|
|
Post by ss on Jan 18, 2010 1:14:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jan 18, 2010 9:37:19 GMT
2 things.
1) So?
2) Well they are all companies, and interested in selling stuff and staying in business. For the most part while they care a little about who their customers are, they care more about staying in business, especially during the current climate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 18, 2010 12:53:56 GMT
My (!) take on this?
Up until last year, when China overtook us, Germany was the world's top exporter with $1.133 trillion exported in 2006 - to put the $ 400 million in perspective. Further a lot of those are from rather 'civilian' goods and services.
Also there is a good chance that most of these contracts were competed against other nation's corporations (France for one, or Swiss in case of the tunnel experts).
Not that German corporations are all angels - there have been some known to circumvent restrictions imposed by the government (Chemical factories to Lybia were an issue - build to produce fertilizers, allegedly used to produce chemical weapons).
Generally speaking Germany has one of the strictest laws on exporting 'weapon' materials or exporting into crisis regions.
Notwithstanding that, there is always a way around to the creative business. And where there is money to be made, there is a way to be found.
But then, there is no general ban on business with Iran - at least not from Germany, nor the European Union nor the UN (Among developed nations, the most active investors have been Germans, Norwegian, British, French, Japanese, Russian, South Korean, Swedish, and Swiss companies). If and when there will be, Germany's government will uphold it - up to then, it is not up to the government to order or restrict business decisions of free enterprises (Or do American corporations not complain or yell when the US Administration interferes in their's?)
I'd wager that if those underground facilities have been built with German engineering know how, they also were built with the help of some caterpillars...
Is he who builds the hull responsible for what is installed into it?
If I sell you steel to make a car, am I responsible if you forge a knife or manufacture a tank from it? (I'd argue yes, if I knew you would actually - but then cars have been known to be converted into bombs too).
What the guy is basically saying is 'Don't trade with Iran, because he is a bad boy' (And he may well be). Don't give him cement, he may build bunkers, don't give him fertilizers, it'll feed his holy warriors or he'll make explosives from them...
Now, not trading gives you the least influence on a sovereign state.
If however you intertwine his economy with the global market, make it dependent from the revenue it generates, you get leverage.
That's why the world is safe from (a military) Germany nowadays - we can't afford to lose our markets, however no single market depends on us alone.
All in all I find this article somewhat hypocritical - especially from an American. America was the biggest of them all to use business investments and know how as a weapon (Nowadays I'd bet on China, but they're more subtle) - give to the friend and withhold from the foe. Unfortunately, sometimes, friend turns to foe...
P.S. - the meeting with Israel mentioned in the article starts today (which makes for a number of traffic jams in the capital), and the Israeli will argue, if you give tunnels to Iran, we would need you to sell us more submarines (to be refitted with American missile launching technology, the sale of which would be illegal for Germany, even if it is to Israel).
{Ephraim Kishon, a popular Israeli satirical author, once wrote 'incorruptible is he who takes it from everybody...!'}
|
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jan 18, 2010 16:20:20 GMT
All in all I find this article somewhat hypocritical - especially from an American. America was the biggest of them all to use business investments and know how as a weapon (Nowadays I'd bet on China, but they're more subtle) - give to the friend and withhold from the foe. Unfortunately, sometimes, friend turns to foe... And I love how it is expected of Glance to "defend" his country....just wondering how you would have reacted (to ss) if the article would have talked about Uzbekistan or Lithuania... |
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Jan 18, 2010 17:03:09 GMT
Ah yes, or how about Georgia, a more recent [Censored]pot?
The Georgian military that was used to attack South Ossetia war armed and ENTIRELY FUNDED by the US department of defense for instance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 18, 2010 18:36:35 GMT
And I love how it is expected of Glance to "defend" his country....No sweat, kitty - I take it Sam was asking for a qualified opinion!  Actually he didn't ask, nor I believe expected, that I'd be in a defensive position. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 18, 2010 19:02:59 GMT
Unfortunately, sometimes, friend turns to foe...
