"Germany disbands elite special forces unit" Topic

Germany's defense minister disbanded a company of special forces on Wednesday, saying a culture of right-wing extremism had been allowed to develop behind a "wall of secrecy."…

link

Were they Nazis?

From what I gather the German military is doing the same as the Australian one – trying to neuter "male warrior culture."

The KSK is actually one of the few fully functional military formations in Germany. It's bad they've just gutted a quarter of it!

There is a huge difference between 'male warrior culture' and right wing extremism – though there may well be a correlation.

What I'd want in a military is cold professionalism. What the British Army prides itself on having [though it may well be more imaginary than real especially these days].

Many scandals and warcrimes in recent years seem to stem from allowing enlisted men to fill a power vacuum resulting when the officer corps is derelict.

A lot of the excess testosterone might result from being stationed in areas with no-one to fight. If the days are filled with boredom and the threat of IEDs or sniper attacks the troops may turn on each other or on civilians. This may even be the strategy of the enemy.

Troops still train for high intensity combat but that is not what most will face.

And lets face it – Germany has a poor track record in this area. So I for one applaud this move.

That said – Armed forces are not the boyscouts. We need 'rough men willing to do violence on our behalf'. But anything political has to go.

Well said Skarper.

Armed forces are not the boyscouts. We need 'rough men willing to do violence on our behalf'. But anything political has to go

In the Australian Army the definition of political is huge. Soldiers are no longer allowed to display "violent" symbols such as skulls.

I've posted many links to this and other events within the ADF which are openly designed to make the ADF more caring and more diverse blah blah and less "white male warrior" culture which is viewed as politically incorrect.

Apparently there's also been attempts to change the German military culture to be more similar to other public servants which is frankly absurd.

The German military's other cultural problem is its traditions are limited due to its history. In many ways they have to renounce the whole history of German military forces. And now they're even having to renounce their early post WWII history because the officers of the post WWII army were all ex--Wehrmacht!

That's a hard thing to do especially when what it gets replaced with is "airy fairy" modern stuff.

It probably doesn't help the military is generally underfunded and neglected which probably makes soldiers less likely to adhere to modern politically correct standards.

link

So to sum up you have a neglected military which is not allowed to have a history or tradition and which is expected to be exactly the opposite of what its function is.

What I'd want in a military is cold professionalism. What the British Army prides itself on having [though it may well be more imaginary than real especially these days].

I doubt that cold professionalism exists anywhere. We are talking human beings, not robots or bioengineered super soldiers.

A lot of the excess testosterone might result from being stationed in areas with no-one to fight

That is war in general. What do they say: 90% boredom and 10% sheer chaos!

Also most troops never see combat anymore and haven't since before WWII – they are the massive logistical and support tail. They drive trucks, repair things, work in behind the lines communications units, cook, etc etc.

It has been reported that some weapons have gone missing from that unit that was disbanded.One more thing to worry about.

Were they Nazis?

Not if they were also right-wing extremists. Of course, there's some confusion about what's considered right/left between Europe and the US. So I guess all I can really say is, good luck with the next war.

Sound like it was being run very badly. Sloppy paperwork, sloppy controls on weapons and ammunition and sloppy monitoring of personnel. The German military is a joke.

The German military is a joke.

Even their parliament's commissioner for armed forces agreed!

link

One of the most pathetic incidents was that to maintain one batallion ready, it had to borrow 15,000 pieces of equipment.

I read of one exercise where German troops used broomsticks to represent heavy machine guns.

link

I imagine that if those voting for this don't live long enough to rue the day this occurred, their children certainly will.

Being a logical centrist, from what I've read, can be and IS frequently construed as "right wing extremism" in some cultures, due to the large lurch to the left by many.

Not too long ago, they found that most of their new, state of the art, assault rifles didn't work properly.
Such is the state of affairs in Germany, that this is just one example – others include very low serviceability rates on military aircraft, new vessels without sonar capability being bought and fielded for a submarine-rich environment like the Baltic Sea, etc., etc., not to mention their dire situation with modern armored vehicles.

They were rigth wing extremist, which probably means they were nazis. Nationalsocialism is a rigthwing mowement, with ideas of military dictatorship. You cannot have people in the army, which actively act against the constitution, and as the main risk of terrorism is rigth wing extremism, either at something like nazis or reliogious like ISIS, you have to act.

Troops still train for high intensity combat but that is not what most will face.

