How Germany Lost the Iraq War
Livat B. Udokan
"Fritz Wuehler" <fr...@rodent.frell.eu.org> wrote in message
news:aa8732ac2330c9e7...@remailer.frell.eu.org...
> http://snurl.com/schroder_blows
> by Michael Mertes
>
> Wars always have winners and losers. Saddam Hussein--dead or on
> the run--is, of course, the Iraq war's biggest loser. But
> Germany has also lost much, including the many US troops who
> will now reportedly be re-deployed to bases in other countries.
> Despite the announcement of plans to create a European army
> along with France, Belgium, and Luxembourg, Germany is less
> relevant in both European and world politics than it was before
> the Iraq war. Repairing the damage will not be easy.
>
> Every part of Germany's international position has been wounded
> by the Iraq war. The country can no longer play the role of
> transatlantic mediator between France and America. It can forget
> about US support in its campaign to gain a permanent seat in the
> UN Security Council. Instead of forging a "third way" for
> Europe's left with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Chancellor
> Gerhard Schröder needs Blair to plead his case with President
> George W. Bush, who feels personally betrayed by the
> Chancellor's conduct in the run-up to the war.
>
> In postcommunist Eastern Europe, Germany is no longer perceived
> as an absolutely dependable advocate of the region's needs.
> Multilateral institutions that served as pillars of German
> foreign policy for almost half-a-century have been weakened: the
> European Union's hopes for common foreign, security, and defense
> policies have been gravely jeopardized.
>
> >From an American perspective, flexible ad hoc coalitions of the
> willing have turned out to be more useful than the established
> NATO alliance, where Germany led the fight to refuse Turkey's
> request for support. Even the UN--the institution that Schröder
> was supposedly defending--has been diminished by his
> fecklessness.
>
> But the heart of the matter is the deterioration of German-
> American relations. Germany is by no means the only sinner here,
> for US diplomacy over Iraq was often clumsy and bombastic.
> Nevertheless, pointing out others' mistakes is not going to help
> rehabilitate Germany's position.
>
> German-American relations suffered a devastating blow when
> Schröder stoked the country's overwhelmingly pacifist attitudes.
> By doing so he drowned out the concerns about low growth and
> high unemployment that were threatening his re-election
> prospects. But that political strategy left President Bush
> believing that Schröder had stabbed him in the back. As with
> people, so too with states: trust once lost is extremely
> difficult to regain.
>
> Germany's opposition parties and much of its foreign policy
> establishment warned that the country risked diplomatic
> isolation, so Schröder joined an ad hoc coalition of the
> unwilling, along with France and Russia. This compounded the
> error by adding to it a public relations disaster. Much of the
> world press dubbed this "gang of three" an "axis," a word with
> sinister echoes of the German-Italian-Japanese World War II
> axis. Not surprisingly, Poland--like other Central and East
> European countries--sought reassurance from the US and Britain
> when their colossal neighbors, Germany and Russia, embarked on
> their anti-American flirtation.
>
> But wartime victory makes cowards of leaders who backed the
> wrong side. So, with Baghdad's fall, Schröder began to send
> conciliatory signals to Washington and London. Schröder
> implicitly began to welcome regime change in Iraq. During a
> Franco-German-Russian summit in St. Petersburg, he explicitly
> refrained from criticizing the US and Britain. "I don't want to
> speak about the past," he emphasized, "we should think about how
> the military victory can be turned to help the entire region."
>
> That French President Jacques Chirac is even less popular in the
> US than Schröder gives German diplomats slight consolation. But
> opposition to US policy from France never comes as a shock.
> Indeed, Chirac's tone and tactics conform to textbook Gaullist
> patterns. By contrast, German assertiveness vis-à-vis the US was
> stunning--perhaps because, as it is said, you have to be fully
> behind someone who you stab in the back.
