the nazis or the communists in history felt like old abraham lincoln , but the outcome was mostly millions of dead people .
if everyone would just try to take care of himself the whole world is saved imho
Ya.. if everyone was nice the world would be a better place... you sure are a deep thinker there hartmut.


btw america has yet to attempt china and they still communists and they will absord in a close distance future all investment money which flows to america at the moment. Just look the today situation , china is sucking more investment money today than all other asian country in the region together like , vietnam,korea,indonesia, philipines,thailand etc ... like 5 years ago china was equal in the amount of investments to these "tiger-states".
So many mistakes here Hartmut..
First.. China is tranforming country.. they are no longer practicing communists.. they are only communists in a lip service type way.. They are transforming into a free market capitalist nation.
And no... china will not absorb all money that flows to America... Japan was supposed to do that too.. remember them? China has over 1 Billion people.. thats 1 Billion Consumers.. Thats a good thing for the world. For everyone.. there are no losers in that accord. The US still has sizable and huge advantages in a lot of ways..
A good example is this.
Do you who is producing the finest engineers in the world right now?
India.. at IIT, The best Tech University in the world.. hands down.. even Better than MIT atm. On graduation.. where do 94% of its graduates go? Guess?
Heres a link for you detailing some of the difficulties in china right now.
www.financial-planning.co...01032.html (http://www.financial-planning.com/pubs/fp/20030701032.html)
Thats as straight up as your gonna find... its for people who are looking to invest.. to make money there..
And remember.. people who invest generally get more money OUT than they put IN.. or people dont invest. Investment is not a charity.


what i would like to point out is the enemy has a new name and the mission "destroy communism at all cost" was not accomplished.
That was never the mission.. the Mission was "Containment"
www.studyworld.com/newsit...-32441.htm (http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/History/European%5CContainment_of_Communism-32441.htm)
and it worked Brillantly.
Part of the fiery debate arises from parsing the role played by Ronald Reagan; indeed, the Reagan Presidency for years has been the favorite target of much of the clatter of historiographic musketry. Out of this has strangely emerged a battle for Reagan's soul. Left-leaning historians claim it was Reagan's affability and outreach to an equally charming and receptive Gorbyachev that included the Russian leader toward accepting as genuine Reagan's stated opposition to nuclear weapons offered at the 1985 Geneva Summit. And that Reagan's peace-through-strength rhetoric was in keeping with the tried and tested formula of his predecessors; in other words, Reagan was simply the extension of the chastened, post-Afghanistan Jimmy Carter, a view that to some extent is shared by former CIA chief Robert Gates, who in his recent memoir reflects on the fact that Carter indeed had committed to a recharged anti-insurgency in Afghanistan long before Reagan -- through William Casey -- turned over Stinger missiles to the Muhajadeen.

But much can be said for Reagan's Evil Empire speech, not to mention the decision to employ Pershing missiles in Europe, as attention-getting wakeup calls to the Soviet leadership. Edwin Meese, attorney general and close confident of Ronald Reagan, argues in his Reagan-era memoir that the Russian leadership, before and after the arrival of Gorby'achev, became convinced that Reagan's pedal-to-the-metal arms' buildup, particularly is proclaimed interest in the Strategic Defense Initiative or, as proclaimed by foes in the press and Congress, "Star Wars," would lead to further disruption in the Soviet economy. In order to keep up and build their own or a similar project economic bankruptcy might well ensue.

Peter Schweizer, a Hoover Institute Fellow, has devoted an entire book, to demonstrating how decisive Reagan's anti-Communist strategy was in bringing down the "Evil Empire." While much of the book amounts to a celebration of William Casey's ability to strike a blow at the enemy via his fabled access to Reagan and his CIA leadership prerogatives (constant trips throughout the world on a secret black-painted CIA airliner are highlighted), it nevertheless develops a credible scenario, if not for the single-handed toppling of the Soviet Union, at least for providing a push sufficient to help tumble it into history's much remarked upon dustbin.

To Schweizer, Casey, always with Reagan's imprimatur to back him up, is able to work wonders, in some cases simply through his banking and big business contact. He is able, for example, to quash low-interest loans to the Soviets; to clamp down on the export of Western technology the Russians are employing to maintain their crumpling industrial base; to make it tougher for the Russians to complete a huge natural gas pipeline that would, if ever properly completed, provide them with much-needed Western hard currency;; and finally through astute jawboning and clever parceling out of quid pro quos in the form of military intelligence and high-tech weaponry to strategic allies, especially the Saudis, the United States is able to convince the latter to substantially increase oil production and thus in one blow enhance the American economy by reducing oil prices while concurrently devastating the Soviet Union's major source of income, namely their export of petroleum.

This American-induced drop in oil prices also makes it more difficult for purchasers of Soviet arms such as Iraq, Iran, and Libya to continue their brisk acquisition of high-tech Soviet weaponry, thus leading to a further diminishment of Soviet income. Furthermore, large planned industrial projects such as a Renault car factory, two British chemical plants, and the purchase of Japanese and U.S. machinery are forced to be scrapped for lack of hard currency.

