Stardate 20030124.0351

(On Screen): The rhetoric just keeps getting stranger and stranger. I think there really must be something wrong with the water in Europe; have they all gone collectively insane over there?

Rumsfeld rejected the idea that (highly) vocal objections to an Iraq war by the governments of France and Germany was a major stumbling block to us in actually fighting one, and disparaged them as being "old Europe" while pointing out that many of the "new European" countries such as the Czech Republic were far more supportive of us.

Of course, that was like a red flag in front of a bull; to actually suggest that France and Germany are decadent, self-absorbed, decrepit, pretentious has-beens is simply intolerable.

Even though it's true.

So Rumsfeld has come in for a severe Franco-German tongue-lashing; they have deployed their most forceful scowls his direction (their most dreaded weapon internationally, as is well known). But they're running into a bit of a problem coming up with rational arguments (not that that's ever stopped them). Here's one of the more preposterous:

In an editorial, Bild reminded Rumsfeld of his German roots and the ideals of the French Revolution which inspired the United States' constitution.

"Mister Rumsfeld, hundreds of thousands of your G.I.'s fell for 'old Europe' because they freed us from the tyranny of Hitler. You are sinning against your own heroes by disparaging 'old Europe'. Your G.I.'s died for the ideals of your place of origin," Bild wrote in an editorial.

Let's see; the US Constitution was written in 1787 and was largely based on principles discussed in the US as early as 1774, if not even earlier. Many of those ideals are in the Declaration of Independence written in 1776. So how, exactly, was this influenced by the ideals of the French Revolution, which took place in 1789?

Actually, historically speaking it was the other way around: the revolutionaries in France were in large part inspired by the American example, though only imperfectly. Not to put too fine a point on it, they screwed it up. The ideals of the French Revolution led to the guillotine, Napoleon, and 20 years of devastating war in Europe leaving behind more than a million dead. France is on its, what, fifth republic since then? Something like that? (And we're still working on our first. I guess we're falling behind.)

Bild also argues that because American GIs died fighting against Hitler, that therefore the US is now obligated to shape its foreign policy according to the dictates from Berlin, because to do otherwise is to betray all the American soldiers who died in that war. Apparently Hitler wanted the US to stay independent, but American GIs fought and died to make sure that American would become a colony of Germany, and now Rumsfeld is dishonoring their sacrifice – or something like that. From here on planet earth it's rather difficult to understand exactly what they are thinking, over there on the other side of the universe.

You know, if anything that argument would run the other direction. Wouldn't you think? I, myself, have tried not to use the "dammit, they owe us" argument but it's truly strange for them to try to turn it around and use it against us. If thousands of American dead in cemeteries in France and Germany lay any obligation on anyone, wouldn't you think it would be on them and not on us? Of course, these are also the nations who used the invocation of NATO Article V ("An attack on one will be considered an attack on all") to mean that the US had to get permission from Europe before fighting alone ("Since we were all attacked, we all have to agree on how to fight back using the US military that we all collectively control").

Maybe the multicultis are onto something after all when they claim that "logic" is a local construct of American culture and that others otherwise can have their own logics which are different but equally valid.

Naaah... can't be. It must be the water.