>
> The Chancellor's aides try to justify Schröder's rhetoric as an
> expression of the country's political maturity. At long last,
> they say, German leaders can use the unrestricted sovereignty
> Germany acquired with reunification in 1990. But the
> Chancellor's juvenile experiment in mature diplomacy has
> diminished, not expanded, Germany's prestige.
>
> Quite simply, German Gaullism doesn't work. After all, Germany's
> traditional low-key foreign policy made the country an anchor of
> NATO and helped secure reunification. That diplomatic tradition
> has never simply been about "do-goodism" and checkbook
> contributions to peacekeeping missions around the world. It was
> about creating and transferring stability through the
> strengthening of international governance and supranational
> structures.
>
> Germany is too big to abstain from leadership in Europe. But it
> is well advised to avoid being suspected of hegemonic goals.
> Sharing sovereignty with its fellow Europeans and exerting
> influence through European and Atlantic institutions remains
> Germany's most promising political strategy.
>
> Besides abandoning any Gaullist pretensions, the other lesson
> Germany must learn is that influence is based not only on soft
> "civilian power," but also on hard military capabilities that
> are adapted to the exigencies of the post-Cold War world. If
> Germany wants to increase its diplomatic weight, it must
> increase its defense spending. Only an enhanced German relevance
> in European and world politics will convince America that it is
> time to bury the hatchet.
>
Nicely written. What do you see as the physical consequences of their
actions (France and Germany)? My only complaint is that your piece only
assesses the situation but does not discuss what happens next???
Do you think the US policy that accepts a weak dollar was "payback"? A
strong Euro means more unemployment for Chirac and Shroeder due to fewer
exports to the US. 11% of German exports go to the US. Over the last 2 years
European goods have become 35% more expensive for Americans.
The down sizing of bases in Europe is overdue. New geopolitical realities
mean those bases would be better located elsewhere.
We have troops in an awful lot of countries right now and frankly I think
it's getting a little out of hand. The newer requirements would be easier to
deal with if personnel from Europe were used with the intention that they
would not return.
Scott Erb
France and Germany, the weak dollar hurts the US, and the strong Euro gives
the ECB more ability to lower rates and stimulate the European economy.
Neither side benefits if there is too much of an imbalance. Troops in
Germany are irrelevant -- after all, the French kicked American troops out
in the mid sixties voluntarily.
Furthermore, the US is getting bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, and is
finding the war on terror is no closer to being won. That, plus lack of WMD
in Iraq (making Bush appear a liar), means the US is finding its position
sinking daily, and to avoid massive spending and costs to keep Iraq and
Afghanistan stable, and to work against terrorism, the US *needs*
cooperation and support from allies. If it pushes the allies away in a
childish pouting "you didn't support our war so we'll shun you," the US
shoots itself in the foot and only increases its problems down the line.
The US is not in good shape. The weak dollar is not a good sign, and hurts
the stock market and outside investment immensely. The strong dollar gives
currency benefits that helps finance deficits. Add that to the massive US
budget deficit and signs of inflation, and the only answer for the European
and American economies is to work together as partners.
Unfortunately, the current US administration seems to think that it should
be able to unilaterally call the shots and Europe will follow. That won't
happen, and the US will learn the hard way the costs of what conservative
thinker Edmund Burke called "the arrogance of superpower."
Raymond Luxury-Yacht
> You guys are in fantasy land. The US is impotent to do anything against
> France and Germany,
Go ask your local American BMW, Mercedes or Audi dealership about how
the U.S. is impotent. The U.S. showed extreme restraint in being
critical of Germany because the U.S. good relationship with good and
decent Germans - see CDU. Schroder has hitched his star to that
terrorist Joscka Fischer.
Germany runs a $30 + billion trade surplus with the United States.
Bush may need to see why the Germans are cheating on trade.
Germany has ex-terrorists with ties to Islamic terrorist running the
German govt - ie Joschka Fischer. The U.S. has given up on dealing
with these known criminals.
Bill Willis
Great post. ISTM that you are on-target on *all* points and have
comprehensively dealt with the topic.
