Europe's View of America now

[Seehund]

I have the deepest respect for those who fought to liberate Europe of National Socialism whatever country they came from.

No one would dare to say the American sacrifice was not the key to victory in the West. Without it, Britain would have been unable to breach the Atlantic Wall alone. Somehow, the British, Commonwealth and Free Forces endured the nightmare until, by 1942, they finally began to wrest the initiative from the foe, and the following year saw offensives on all fronts. I think that you forget that sometimes. And one should not neglect the Soviet involvement in the war.

You tend to see yourself as the world's savior. NATO is not only the U.S. - what with all the other nations, they are insignificant? In Europe we have the tradition that we can openly criticize each other and I know that you as Americans can have problems receiving criticism from us in Europe. Learn to live with it.

Regarding debt and respect to the U.S..

Yes, American men and women have spilled blood for Europe, Do we owe you something? YES! Will we pay you back? YES!

We have stood shoulder to shoulder with you since 9 / 11. Danish men and women have fought and died and still do to this day together with your soldiers. I have sent my own son off twice and GHR here on our forum is another of these young people who is now paying back the debt. Respect goes both ways - remember that.

BTW. The Soviet Union actually liberated a part of Denmark and it was not until mid 1946 that they left.

 

[Del Boy]

Very good posts all round here Guys, candid worthwhile exchanges; good for the soul among allies.:thumb:

I have made my feelings known where this subject is concerned very often. IMHO American isolationism would bring chaos into the current world situation. Yes, even more chaos. Peace through strength is still required.

And Yes - memories are indeed short generally, so here you are presenting timely reminders. Applauding here.

 

[brinktk]

I cringe every time I hear an American claim that Europe owes us for the World Wars...I think fighting the Nazi's was just the right thing to do. Whatever happened to doing the right thing for the sake of just doing the right thing.

If you help save someone's life, do you expect that person to owe you favors for the rest of their lives. They certainly owe gratitude, but reminding them about it every 2 seconds kind of has a way of diminishing the effect.

 

[Chief Bones]

A debt is a debt and should be honored .....

I cringe every time I hear an American claim that Europe owes us for the World Wars...I think fighting the Nazi's was just the right thing to do. Whatever happened to doing the right thing for the sake of just doing the right thing.

If you help save someone's life, do you expect that person to owe you favors for the rest of their lives. They certainly owe gratitude, but reminding them about it every 2 seconds kind of has a way of diminishing the effect.

When I said that various countries owe America, I wasn't just talking about the human lives that were lost .....

I actually meant that many countries owed (and still do), monies that were given to the countries as loans for a variety of things (mainly the purchasing of weapons etc). A large portion of the WWII debt that was owed to America, was forgiven ... much of it wasn't.

Here we are .. it's 2011, and America is STILL paying large amounts of money to many countries that still can't seem to stand on their own feet without America bolstering them. Look around the world and add up the money that is being spent to maintain troops, bases and governments. Many American believe that money could be best spent in our own country. Instead of bolstering governments and padding the bank accounts of two-bit dictators, we could address the many economic issues facing this country.

I don't mean to diminish the contributions made by other countries during the war .. however .. debts are debts and should be honored.

 

[brinktk]

Point taken.

 

[MontyB]

Point taken.

Really then explain why American debt is primarily owed to Japan, China, Britain and the Middle East?

Does that give them the right to belittle American efforts around the world?

 

[brinktk]

Really then explain why American debt is primarily owed to Japan, China, Britain and the Middle East?

Does that give them the right to belittle American efforts around the world?

I honestly don't know enough about who owes what to whom to make an educated argument one way or another. Also, the "point taken" was more for the fact that he wasn't strictly speaking of the lives that were lost. Chief clarified the context from which he was speaking and I acknowledged this clarification, that's all.

 

[rattler]

One other thing, if the founders of our country intended to establish a plutocracy they would have simply created a unitized voting scheme, for instance instead of one man one vote; a land owner would have one vote per acre of land; a businessman, one vote per an established monetary value of his yearly trade. This was not done. Each man got one vote, rich or poor, high or low born, educated or ignorant, as long as he owned land or real property.