From what I was reading years ago (pre-9/11) this was why US SOF troops were getting out after being extensively trained. Lots of high-speed training and nothing to do but train foreign militaries how to shoot.

Destroy
families
education
Nation
Culture
History
Now what is left of defense.

What if they gave a war and nobody came? If only it was possible. (Sigh)

National socialism is a rigthwing mowement, with ideas of military dictatorship.

I told you it was confusing. From what I've read, it's a left wing movement, but it also depends on your definition of the right and left wings, which are not so clearly defined. I would classify most of the military dictatorships I'm familiar as leftist, but that's just me.

Politics is a circle. They join at the bottom.
Denial of the brownshirts and the Zi of the thing is very common and so practical.

From yesterdays Guardian

The KSK was formed as an army unit in 1996 with a focus on anti-terrorism operations and hostage rescues from hostile areas. It has served in Afghanistan and the Balkans and its operations are kept secret.

Military investigators have been looking into the unit since a group of public German broadcasters reported in 2017 that at a going-away party, members displayed the Hitler salute, listened to right-wing extremist music and participated in a game that involved tossing a pig's head. In January, the military reported 20 soldiers were under suspicion of being right wing extremists.

Kramp-Karrenbauer established an independent commission in May to investigate the KSK and propose reforms after a cache of weapons, explosives and munitions were found at one of the suspected extremist's homes in Saxony, which she said revealed a "new dimension" to the problem.

She said the investigation has revealed "grave deficiencies" in the unit's record keeping and that there were many missing items, including ammunition and explosives. It was not clear whether the munitions were used, left behind after deployments or pilfered, she said.

Strange that some people still think that nationalsocialism is something to do with socialism. It has been clearly documented that in historiacal literature that the socialism epithet is something that put into the name as a propaganda device. Nationalsocialism arose from the different bands of militaristic, rigth wing units from the past WW1 period. There is a reason it was supported by the the rich industrialists, and royalist after the war as an way to split the different workers movement. So no politica is not a circle and no they are not socialists. This typical confusion spread by people who want to hide their dictatorial tendencies.
Most military dictatorships are rigth wing which you could see in prewar balkans, in latinameria, and asia. The greek, spanish and portuguese dictatorships was rabid rigthwing, as you can see that they were supported by the US.

Sorry, but Cuba and Venezuela, Nicaragua, China, and many other dictatorships ARE left-wing, not right-wing, though they use the same tactics.

Many rioting in the streets in the USA now, such as Antifa claim to be anti-fascist, but are using the same "brown-shirt" tactics the Nazis did prior to AND during WWII, AND they certainly are not "right-wing", since many of them are die-hard communists and socialists. They are the new fascists of our day.

A lot of the planning, funding, and backing is also coming from various communist and socialist organizations. The protests are not "spontaneous" but are being organized and lead by a number of groups with a lot of financial backing, just like they did prior to the Nov. 2016 elections in the USA.

Nothing new

Tommy
Rudyard Kipling

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I don't want any neo Nazis fighting on my side when the band begin to play thanks. I want them where they belong, in prison, and not in my armed forces.

As for those repressive and murderous right wing dictatorships (most military)you can't think of:
Mussolini's Italy
Franco's Spain
Croatia – Ustasha
Greece – Colonels regime 60s/70s
Salazar's Portugal
Brazil 64-85 (amongst other periods)
Pinochet's Chile
Videla, Massera and Agosti's Argentina
Batista Cuba
Pinilla's Colombia
Stroessner's Paraguay
Bordabery's Uruguay
Bolivia – 60s/70s early 80s
Somoza's Nicaragua
Manuel Noriega's Panama
Japan 30s/40s

I've left a lot of African and Asian contenders out because it is probably unfair to left and right to map western concepts of political 'wings' onto cults of personality and post colonial power struggles – but both sides could claim quite a few should they wish.

It really does depend on your definition of left and right wing. A lot of Nazi economic policy was more left wing that right wing as private enterprise was heavily regulated and controlled by the Nazi regime.

I would actually say modern China has become a fascist state – you have an authoritarian government that still controls the economy yet it allows free enterprise as long as that free enterprise does what the government expects of it.

Right wing implies far more freedom for business ala free trade and letting the market sort it out.

Free markets are a myth that bedazzle people – in truth every government has constrained the operation of markets- the only questions have been: how, by how much and to whose advantage.