I would add that Germany (people and government) along with Europeans in
general have shown a mid boggling lack of understanding regarding
America in general since 9/11 and George Bush in particular since his
assuming office.
If Europe itself had forward thinking leaders that could have
appreciated even a little the monumental event of 9/11 from an American
perspective or had they reacted to Bush as merely the current president
of the United States instead of throwing the baby out with the bath
water then much of the very great and permanent damage to
European/American relations might have been avoided.
Sadly Europe only had mediocrities like Schroeder and Chirac and in
fairness the United States only had Bush. But when the score is finally
tallied on this sorry chapter of the Western alliance the bulk of blame
will surely rest with the "Old" Europeans as will the bulk of the
consequences.
Bill
Dirk Bruere at Neopax
"Bill Willis" <bwi...@bcpl.net> wrote in message
news:3ED25C...@bcpl.net...
I rather think that history will record how the US turned a single terrorist
act into a decades long global war with hundreds of millions of dead.
AQ has never been more popular.
Dirk
Bill Willis
Of course I should have noted that the posting is an opinion piece by
Michael Mertes that was provided by the poster Fritz Wuhler and I have
no idea whether or not Mertes views are the same as Wuhler's.
Kleuskes & Moos
> Germany runs a $30 + billion trade surplus with the United States.
Guess why...
> Bush may need to see why the Germans are cheating on trade.
Better goods at lower price == cheating. whatever happened to 'free trade'?
> Germany has ex-terrorists with ties to Islamic terrorist running the
> German govt - ie Joschka Fischer. The U.S. has given up on dealing
> with these known criminals.
Sure... And we're *mighty* impressed, too. Soon the US won't be talking to
anyone anymore.
--
"Matrimony isn't a word, it's a sentence."
Pierrot le Fou
E.F.Schelby
>You guys are in fantasy land. The US is impotent to do anything against
>France and Germany, [...]
>Furthermore, the US is getting bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, and is
>finding the war on terror is no closer to being won.
>The US is not in good shape. The weak dollar is not a good sign, and hurts
>the stock market and outside investment immensely. [...]
The PBS site has an email exchange between Robert Kagan and British
author Will Hutton (latest book _A Declaration of Interdependence_).
Hutton points out that the Unites States has $ 3 trillion in
liabilities to the rest of the world. Consequently, the hyperpower
stands on "economic feet of clay." See:
www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/blair/europe/kh.html
Greetings,
E.
Livat B. Udokan
"E.F.Schelby" <sch...@swcp.com> wrote in message
news:vl27dvg48q3um3oh2...@4ax.com...
So then the US should just declare bankruptcy and write off the debt.
> www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/blair/europe/kh.html
>
> Greetings,
> E.
Scott Erb
about how the US could maintain its strong dollar with a huge current
accounts deficit. That question has been answered -- it can't. But where
this will lead is an interesting thing to watch.
Interesting times we live in. On a different note, you are constantly
making such good historical comments and examples, I wonder if you have any
particular suggestions for an interdiscplinary course I'm teaching with an
Art historian and Musician on (mostly) Europe (there can be some bleed over
from the US) at the time of the "Great War" -- right before, during, and
after. The class will read All Quiet on the western Front, and basically
we'll mix a look at art and music at the time, with the political and
cultural situation. I've got a bunch of ideas, but this is an experimental
interdisciplinary course (I look forward to learning about Art and Music of
the era!) and if you have any ideas of what might work well from the
history/culture standpoint, I'd love to hear (and if you're interested, I
let you know how the course finally ends up looking)
-Scott
"E.F.Schelby" <sch...@swcp.com> wrote in message
news:vl27dvg48q3um3oh2...@4ax.com...
Adrian & Marta Bailey
news:5c859948.03052...@posting.google.com...
> Germany runs a $30 + billion trade surplus with the United States.
> Bush may need to see why the Germans are cheating on trade.
LOL Cheating on trade?! They make better stuff than you! QED.