(Sorry, have not follwed the thread for some time hence my late response)

Interesting that you should mention this, because, while I am not an advocate of the US system this indeed was a fundamental change to e.g. the (European) Prussian electoral law (dominant at its time, 1850 installed) , where the votes were spread according to wealth/ground you owned, here a take from 1910 where finally some people realized that one man one vote might be a better idea: http://www.marxists.org/archive/pannekoe/1910/prussia.htm

Completely apart, if you ask me all democracies lack something as we give the same power to the uneducated as to the educated voter, from my POV every wvoter should pass a "voter test" so he can confirm he knows the subject the vote is about, but I fully realize this would not only be impractical but collide with many of our - and mine - modern ideas, and that it would be easy to influence an election by setting up the test to favor certain directions.

There is no icdeal way, we have to live with what we have, but if we really dont like it (like our - all parties, right and left - Spanish EU parliament members voting for *not* reducing cost by going tourist class instead of 1st on flights below 4 hours when in the current crisis 45 Millions (Euros) in difference would at least send a signal) we should learn (again, maybe?) from the Arabs and start taking to the streets.

Not intending to hijack, but if I (the day after the air fees vote) read in the news papers "those politicians have forgotten what they are sent there for, to represent and defend the Spanish citizen in the European environment" then I find that a hypocrites´ view again:

All those EU parlamentarists are guys that their party did not want in the home turf (for being a threat to establishment or for being useless), but did not want to let them fall into oblivion either (for their merits - within the party, of course, not for the citizen), so they simply looked for a place where they could comodly earn their 10.000 a month and do nothing (called "high fire" here in Spain: You fire the guy, but not in RL, you just find him a money making job and a title). Hypocricy to send them there on that pretext and then claim they should be representing the citizen and share his woes, those guys are doing *exactly* what they were sent there for, to the jota, they and the ppl that decided to send them there deserve applause (on the street)...

FWIW,

Rattler

 

[rattler]

I decided to go the PhD route since I will be studying social cultural behavior,...It will help me develope ideas on why cultures behave and believe the way they do and how at the, end we're all binded together in more than one ways

(I know double posts are frowned upon here and against the rules, but as I am now catching up on the thread allow me some multiple posting to address the issues as theyand in the order they come up within the thread...)

My dearly beloved Sky, from my POV I would think that a little travelling would help you a lot more in this respect (of course I believe in intellectually and academically backing up all experiences, especially when you start analyzing them): Come here, live just 6 month with me and my people in our environment, and you will have eye openers enough to have doctorate thesis stuff for the next 10 years. I guess the same holds true with any other country/culture, Spain is nothing special, "submersion" is the word here: Cultures resisit themselves to being understood by "studying" them from a mere academic POV, you have to - in order to get the perspective - be part of them for some time, and be it as a foreigner and with this status.

Just as a little example (mainly for you as Spanish speaker), have you ever wondered why all "Franciscos" are "Paco", and all "Josés" are "Pepe" in collquial conversation?

I am sure you can find the solution somewhere on the net, but having shared time with some Xiscos and Josés would have shown you the solution much faster, and you would even get the "feel" for what you describe as "why cultures behave and believe the way they do".

Rattler

 

[RealNavy]

Point taken about the countries you list--although I did mention Sweden and Switzerland.

Actually the British did not liberate Denmark. It was a protectorate of Nazi Germany from 1940 until the German surrender. The Germans simply left, there was no liberating army. Sorry.

I'm told by Seehund that the Soviets did occupy part of Denmark until 1946. I haven't found any documentation that the Soviets liberated Denmark from the Germans, or even fought them there. But his word is good enough for me.

As far as NATO is concerned, throughout the cold war the largest presence in the alliance was the US. We contributed the most men, the most material and the most money to the alliance. This is simple fact, it takes nothing away from the fact that NATO was and is a splendid team effort in which the contributions of every participant deserve equal recognition.

You are a very knowlegable gentleman MontyB so I know you are familiar with the timeline of US involvement in the war. The 8th Air Force began bombing occupied Europe in 1942, where my Father twice brought back B-17s so badly shot up they were only fit for junk and earned his first DFC. That same year we invaded North Africa to assist Commonwealth efforts. 1943 Sicily and Italy, where my Uncle was killed at Anzio. 1944 D-Day and beyond.
BTW, yes the French aided the Americans in the revolutionary war, for that we were and are grateful.

My indignation was aroused by Seehund's casual dismissal of our role in the war and his characterization of our war dead--inculding my Uncle--as a "numbers game." I offer no apology for being offended by that.

I also recall that there was a great deal of consternation about a Japanese invasion of your country and Austrailia in 1942. I believe it was the US that kept that from happening since the homeboys of both countries were fighting in the deserts and jungles far from home. But that is another issue.

