Quote: I really don’t understand the obsession with Merkel
No obsession but the realization that this woman has done more damage to Europe than anyone since Hitler. The list is long (and I’m writing on a phone) but she enabled Putin at every turn. So-called ‘red lines’ in Syria that he of course ignored, no real pushback against the annexation of Crimea, the so-called Euro saving that only served to weaken Southern Europe (but bailed out German banks and insurance companies) to her mad 2015 migration intervention. The latter two actions gave a massive boost to the European extreme right who all are in Russia’s camp. Today she still defends her foreign policies (see an article in Der SPIEGEL)!
Many would agree with some of the things that she did and do not interpret it in the same way as you do. And many of the things you list were not down to her alone.
I didn’t see Trump, doing much re the red lines in Syria, and the UK decided against involvement. So did other European Countries. Only Turkey opposed Russia and Syria.
I also remember Trump saying that Putin was a man he could do business with and more recently calling him a genius for invading Ukraine.
And the arrangements the EU made with Greece seem to have put them.back on the road to recovery if their economists are to be believed. I don’t recall the German banks having to be bailed out, unlike British and American banks. But I am open to be proved wrong.
So IMO she has a right to defend her policies. Not that I believe that she got everything right. But the only people who matter in this is what the German people thought of her, and they kept her as leader for longer than any other European leader I believe.
But it does seem that you have a grudge against madam Merkel.
Peter wrote:
Various forms of that claim have been around for years, and then you speak to somebody who actually makes 100LL and they set you straight
Great! So set us straight — where in the EU is TEL produced?
Anyway, it would be absolutely terrible if the EU had to buy some terribly toxic chemical from a former club member
If you have followed the EU debate about toxic chemicals, the risk is rather that AVGAS producers in the EU will not be allowed to import (pure) TEL at all – no matter where it was produced. In that case all AVGAS 100LL will have to be imported.
Maybe Mr Putin will sell you some 100LL 
The way things are going with their “industrial accidents”, the 100LL refinery will soon be the only one left
I have been following the “EU debate about toxic chemicals” for about 20 years. It’s a massive gravy train. I think the only stuff not on the current spreadsheet (I get a new one in email every week or so) is hexavalent plutonium.
Regarding Mrs Merkel, I think she was seduced by the smooth talking Putin who offered an oven ready solution to Germany’s principal political challenges. Perhaps she ought to have known that he lies and lies, completely shamelessly, all the time, and this is a completely normalised way of behaving. Perhaps she was badly briefed by her intellegence services? I doubt that. Unfortunately most of W European politicians fell for that conman. Only those will real balls will admit it. Unfortunately, Mrs Merkel was running Europe’s biggest economy; if she had been running Lichtenstein, nobody would be critical of her. Britain was full of Putin’s associates, getting in on special visas… No more.
Funny Merkel is mentioned here as doing damage to Europe.
Have you forgotten what went on with a ex-EU country that caused unprecedented turmoil for years? A direct punch in the face to „peace, stability and prosperity“ of Europe. Certainly, one guy was very happy with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_referendum
Isn’t this the only place left producing TEL for Avgas?
Innospec manufacturing plant
https://goo.gl/maps/pQcPdEQL2rqUPTMQA
Never verified if that’s true.
LOL, those comments very much check out re. the „aviation angle“ 😂😂
Snoopy wrote:
Isn’t this the only place left producing TEL for Avgas?Innospec manufacturing plant
Well, Peter claims there is one in the EU, but he won’t say where.
That’s not what I said, but I won’t feed an OT diversion.
LeSving wrote:
Did anyone actually believe Putin would go berserk like this?
The question is rather, why did nobody imagine he’d try to “solve” the Donbass conflict by force? He did it in Crimea. He did it in Georgia. Chechnia anyone? And he showed what the Russian army does in Syria (Aleppo looks pretty much like Mariopol after he was done with it).
Apparently nobody in Europe and the US cared too much if he got his hands dirty in Syria lest they would have to. Nobody cared about Georgia too much. So how would Putin expect Europe to get their collective knickers into a twist over Ukraine? Or an US President actually calling for his removal? What was different out of his perspective?