Adrian
Randy Met
Germany & France are the big loosers.
The german pussified position of opposing the USA is bearing its
fruit.
Lets all Welcome Germany to the cowardly world od 3rd Rate Countries
who kiss up to the smelly french.
and God Bless Poland, the Pols & British had the balls to side with
the USA, and have earned the respect of AMerica's brave people!
Randy Met
Florida, USA
mark
ROFLMAO. Unfortunately the debt your govt runs up is not like personal
or business debt. You cant say I cant pay and walk away from it and
start again.
Ask Brazil, Argentina and most of the African sub continent, you have
to pay that debt even if you cant give your citizens food, heating and
medicine.
> > www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/blair/europe/kh.html
> >
> > Greetings,
> > E.
Livat B. Udokan
"mark" <fuga...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aee685f1.03052...@posting.google.com...
> "Livat B. Udokan" <Moon...@weaselsrippedmyflesh.com> wrote in message
news:<loMAa.4068$Ah3.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> > "E.F.Schelby" <sch...@swcp.com> wrote in message
> > news:vl27dvg48q3um3oh2...@4ax.com...
> > > "Scott Erb" <scot...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >You guys are in fantasy land. The US is impotent to do anything
against
> > > >France and Germany, [...]
> >
> > > >Furthermore, the US is getting bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan,
and
> > is
> > > >finding the war on terror is no closer to being won.
> >
> > > >The US is not in good shape. The weak dollar is not a good sign, and
> > hurts
> > > >the stock market and outside investment immensely. [...]
> > >
> > > The PBS site has an email exchange between Robert Kagan and British
> > > author Will Hutton (latest book _A Declaration of Interdependence_).
> > > Hutton points out that the Unites States has $ 3 trillion in
> > > liabilities to the rest of the world. Consequently, the hyperpower
> > > stands on "economic feet of clay." See:
> > >
> >
> > So then the US should just declare bankruptcy and write off the debt.
>
> ROFLMAO. Unfortunately the debt your govt runs up is not like personal
> or business debt. You cant say I cant pay and walk away from it and
> start again.
>
ROFLMAO indeed. If the US debt becomes a big problem, it also becomes a big
problem for Europe, Russia, China, Mexico and Canada...to name a few. The
country with feet of clay is the largest economy in the world so the
assessment seems pretty irrelevant.
Scott Erb
"Randy Met" <rand...@post.com> wrote in message
news:eb11100b.03052...@posting.google.com...
"Pussified"? What kind of discourse are you involved in? Try some reason
or analysis, trying responding to ideas.
> Lets all Welcome Germany to the cowardly world od 3rd Rate Countries
> who kiss up to the smelly french.
>
> and God Bless Poland, the Pols & British had the balls to side with
> the USA, and have earned the respect of AMerica's brave people!
You obviously do not know what you are talking about. Goodbye.
Christian Roessler
>> Germany & France are the big loosers.
Hah, I remember well my old english teacher. He said I may write as I
want, but he wrned me about two things. First, I should be aware of
there/their/they're, as that will look good. Second, he told me I should
never write 'loser' with two o's, for then the people will say I am one.
>> The german pussified position of opposing the USA is bearing its
>> fruit.
> "Pussified"? What kind of discourse are you involved in? Try some reason
> or analysis, trying responding to ideas.
Well, Scott, that's a wonder I always perceive with shock and awe: The
incessant usage of a more and more infantilized (sp?) language.
>> Lets all Welcome Germany to the cowardly world od 3rd Rate Countries
>> who kiss up to the smelly french.
Kindergarten talk pt. II.
>> and God Bless Poland, the Pols & British had the balls to side with
...the balls, the balls, the balls. Is that testosterone-laden teenager
talk?
>> the USA, and have earned the respect of AMerica's brave people!
Yeah, the land of the brave. Very brave these actions were.
> You obviously do not know what you are talking about. Goodbye.