One notable personage who definitley disagreed with your apparent belief that the Allies could have won the war without the US was Winston Churchill.

The Second world war was a magnificent effort in which all of the allies fighting Germany and Japan fought valiantly and frequently paid the highest price. Not one of the allied countries is undeserving of respect and gratitude for the part they played. No one should ever minimize the contribution of any participant in the "Great Crusade."

I do believe the question of Gratitude is overdone and somewhat immature. I think a more appropriate context would be "recognition" not gratitiude. Allies fighting side by side rely on each other, they have mutual respect for each other. "Thanks alot buddy" comes after the battle is over and it need not be repeated endlessly.


Rattler: I agree, but the Marxists added a step. One man, one vote, one CANDIDATE. Voters tests, brilliant idea. If a person doesn't possess the basic intelligence to make an informed choice he or she should not be allowed to vote.


________________________________________
Just because a man can look through a keyhole with both eyes, it doesn't make him narrow-minded.

 

[rattler]

I sometimes think that some of the European countries have forgotten the debt that is still owed to America for stopping the Nazis during WWII (a debt that America has never demanded).

Chief,

most of what you say has already been addressed (and I am as German the first to be thankful to your people having saved us from a German speaking world nightmare), but I refer especially to the part in parenthesis when I ask permission to disagree:

America *has* demanded the debt, and *has* recived the payment. myself and my co-citizens are the best example for it:

For around 40 years we West Europeans (Germans, Dutch, French, Belguians) were asked by the US (via the NATO treaty) to form a buffer zone in the cold war that would allow the US to activate forces over the atlantic to stop the Red Storm before it would hit the US mainland.

Frankly, and I am not sure you apreciate that fully, this was asking us as people and nation to accept total sacrifice, all the above mentioned nations wuld have come out completely devastated in a conventional (and 100% in a nuclear) war scenario with the WP forces. We were meant (and accepted and even supported) to perfom the street bump to slow the progres of an eventual WP attack to the Atlantic.

Personally, I served under that concept, and all our simulation always had the above described result: Sacrificing Germany so that US could survive.

If thats not paying back debts, you tell me.

Rattöer

 

[franzmaximilian]

A little contribution. The following text (translated by me from Italian) was written around 1992 and was presented in a different debate. I think it contains some truths worth being considered, with full respect to our American friends.

The average American has a perception of war and its implications that is totally different from that of the average European.
Statistically, much fewer Americans lived themselves a war experience or had first hand accounts. To the average American war is something that happens on screen or, if he was there or heard first hand memories, it happened in remote and possibly exotic places.
In those memories, hunger and moral misery, fear and degradedness, horror and violence are episodes, very seldom prolonged experiences.
On the contrary, a great part of Europeans has in his life or in family memories at least one of the following experiences linked to one of the World Wars: loss of one or more relatives, loss of all goods, hunger, escape, mutilation, fear, imprisonment, humiliation.
No American has ever seen his town or village destroyed, occupied or humiliated in a defeat. To no American black market has been the only source of goods of first need, and very few has seen the girls of their generation turning into prostitutes to feed their parents, if not as their clients.
It is a fact that the few Americans who know who was General Pershing associate his name to the operations at the Mexican border (often brought on screen by Hollywood), rather than thinking of the Chemin des Dames, where thousands of Americans died in France.
Each People has its myths, taboos and icons. If Pearl Harbour brings to American minds the words infamy and will for redemption and nothing else, to Europeans names like Verdun or Stalingrad, Gallipoli or Warsaw, Carso or the Somme mean in first instance death and destruction, lost generations, human misery. Only in a second instance words like honor, pride or victory come to mind.

 

[senojekips]

If thats not paying back debts, you tell me.

Rattöer

I find all this talk of "debt" by the Chief, to be somewhat arrogant. After all it was largely the debt imposed upon Germany by the Versailles treaty that sowed the seeds of WWII.

Prior to 7 Dec. 1941, the American people by and large, wanted no part in "Saving Europe from the Nazis" Their politicians were a little more aware in that they did send some help to Britain, much of it at the end of it's practical lifespan anyway. It was not until they were attacked at Pearl harbour that the writing on the wall became self evident, and even then, there were many who wanted no part of the "European" war.

America certainly became a major player in WWII, but I might suggest that there was a good deal more self interest involved than any moral obligation to help those in distress.

 

[MontyB]

Point taken about the countries you list--although I did mention Sweden and Switzerland.

Actually the British did not liberate Denmark. It was a protectorate of Nazi Germany from 1940 until the German surrender. The Germans simply left, there was no liberating army. Sorry.

