Germany's president criticized the U.S. administration at a security conference on Friday for appearing to reject “even the idea of an international community.” ...
Steinmeier, a former foreign minister, is independent of Chancellor Angela Merkel's government but the German president is viewed as a moral authority even though his role is largely ceremonial. [emphasis added]
Oh, the sainted international community exists. The problem is that it is a community spoiled by thugs and tyrants who are fine with murder and death committed by fellow thugs and tyrants.
Continental Europeans like to fancy themselves as custodians of an enlightened international community but they do not deserve that fantasy status.
As for the Germans? They sometimes claim--when asked to spend more for the defense of the free NATO part of international community--to see themselves as barely restrained Nazis who can't be trusted with modern armaments or a capable military.
So largely ceremonial President Steinmeier can--with the proper ceremonial embellishments, naturally--shove his bizarrely styled moral authority (tip to Instapundit) and get the Hell out of the way while America goes about the real work of defending the West from tyrants and thugs. You're welcome.
Maybe the continent could think about helping us with that.
UPDATE: The strange enduring German-Iranian relationship. Tell me more about that moral authority:
As non-nuclear-weapon states, Germany and Iran both share an interest in interpreting the Non-Proliferation Treaty generously. That is why Germany has always been in favor of conceding to Iran the right to enrich uranium. And that is also why, until today, the extent of the danger posed by nuclear weapons in the hands of Shiite Islamists is hardly mentioned in German public debates. To quote Peter Rudolf again: “The fact that despite intelligence reports to the contrary, the German government tends to downplay the [Iranian] nuclear issue is quite puzzling.”
What kind of perverse moral authority thinks that mullah-run Iran can have nuclear weapons?
UPDATE: But don't think French leftists get a pass on the nutball Iranian regime:
It is worth remembering that the Iranian theocracy was a great project of the secular Western Left.
The Red-Green alliance that is so apparent in the West has always mystified me. As has the failure of Western feminists to be the most outspoken supporters of the war on Islamist terrorism and ideology.
It isn't just the Sunni jihadis that the Left loves. I just don't get why Westerners--despite differences that are trivial compared to our collective differences with Islamists--don't unify against the scum that threaten all of us.
Have a super sparkly day.
UPDATE: This post is twisting down a rabbit hole. Regarding my Red-Green alliance comment (tip to Instapundit):
This dangerous mindset [that the ends justify the means] makes radicals prone to another pernicious fallacy—that their enemy’s enemy is their friend.
Initially, the September 11th attacks, which killed 2977 people, elicited in me a feeling not of horror but of excitement. After all, a devastating blow had been dealt to American hegemony. My moral compass was completely thrown off by the notion that the terrorists’ jihad was best understood as a liberation movement against Western capitalist imperialism—the chickens had come home to roost. This view was quite common among radicals.
They are screwed up, sick people.
UPDATE: Back to the original subject:
German officials confirmed Wednesday that a court has ordered the release of an Iranian man wanted by the United States, but declined to comment on reports that the move was part of a prisoner swap with Iran.
Thanks moral authorities!