There I agree in any case. By the way, Scott, thanks for the energy you
spend debating these trolls. I wish I would have some more of that,
sometimes.
Gruß, Christian
AV
> http://snurl.com/schroder_blows
> by Michael Mertes
>
> Wars always have winners and losers. Saddam Hussein--dead or on
> the run--is, of course, the Iraq war's biggest loser. But
> Germany has also lost much, including the many US troops who
> will now reportedly be re-deployed to bases in other countries.
Most countries favor withdrawal of foreign troops.
> Despite the announcement of plans to create a European army
> along with France, Belgium, and Luxembourg, Germany is less
> relevant in both European and world politics than it was before
> the Iraq war. Repairing the damage will not be easy.
How is being part of the new European army makes it less relevant ?
> Every part of Germany's international position has been wounded
> by the Iraq war. The country can no longer play the role of
> transatlantic mediator between France and America.
Why should it ? France and Germany can now mediators between Middle East
and US :)
> It can forget
> about US support in its campaign to gain a permanent seat in the
> UN Security Council.
But can perhaps count on support from France, Russia and China ...
> Instead of forging a "third way" for
> Europe's left with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Chancellor
> Gerhard SchrЖder needs Blair to plead his case with President
> George W. Bush, who feels personally betrayed by the
> Chancellor's conduct in the run-up to the war.
It's rather Bush who betrayed the rest of the world.
> In postcommunist Eastern Europe, Germany is no longer perceived
> as an absolutely dependable advocate of the region's needs.
> Multilateral institutions that served as pillars of German
> foreign policy for almost half-a-century have been weakened: the
> European Union's hopes for common foreign, security, and defense
> policies have been gravely jeopardized.
US's sweetest dream ..
>>From an American perspective, flexible ad hoc coalitions of the
> willing have turned out to be more useful than the established
> NATO alliance, where Germany led the fight to refuse Turkey's
> request for support. Even the UN--the institution that SchrЖder
> was supposedly defending--has been diminished by his
> fecklessness.
more BS
> But the heart of the matter is the deterioration of German-
> American relations. Germany is by no means the only sinner here,
> for US diplomacy over Iraq was often clumsy and bombastic.
> Nevertheless, pointing out others' mistakes is not going to help
> rehabilitate Germany's position.
>
> German-American relations suffered a devastating blow when
> SchrЖder stoked the country's overwhelmingly pacifist attitudes.
> By doing so he drowned out the concerns about low growth and
> high unemployment that were threatening his re-election
> prospects. But that political strategy left President Bush
> believing that SchrЖder had stabbed him in the back. As with
> people, so too with states: trust once lost is extremely
> difficult to regain.
>
> Germany's opposition parties and much of its foreign policy
> establishment warned that the country risked diplomatic
> isolation, so SchrЖder joined an ad hoc coalition of the
> unwilling, along with France and Russia. This compounded the
> error by adding to it a public relations disaster. Much of the
> world press dubbed this "gang of three" an "axis," a word with
"gang", nice term for the ones opposing illegitemate war of aggression ...
> sinister echoes of the German-Italian-Japanese World War II
> axis.
Wow !?
> Not surprisingly, Poland--like other Central and East
> European countries--sought reassurance from the US and Britain
> when their colossal neighbors, Germany and Russia, embarked on
> their anti-American flirtation.
Cute, ha-ha.
> But wartime victory makes cowards of leaders who backed the
> wrong side. So, with Baghdad's fall, SchrЖder began to send
> conciliatory signals to Washington and London. SchrЖder
> implicitly began to welcome regime change in Iraq. During a
> Franco-German-Russian summit in St. Petersburg, he explicitly
> refrained from criticizing the US and Britain. "I don't want to
> speak about the past," he emphasized, "we should think about how
> the military victory can be turned to help the entire region."
> That French President Jacques Chirac is even less popular in the
> US than SchrЖder gives German diplomats slight consolation. But
> opposition to US policy from France never comes as a shock.