The mistake of the West in that regard was, amongst others, to believe that Russia had subscribed mostly to the Western lifestyle and would not risk it being taken away from them. For much of the population that is true, for Putin however it never was.
Clipperstorch wrote:
She stayed in power because she didn’t start anything that could blow back on her.
and because there was nobody to replace her. You can see how difficult it is to get someone with his marbles in good order to replace reasonably sane people. If you look at some of the so called “World leaders” who emerged over the last decade or so, we really have to ask ourselves, are those people really the best there is? Why are we faced with “the lesser evil” in many many elections rather than the choice between good women and men who understand the position they aspire to as service to their country instead of establishing their own power base and stroke their egos?
Peter wrote:
He managed to grab Crimea without any fuss from W Europe. You’ve got to ask yourself how he pulled that off. It hardly made the news here.
It made the news all right but because it went without any bloodshed nobody gave a fart. Many understood that Russia wanted it’s main naval port back and Crimea was inhabited by quite a lot of Russian language Ukrainians, not unlike Donbass.
Peter wrote:
Ukraine has turned out to go badly for Russia, but it’s because
Russia expected to be welcomed by the Ukrainian Russian population and it simply being a walking in and taking control ops. As you say, very bad intelligence if any.
172driver wrote:
No obsession but the realization that this woman has done more damage to Europe than anyone since Hitler.
I would think that is quite an exaggeration. She did not start a war in Europe nor did she start a totalitarian system.
I think where many people went wrong about her is not realizing (or not wanting to realize) that her GDR upbringing was something which would make her think differently. The refugee politics of hers was a clear consequence of her upbringing as a pastors kid and her absolute rejection of any form of nationalism and racism. Merkel’s idea of humnism is what led her to the “welcome” politics together with a determination that Germany should stand for tolerance and multi cultural societies. Yes, that did cause the ultra-right in Germany and other places to feel empowered but looking at how Europe now welcomes the Ukrainians, it was a very powerful statement too. And courageous too. I find it hard to criticize Merkels effort to trying at least to prove that racism is no longer tolerated in Germany, despite the fact that she must have known it would give the ultra-right arguments. But sometimes it does take risks to stand for one’s ideal.
172driver wrote:
She enabled Putin at every turn. So-called ‘red lines’ in Syria that he of course ignored, no real pushback against the annexation of Crimea,
I would not call it enabling him. She (and quite a few leaders of other EU countries as well as some in other places) simply followed a policy of integrating Russia into an economic system where, they felt, Russia was as dependent on the West than the West was dependent on them. With a rational politics behind it, what she and others wanted to achieve is to make the price for Russia very high to step out of line. Looking at the reaction of the West right now, this is what is happening, pretty much everything Russia achieved economically is in shatters because of the sanctions. Merkel’s et al understanding always was that Putin would not forego what Western money offered him. And that brings us back to the question, who really estimated him to go crazy and start a war in Europe? While it was proven wrong, in all fairness, it was not something anyone could have expected.
172driver wrote:
the so-called Euro saving that only served to weaken Southern Europe
There I agree. What happened there was nothing short of trying to impose a hegemonial guardianship over the Eurozone with methods which were nothing short of economic warfare to Southern Europe at the time. And yes, this is something which was very bad for Europe and in a way a contradiction of her “welcome culture” by singling out Southern Europe as inferior and using very authoritarian politics against them.
Snoopy wrote:
Have you forgotten what went on with a ex-EU country that caused unprecedented turmoil for years? A direct punch in the face to „peace, stability and prosperity“ of Europe. Certainly, one guy was very happy with it.
He was also very happy with the Trump presidency as well as the rise of authocratic leaders in Europe such as Orban and other would be authocrats. Clearly Brexit was in the Russian interest as it weakened Europe too. It should not be forgotten however that the real drivers behind all those movements were homegrown.
Russia has always tried to influence European politics, in the 80ties by funding the peace movement against NATO and ever since. The West has in some ways tried to do the same mostly economically. Clearly however, todays technology presents a clear and present danger in that regard.
