Yup. I’m all in favor of militant pacifism (and taxing the rich). It’s crucial for maintaining peace in today’s world. Look dangerous, be dangerous, but only use this power to defend yourself and others from aggression.

There’s a reason I contrasted the West-German with the East-German situation. One was clearly an occupation, the other was a lot more nuanced. Perhaps I should have elaborated on just how independent the West-German government was in its decision making even before 1955. This kind of behavior simply isn’t possible under anything that can be described as an occupation.

I didn’t say figuring out, I said figuring. Presented with two choices, close everything down or pay rent, they chose the latter.

Alright, fair enough.

Germany is very different in this regard. They haven’t been perceived as occupiers in ages and rightfully so. Until Trump began destroying the close relationship with Germany, US soldiers on German soil weren’t seen as much of an issue. It’s not like they were omnipresent after the end of the Cold War, outside of close to where they are stationed. You’d occasionally spot a handful e.g. on the train (although these days, you’re more likely to come across Mormon missionaries, at least it feels that way) and it’s not like anyone has an issue with their easygoing nature. British soldiers had nowhere near as good of a reputation, by the way. It had nothing to with the British government, but rather with the behavior (often drunken excesses) of poorly disciplined conscripts stationed here and the (to Germans) shockingly rough discipline imposed on them by their officers and MPs.

That’s not to say that US soldiers being stationed here wasn’t controversial at times. When Bush Junior started his illegal war against Iraq (an immensely unpopular thing in Germany - I was one of millions protesting against it), the fact that Germany was a major logistics hub in the war despite not officially participating (it only secretly did) was being heavily criticized. Earlier during the Cold War, when Reagan had his “Star Wars” moment, it led to a surge in anti-American sentiment, since Germany would have become an irradiated battleground between the two superpowers in case of a hot war, so anyone heating it up wasn’t exactly looked at fondly. By the time Bush Senior was in office, the whole thing had cooled down again though and shortly afterwards, the whole thing was over anyway.

This is incorrect. Occupation ended in West-Germany in 1955, when the Federal Republic of Germany joined NATO - and it had already been gradually reduced from 1949, when more and more powers were transferred to the German government. Sovereignty was officially granted to the young democracy that year in both foreign and domestic matters, but there were a number of exceptions: The right to station troops (as part of NATO) and to deploy them in Germany in case there was an invasion from the East, even without explicit consent from the West-German government, as well as the right to restore order in case of national unrest, in case it endangered the stationed troops (but this came with the caveat that the German parliament could override this).

This doesn’t mean that America (as well as other Western allies like Britain and France) didn’t exert a great amount of influence on the young republic, but even under Adenauer already, it was able to forge its own foreign and domestic path and did so often against the wishes of what the West wanted, exhibited sovereignty far more quickly than many (more so in France and Britain than the US, for obvious reasons) were comfortable with this shortly after the end of WW2.

The situation was fundamentally different in East Germany, which remained under strict control of the Soviet Union. This ranged from the relationship between occupying soldiers with civilians to the way even major internal decision making within the ruling party had to get signed off by Moscow. Russian soldiers stationed in Germany were not just there to possibly attack NATO (it was never a defensive force - their doctrine was all about offensive, contrary to NATO), but also to maintain Communist rule in case of a revolution (see e.g. the 1953 workers’ uprising in East Germany, the Hungarian revolution, the Prague Spring, etc.). There’s a reason the reunited Germany went to great lengths to get rid of these troops as quickly as it could, even paying Russia handsomely to bring them home. When Russian barracks were inspected after the soldiers had left, they were found to having been in an absolutely desolate state.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US didn’t just flippantly “figured something out”, but instead dramatically downsized its deployment, but kept it active as both a logistics center (same as Britain, which by now have left the country) and as a deterrent against Russia, which despite a thawing of relations with the West still had nukes and conventional troops pointed West. While “Ami go home” was a popular sentiment particularly among the Left and especially when tensions heated up again in the early '80s due to Reagan heating up the arms race with the Soviet Union again (which would ultimately be a major contributor to its downfall, as the mismanaged economy had no chance of keeping up with the West), most people understood that American soldiers on German soil were there to protect them against the Soviets and later Russia, not an occupying force anymore.

Before Trump, it was pretty obviously meant to protect against Russia as well as part of Germany’s integration into NATO - and the majority of Germans were more than fine with it.

You can block these with one of uBlock Origin’s filter lists.

Yup. Clothes in particular have infested previously safe secondhand stores and sites, where you used to get cently used quality items in the past. It’s a minefield and people just don’t realize how dangerous these items are.

Not the first time he’s done this. He’s not a smart man.