> Indeed, Chirac's tone and tactics conform to textbook Gaullist
> patterns. By contrast, German assertiveness vis-Ю-vis the US was
> stunning--perhaps because, as it is said, you have to be fully
> behind someone who you stab in the back.
> The Chancellor's aides try to justify SchrЖder's rhetoric as an
AV
Amazing example of how the ones with balls and the asslickers are
interchanged ..
>
> Randy Met
> Florida, USA
TR
Hundreds of millions. We would need about 500 more wars to reach
that total. And AQ is loosing some of its popularity even in Saudi
Arabia. And what makes you think that it was a single act. It was
the second time that the WTC was attacked. Remember the Cole.
Remember the earlier attack in Saudi Arabia. Remeber the embassies
in Africa. And that only accounts for some of the attacks against the
US. If you look at the rest of the world there are multiple terrorist
attacks every week. You are apparently a full blown moron that
cannot count. And you are stupid enough to believe that Islamic
terrorism will simply go away if we ignore it.
TR
E.F.Schelby
>"Raymond Luxury-Yacht" wrote:
>> Germany runs a $30 + billion trade surplus with the United States.
>> Bush may need to see why the Germans are cheating on trade.
>
>LOL Cheating on trade?! They make better stuff than you! QED.
Making better stuff is one thing, developing an export trade is
another. It takes years, and more years, and cultivation of
relations with customers in foreign countries, and knowledge of
customs and culture (and ideally,language). These are all
intangibles US business neglects - for a variety of reasons. Small
and medium-sized US companies export very little, and don't know (or
care to know) even the basics. Many Fortune 500 companies are
multinationals already, so perhaps the US can't expect too much from
them. Good export management is not primarily based on price.
Regards,
ES
E.F.Schelby
>On a different note, you are constantly making such good historical
>comments and examples, I wonder if you have any particular suggestions
>for an interdiscplinary course I'm teaching with an Art historian and
>Musician on (mostly) Europe (there can be some bleed over from the US)
>at the time of the "Great War" -- right before, during, and
>after. The class will read All Quiet on the western Front, and basically
>we'll mix a look at art and music at the time, with the political and
>cultural situation. I've got a bunch of ideas, but this is an experimental
>interdisciplinary course (I look forward to learning about Art and Music of
>the era!) and if you have any ideas of what might work well from the
>history/culture standpoint, I'd love to hear (and if you're interested, I
>let you know how the course finally ends up looking)
Good for you. This sounds like a worthwhile project on a pivotal
period. For my taste, many of us have grown too provincial. There is
so much out there, and daily life is so busy that one is tempted to
keep one's nose too close to the grindstone. But looking around and
tracking the larger connections is more important than ever.
Otherwise all the yadda-yadda about "the West" and the world is for
the birds.
What follows is a spontaneous sampling of some of my favorites. It's
nothing systematic, but I hope one or the other of these suggestions
will be helpful.
Fussell first:
http://www.pbs.org/greatwar/interviews/fussell3.html
(travel the site)
http://www.semcoop.com/detail/0195133323
Here is the title:
The Great War and Modern Memory / Paul Fussell. -- New York : Oxford
University Press, 1975.
From a review: A landmark book, still "the classic modern
interpretation," Fussell surveys Great War poetry, drama, fiction,
memoirs, and even letters and general culture, finding in them
earlier influences, and also tracing their influence on subsequent
twentieth-century writing, culture, and thought. This is the book
with which all subsequent critics have had to deal -- a knowledge of
it is essential to the study of Great War literature.
Related: the _Declaration_ of the poet and soldier Siegfried
Sassoon:
http://www.geocities.com/~worldwar1/sassoondeclaration.html
http://165.29.91.7/classes/humanities/britlit/97-98/wwipoets/sassoon.htm
****
This one is a bit older. Perhaps you know it. To me it was, and is,
a key book. It presents rarely covered geopolitical and social
thinking that shaped the 20th century - not only in England, but
indirectly also in the US and in continental Europe.