THIS is something US foreign policy should evaluate.
The EX-foes Germany and Japan became allies - but a lot of 'old friends' didn't stay friends. That's what happens when you (ab-)use your friends to fight YOUR foe. (That's why the USSR was different - they had no friends ;D )
The economic 'war' called competition isn't over yet - and the winner will be - ?
Up to 50 years ago Germany was the world's biggest manufacturer of motorcycles - now?
Up to 40 years ago Germany was leading in photography - now?
The USA were the world's biggest automobile manufacturer...
The USA lead the technology they themselves found no better word than the brand name - Xerox
Once upon a time 'IBM-compatible' was a requirement for any PC build worldwide...
Yesterday's winners of the above sit in Japan - Tomorrow's winners are called Samsung, Hyundai, LG and sit in South Korea.
The day after tomorrow?
Could it be that cultivating friendships may be a better strategy than fighting wars on who- or whatever?
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 18, 2010 21:15:54 GMT
Britain led the world in trade once, too. Maybe our countries should all get together and form a 'former great powers' club? ;D
Seriously - happens to all nations: both the rise and the fall. Always has, always will.
Sooner or later it would be nice to think nations at the top will work out what a good idea it is to make friends, ready for when they hit the down slope. I'm not holding my breath, though. All seem to be SO sure their dominance will never end... Until it does.
|
|
|
|
Post by ss on Jan 19, 2010 0:45:57 GMT
And I love how it is expected of Glance to "defend" his country....No sweat, kitty - I take it Sam was asking for a qualified opinion! Actually he didn't ask, nor I believe expected, that I'd be in a defensive position. Sorry to take so long to respond Glance, and your right, wasn't asking for anything more than you gave...thanks for that... I agree that you definitely have more leverage if someone is dependent on you for their goods and such... I figure that if they are building tunnels then they will be good ones, in that German engineering is top grade.. ;D The US will just have to build larger bunker buster bombs (if they haven't already) to penetrate them...  I know that when we invaded Iraq, the French didn't want us to go in because all the instructions for the weapons were written in French...(or Russian). ;D Besides, you have a hard time buying cement here because China is paying a better price, and in return exporting dangerous material to the US.... And as far as arms, the US is most definitely a big exporter and, as most countries, don't really care what they do with them. It is always, and will always, be about the money.. And of course you are joking about the "caterpillars"...their stock IS up....  |
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Jan 19, 2010 2:08:28 GMT
I'm gonna repeat my previous post but more directed towards SS as he clearly ignored the implications I was trying to make with a brief point.
Its ok for Georgia, when funded by the United States and being provided US weaponry, to attack South Ossetia?
And America was outraged when the Russians kick them out, because the Russians destroyed all said US equipment.
Really, the US plays the same game. Don't pretend it doesn't. So [Censored] um. I don't want Iran to get a nuke, but its an imperfect world, in a perfect world everyone plays by the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 19, 2010 9:57:02 GMT
...in a perfect world everyone plays by the rules.
A perfect world would first have to have commonly agreed rules to play by...
|
|
|
|
Post by ss on Jan 21, 2010 0:27:38 GMT
I'm gonna repeat my previous post but more directed towards SS as he clearly ignored the implications I was trying to make with a brief point. Its ok for Georgia, when funded by the United States and being provided US weaponry, to attack South Ossetia? And America was outraged when the Russians kick them out, because the Russians destroyed all said US equipment. Really, the US plays the same game. Don't pretend it doesn't. So [Censored] um. I don't want Iran to get a nuke, but its an imperfect world, in a perfect world everyone plays by the rules. I wasn't ignoring your post TD...I never do...yours... ;D I didn't post the article as a slap at Germany.??..and I agree that all countries do it...it was just an interesting issue that is taking place today.....or at least interesting to me... I just didn't have time to respond to yours... ;D...busy moving... Besides, I know that you are anti-everything (mostly)... |
|
.com