But it's the specter of SDI that apparently had become a major fixation in the minds of both the Soviet strategic defense hierarchy as well as Gorbyachev himself. Not only do Reagan defenders point this out, but much of the evidence stems from reports provided by the Russian leaders themselves. From wiley old Andrei Gromyko to highly-ranked Soviet army officers to KGB officials, the assumption early on was that it was Reagan's intent to wreck the Soviet economy on the shoals of the arms race.

And to Gorbyachev it was becoming increasingly clear that in order to reform the Soviet economy it first would be necessary to reduce substantially the enormous expenditure going to their military-industrial complex. In fact, the impromptu Iceland Summit in 1986 in large measure centered on Gorbyachev's attempt to convince Reagan of the importance of scrapping SDI.

One theory is that following Khrushchev's embarrassment over the pullout of missiles from Cuba, the Soviet's full-speed-ahead military buildup provoked the West into a competition that was unwinnable for the Soviet side. Laqueur quotes Valentin Falin, former Soviet ambassador to Germany, who, in speaking apropos of the arms race, said that "Detente would never have resulted in the tearing down of the Iron Curtain."
something to think about there... Soviet Union defeated and China transforming.. slowly.. as everything China does iis done slowly.


btw i had a goooood laugh when i read your point of view about the fall of the berlin wall.

the whole movement was initiated by millions of joe smiths and not by america .got that ?
No.. it was initiated by Millions of people who wanted Democracy.. who wanted what Gorbechev had promised the Russian people.. openness, but Honeker had tried to deny.. Democracy.. capitalism.. Everything West Berlin was, tired of opression by a failed system people wanted a better life, a life with meaning..



What an odd opinion.. If West Germany would have turned to Communism... would you say that Russia had nothing to do with that? Of Course no.. The Marshall Plan caused the Wall to Fall..
btw i grown up in eastgermany and i can say: live wasnt bad when i was young and i seen the system collape and how it collapsed and after the life was even better .
really? and how many times were you taken in by the Stasi? Remember the Stasi? Life was good, as long as you didnt dissent, as long as you didnt talk to anyone about the government, or try to disagree, as long as you stayed in line and looked straight ahead..
Nine Inch Nails has a song called "Happiness in Slavery".. Your mind set could take that song as an anthem.

there was no american on my side of the wall , just russians )
How many West Germans tried to jump the wall to get into the East?

btw like ytrok pointed out i think you are responsible for your actions ,so if you support the bad boys you have to live with the consequences ...
We all live day by day.. doing the right thing is complicated in a complicated world, and nobody can see where all paths lead... But to DO SOMETHING, to try, is far superior than to sit idly by and watch destruction because you were afraid to act and to do the wrong thing.


i mean you believe for instance that communism is bad and all that stuff, but you know a lot of reasons why ... because someone told you, explained a lot background otherwise the story wont fit for long in the heads of the people.
Communism was bad.. it was a best a huge lie.. and at worst a oppressive, evil system that was created to strip the individuality of people away and turn them into vassles of the State.. the Individual as property...

the USA have a BIG image problem.
As far as problems go... ill live with that one.. the truth is what it is.. no amount of denial, fabrication or twisting of facts will change that.

You never saw Soviet Tanks in your town Ytrok because of America.


That's fuckin funny!

It wasnt so funny in the 1960s..

www.cia.gov/csi/books/pri..._11_62.pdf (http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/princeton/nie_11_11_62.pdf)

open an eye or two for you..
www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa.../bcp1.html (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/berlin_crisis/bcp1.html)
What nations tanks are those Standing off against soviet tanks?
www.hpol.org/jfk/cuban/ (http://www.hpol.org/jfk/cuban/)
or here...

See.. the Major concentration of Soviet Forces was in East Germany and Poland.. some, 122 Combat Divisons and 1500 aircraft. The major soviet concerns were 2 things.. A. Getting through American troops in Germany fast enough to smash through the Baltic coastline and encircle Britan.. preventing troops from America to land in England.
And B. Out running supply lines.
Capturing the Baltic coast was paramount as supplies and troops could be moved faster and safer over water as well as preventing the Soviet navy to be blockaded and to lock out Europe.

The world was very different place.. you should have some respect for that.

I'm getting so sick of the "we trained Osama" thing, especially after disproving it 100 times.

I saw Summer Sanitarium at the Chicago stop last weekend. I'm gonna change my sig to "Metallica put on a personal performance strictly for me and me only, no one else was there."

German ignorance is astounding.

ignorant people everywhere , that not typically german ... this board proves it day by day ...

Again, I ask... Who the fuck asked you, Germany?

The poll mentioned 31% said the govt could have staged the attacks. Not actually that they DID stage them?

Personally.. Even as a US citizen, it doesnt strike me as being out of the realm of possibilities. Call me paranoid, but I can't really put anything beyond our govt.

Then again.. I am a nutjob.