Bernard Semmel. _Imperialism and Social Reform: English
Social-Imperial Thought, 1895-1914. Publisher: Doubleday. Place of
Publication: Garden City, NY. Publication Year: 1968.
****
Homer LEA (M: 1876 - 1912)
The Valor Of Ignorance [1909]
The Day Of The Saxon [1912]
Lea was the early prophet of a coming war with Japan, and of the
'life & death struggle between the Saxon and Teutonic _races_'!!!
His books enjoyed a wide readership. Both Teddy & Franklin Roosevelt
read Lea. During WW II, new editions were printed.
****
Interesting article from History Today, June 1993 ( I got my copy
through infotrac from our state library) "Fear of Flying: the
Fiction of War 1886-1916." Covers popular lit and science fiction.
The public imagination in several countries was entranced with
future war visions and the bombing of cities. There was also a lot
of pulp fiction of that sort, even for youngsters.
And here's a cite for a brandnew & excellent article in the
Economist, May 24-30, 2003: "German Expressionism: A World Out of
Joint" - quote:
"German Expressionists are enjoying a remarkable comeback..."[they]
speak so eloquently of trouble to come that even at close to a
century's distance, they have the power to surprise.... 'The human
content of their work is very contemporary.' For a brief moment,
they sought to take on the world. At last the world is looking."
The piece includes a list of current and coming exhibits in D.C. and
London, and in Stuttgart and New York.
Of course there are not only the painters but also the expressionist
writers. Also filmmakers. And modernist designers, architects.
****
These are little-known, yet I was glad to see that the Marc letters
(wide-ranging, covering art, literature, music, European affairs,
the war, his beloved Ried in Bavaria, and much more) were finally
translated into English. Like other young European artists and
poets, Marc was killed (in 1916). Some of his letters would be good
companions to "All Quiet" and to Fussell's "Great War."
Author: Marc, Franz, 1880-1916.
Title: Briefe aus dem Feld / Franz Marc ; neu herausgegeben
von Klaus Lankheit und Uwe Steffen.
Published: Muenchen : Piper, c1982.
Description: 155 p. ; 19 cm.
Series: Serie Piper ; 233
LC Call No.: N6888.M34 A3 1982
Dewey No.: 759.3 B 19
ISBN: 3492005330 : DM12.00
Notes: Includes index.
Subjects: Marc, Franz, 1880-1916.
Artists -- Germany -- Correspondence.
Other authors: Lankheit, Klaus.
Steffen, Uwe.
Control No.: 83134156
-------
Author: Marc, Franz, 1880-1916.
Uniform Title: Briefe aus dem Feld. English
Title: Letters from the war / Franz Marc ; new edition by
Klaus Lankheit and Uwe Steffen ; translated by
Liselotte Dieckmann.
Published: New York : P. Lang, c1992.
Description: 113 p. ; 24 cm.
Series: American university studies. Series XX, Fine arts ;
vol. 16
LC Call No.: N6888.M34 A3 1992
Dewey No.: 759.3 B 20
ISBN: 082041588X (alk. paper)
Subjects: Marc, Franz, 1880-1916 -- Correspondence.
Artists -- Germany -- Correspondence.
Other authors: Lankheit, Klaus.
Steffen, Uwe.
Control No.: 91023987
******
And lastly, you may wish to take a look at the chapter "The Great
Illusion" in French-born Jaques Barzun's big marvelous history
_From Dawn to Decadence: 1500 to the Present - 500 Years of
Western Cultural Life_, New York: Perennial/HarperCollins, 2001.
The New York Times called the book "peerless." It is, weaving
social, cultural, and political happenings together in a
masterful way. As to our trolls piling abuse on anything French,
let them try to do this with Barzun, recipient of the Gold Medal for
Criticism from the American Academy of Arts and Letters :-). And oh
my, and he was also the president of the Academy - twice.
It would be nice to see the final course outline.
Good luck,
E.