Generally business fears right wing dictatorships as much as ultra left wing ones, because they tend to constrain markets to the benefit and use of nationalist or racist agendas tied to the ideologies they came to power with.

Gwydion no doubt. Every economy is a mixed economy.

Generally business fears right wing dictatorships

It really does depend on the dictatorship and how much business is vested in it – a lot of dictatorships have key business concerns as major power wielders.

And in a lot of cases business and right wing juntas work hand in hand. After all right wing juntas help stomp labour and environmental activism which could lead to an increased cost to business if implemented.

Business's sole concern is profit and they will do whatever it takes to maximise it.

Both Chile and Portugal boomed far more economically under right wing dictatorships than democracies.

@ Gwydion

Impressive list, and I'll admit I'm not familiar with most. But some of those I would classify as left-ist, as I would: Pol Pot's Cambodia, Castro's Cuba and Stalin's Russia, to name a few.

I guess what I'm driving at is there are tyrants on both wings. So it might be more productive to argue over policies and not over sides.

But some of those I would classify as left-ist

!Which?

arealdeadone – Chile and Portugal? Impossible to say as nobody was able to run a 'control' Chile and Portugal under democracy for the periods they were right wing military dictatorships – so who knows? Well the rest of Europe barring the right wing military dictatorship of Spain for a start did okay, although I admit it's hard to find a South American country not messed up by political and commercial interference to compare Chile to.

Strydberg -Pol Pot – undoubtedly an 'agrarian socialist' loon but as I said, in Asia there were lots of other things mixed in, notably a reaction to a right wing dictatorship supported by outside governments in this case. Don't forget it was a communist country that liberated Cambodia from this terror.

Stalin a failed Georgian priest who subverted a communist revolution.

Castro's Cuba could have been a model democracy if organised crime hadn't put the kibosh on Castro's attempts to work with the USA and pushed him into the Soviet Sphere. A golden opportunity missed.

"Free markets are a myth that bedazzle people…".

My understanding is that Hong Kong is/was pretty much a free market, and has had huge, and very impressive economic success for a number of decades, since regulatory and tax pressures there are/were quite low.

Even in China, regulations are far fewer, leading to regular, double-digit economic growth which is the envy of the world.

Of course, some limits do need to be placed on businesses, so they are not polluting the environment, and getting too out of control, but those should be minimized where possible in order to permit more rapid growth and the economic benefits which come with that.

A pity we don't do more to emulate them, since they are beating us at our own game – capitalism.

So you want to emulate an authoritarian Communist regime's 'low regulation' economy because it outperforms the 'Free Market' USA?

Interesting comrade.

Geydion in both instances economic growth slowed after transition to democracy. There have been a number of case studies into this. Chile was in fact the poster child for modern neoliberal activism as pushed by the Chicago school of Economics and increasingly adopted en masse since the 1980s.

Of course Chile just had a ticking time bomb due to massive itnequality which exploded last year.

Democracy does not mean successful capitalism or better living standards. Economic performance is independent of these.

Thresher most Chinese business low tows to the CCP yo the point each major private company jas a CCP official sit on its board or is owned by the Chinese government.

The restrictions for foreign investors are massive and include almost mandatory transfer of technology and Chinese majority ownership.

Where they are free to do as they please is pollute and exploit workers and violate international rules on intellectual property.

Yes, I'd like to lower overly onerous regulations on many companies across America in order to put people back to work, and to significantly increase the standard of living of numerous Americans.

That only makes good sense, and works equally well in both communist and capitalist societies, apparently.

I think more regulation is needed, especially on Wall St. But the environmental and other regulations need to restored and tightened. There has been a disingenuous campaign against regulation and big government going back at least as far as the Reagan admin.

Increasing the minimum wage and eventually introducing UBI is the best and possibly only way to increase employment. Poorer Americans [the VAST majority are living in poverty or insecurity] have no disposable income and are one pay check away from disaster.

Capitalism is failing. That doesn't mean Communism or Socialism is THE answer. I'm beyond any 'ism' being a panacea. What is needed desperately is proper public discourse so people can have a say in what their government does.

To be a democracy any country needs three things.

Independent free media.
An independent judiciary.
Elected representative government.

The US is going backwards in all 3 areas, but most dangerously in the field of media. If people are uninformed or systematically disinformed then voting is irrelevant.

I'm far from anti-American. By and large Americans are kind, hard-working and decent people. It's just they have no meaningful control of their country. The based way to rein in the US Gov and its excesses is to inform the US public about what has and is being done in their name.