Yes and no, I admit I was partially inaccurate with my "British" claims in that they never marched into Denmark however they deliberately drive across the schleswig-holstein peninsula to prevent the Russians getting into it which was the premise for my claim.

You are a very knowlegable gentleman MontyB so I know you are familiar with the timeline of US involvement in the war. The 8th Air Force began bombing occupied Europe in 1942, where my Father brought back two B-17s so badly shot up they were only fit for junk and earning his first DFC. That same year we invaded North Africa to assist Commonwealth efforts. 1943 Sicily and Italy, where my Uncle was killed at Anzio. 1944 D-Day and beyond.

I also recall that there was a great deal of consternation about a Japanese invasion of your country and Austrailia in 1942. I believe it was the US that kept that from happening since the homeboys of both countries were fighting in the deserts and jungles far from home. But that is another issue.

One notable personage who definitley disagreed with your apparent belief that the Allies could have won the war without the US was Winston Churchill.

While I have no doubt that at the time there was consternation about the Japanese in the region history has told us that it was an unfounded one as New Zealand was relatively safe as long as Australia remained in the war and the Japanese did not have the man power to take on Australia.

Could the Soviets have won the war in Europe. It is a good thing for western Europe that they didn't find out. The Soviets were not liberators, they were conquerors in their own right. When they "liberated" a country they substituted Nazi oppression for Soviet oppression. I'd like to hear from a European. Would that have been a good thing? What worked better for Europe, the Marshall plan or Stalinization?

I have never once claimed that the Soviets winning WW2 would have been good for the world but none the less by 1943 they were always going to beat the Germans with or without Western involvement.

P.S. I have yet to read a post from an American claiming the we single handedly won WWII, but I have read many posts by non-Americans attempting to minimize our contribution. Why is that I wonder?

I disagree I tend to think that all these "we saved your ass in WW2 and you aren't kissing our ass now" posts are saying just that or at least that is the impression they give.

 

[Easy-8]

Personally as an American I used to get into arguements with Europeans all the time. Other Americans often did this as well, we often thought of Europeans as wussies, lazy and socialist where as Europeans thought of Americans as fat, stupid and overty religious. This belief has gone down however as it seems that we have become united against socialism and radical islam.

Just things from my experience.

 

[RealNavy]

MontyB of course you are right in the context of history. But the concerns of the time dictated the warplans of the time. When the perception that Australia and New Zealand were threatened was extant, the Marines were sent to the Solomons to stem the tide of the Japanese advance and the Pacific fleet was sent to the Coral Sea.

I have to agree about your last statement. I think the emotion is poorly expressed in the "where's the gratitude" argument. I think what is really puzzling to Americans is why there is so much overt hostility toward us from our ertswhile allies coupled with an overlying question of "why do they care so much what we do?"

 

[GHR]

Actually the British did not liberate Denmark. It was a protectorate of Nazi Germany from 1940 until the German surrender. The Germans simply left, there was no liberating army. Sorry.

The German forces in the Nederland’s, Northwest Germany and Denmark surrendered to the British on May 4, 1945 but the German forces didn’t just leave Denmark. They remained under German command and fully armed until June 6, 1945 when the German commander Generaloberst Georg Lindemann and his staff formally were taken prisoner by the British.

The German General had ordered all German forces only to surrender to the British because they were the orders he had received. A few units surrendered to the Danish resistance movement, but most stuck to the German order, and several firefights broke out between German forces and the Resistance.

The first Allied soldiers came to Denmark May 5 at. 16.32. It was the British Major-General Richard Dewing, who landed at Copenhagen Airport as a representative of the Allied High Command with a hundred paratroopers. Two days later the first major British units drove across the Danish-German border and began to disarm the German forces. So actually Denmark was liberated by the British.

I'm told by Seehund that the Soviets did occupy part of Denmark until 1946. I haven't found any documentation that the Soviets liberated Denmark from the Germans, or even fought them there. But his word is good enough for me.

The surrender May 5 1945 was not on the Eastern Front as German troops on the Danish island of Bornholm were subject to and the German commander von Kamptz had orders not to surrender to the Russians. On May 7 at midday the Russians bombed, without warning, the two cities Rönne and Nexö. At night they bombed again and dropped leaflets inviting the Germans to capitulate. The third attack came the May 8. After this attack the Germans capitulated. Russian troops occupied the island in the morning on the May 9 1945. The Russians left the island again April 5, 1946.