Thresher, lower regulation =/= better living standards.

USA deregulated manufacturing and allowed foreign imports from 3rd world and living standards fell in the USA. You can't compete with near slave labour they have in China or Bangladesh.

US living standards are falling to the point your average life expectancy dropped 3 over the last 3 years.

Rampant laissez faire capitalism does not work. It is what they call a race to thr bottom.

China is not deregulated and is in fact more regulated than the US. You don't do what the CCP wants and your company is destroyed and you are probably in gaol on some trumped up corruption charges.

As for living standards Chinese can barely breathe the air in their cities. There is no environmental protections at all. And labour is exploited – you have millions of minorities and others working as literal slaves and the vast majority of the population has no rights.

Laissez faire capitalists don't care about the environment or living standard. The goal is enrichment of the rich
And somehow poor people buy into this system.

And don't kid yourself economic growth benefits all. Trickle down effect is a long dead concept that has been disproved.

Agree with that last post arealdeadone. Good one.

Not sure Chile and Portugal are that clear cut though.

Portugal lost an empire and went through chaos post the Carnation revolution rebuilding its societal structures. Not to mention world difficulties with the oil crisis etc around the same time. Democracy got the growth rate back up to pre revolution rates in about fifteen years.

Chile crashed twice during Pinochet's time and average gdp per capita has only exceeded the Latin American average since democracy returned. Of course how that money is distributed is another matter.

OT, hardly a surprise, this issue has been lurking around for awhile. And perhaps unsurprisingly Germany is a little jittery about neo-Nazi's in its armed forces.

Quite why Germany has allowed its armed forces to get into such state is beyond me. A mix of overdrawn peace dividend and an unwillingness of the politicians to get to much involved for fear of being seen 'militaristic' – again something which German politicians are probably a little edgy about?

"Quite why Germany has allowed its armed forces to get into such state is beyond me."

It's not beyond me. Europe is a house of decadence that will in time be sorted out by the Russians or their (i.e., Europe's) Muslim population that they've gone so far out of their way to foster.

Some of these posts only reinforce my belief.

+

Hmm- tad judgemental CFeicht.
Evidence of 'decadence'?
'Fostering' Muslim populations?
You mean making 'no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof'?
Sounds familiar somehow.

Not sure Chile and Portugal are that clear cut though.

They're not clear cut. They were examples used by various neo-liberal academics to espouse their view point and wholly adopted by western governments over the years.

Portugal lost an empire but the growth in European Portugal was large (though they do not mention things like US aid).

The "Miracle of Chile" is neo-liberal economics 101. Basically a bunch of school of Chicago economics professors helped Pinochet implement massive transfer of wealth from state owned sector to private sector.

Problem with things like GDP and GDP per capita is they don't take into account massive wealth disparity. If you have a population of 100 people with one person having $1,000,000 USD and the other 99 live on $100 USD a year, then the GDP per capita is $10,000. USD

This is why Chile exploded into violence last year. All this neoliberalist capitalism in the end just enriched a handful of people.

As for Germany there have been quite a few issues with regards to what they call "parallel societies." Basically Muslims haven't integrated into mainstream German culture and maintain their own social and even legal (or lack thereof) structures outside of the German mainstream.

I'm not saying the Muslims are to blame or whatever. It is what it is.

And whilst not related directly to KSK or Germany the following article shows the ridiculousness of the current culture wars fought against western culture:

link

Publishing a cartoon in the west is viewed as reason enough for violence by Muslim elites and masses, yet actual mass atrocities committed by China against its muslim populations is largely ignored and accepted.

Similarly the world rages against statues and names of all things western, whilst other more brutal powers continue their violent ascendancy.

The real thing at play is that the western system is in decline and is being undermined both within and without.

Well an authoritarian is an authoritarian whether they are in a suit or Islamic dress and in the latter case appreciate their religion more as a tool of social control than enlightenment. The contents of the Guardian article are entirely unsurprising and arguably one could draw the obvious parallels with the abandonment of base ideals of western democracies for even the promise of crumbs from the Chinese economic pie.

Frankly I'd say the main threat to the west from its Muslim population is blowback, and resulting collateral casualties, in the case a full ME sectarian conflict. There's are already the odd yahoo who hasn't got the memo about freedom of religion who takes it into their head to murder some innocent from some fringe denomination.