GERMAN CHANCELLORS SURVIVOR- winner: Willy BRANDT, over Adenauer !

[Hash]

Hermann Müller

[GMantis]

Ludwig Erhard

[minionofmidas]

Tactics, always tactics... but no principles.

That'd be Ebert in a nutshell. But not Müller.

Oh whatever. Erhard.

[Hans-im-Glück]

Ludwig Erhard

Müller isn't the best, but not so bad. There gives others they must go. Kohl (see what lewis wrote), Stesemann (a big foreign minister, but no good chancellor), Scheel (he wasn't chancellor), Ebert (maybe he was the first president in the Weimar Republic, but he was a bad politician)

[Хahar 🤔]

Not Müller!

Stresemann

[big bad fab]

Anyone to break our tie between Müller and Erhard ?...

I don't want to do it myself, but I'm ready if need be.

[tmthforu94]

Müller

[big bad fab]

A very difficult round... Müller is eventually out.
I have PMed a bit, but more likely voters for Erhard than for Müller, believe me !

ROUND TWENTY IS OPEN

And I vote for Gerhard Schröder.

Maybe leftists would view him as too rightist in his reforms. But, for me, that's not a problem of course.
No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).
And I hated his pro-Putin stance and when you end paid by Putin, that's really ugly for the head of the 3rd or 4th economic power in the world...
All this to by-pass poor Poland.

Schröder out !

[Hash]

Helmut Kohl

[minionofmidas]

Kohl

[Hans-im-Glück]

Helmut Kohl

A very difficult round... Müller is eventually out.
I have PMed a bit, but more likely voters for Erhard than for Müller, believe me !

ROUND TWENTY IS OPEN

And I vote for Gerhard Schröder.

Maybe leftists would view him as too rightist in his reforms. But, for me, that's not a problem of course.
No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Iraq war e.g.).
And I hated his pro-Putin stance and when you end paid by Putin, that's really ugly for the head of the 3rd or 4th economic power in the world...
All this to by-pass poor Poland.

Schröder out !

  That's very funny. There gives many parts to criticise the politics of Schröder, but only in the pro-Putin part you are right. All the other things you said is nonsens.

1) All politicans are opportunistic
2) He made nothing against Poland and when you mean the pipeline than it's more than funny
3) That he don't make your favourite politics is one thing, but he make very difficult reforms against his own party and changes the social system more than Kohl in his time. He risk his majority for economic reforms and this you can say about no other chancellor.

Schröder don't believe the lies from Bush and was against his Iraq War. Yes he used it for his campain, but only a very stupid politician wouldn't do this. Only Republican nutheads are this opinion.

[Franzl]

Gerhard Schröder, a disgusting human being.

[Хahar 🤔]

Kohl

[big bad fab]

Helmut Kohl

A very difficult round... Müller is eventually out.
I have PMed a bit, but more likely voters for Erhard than for Müller, believe me !

ROUND TWENTY IS OPEN

And I vote for Gerhard Schröder.

Maybe leftists would view him as too rightist in his reforms. But, for me, that's not a problem of course.
No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Iraq war e.g.).
And I hated his pro-Putin stance and when you end paid by Putin, that's really ugly for the head of the 3rd or 4th economic power in the world...
All this to by-pass poor Poland.

Schröder out !

  That's very funny. There gives many parts to criticise the politics of Schröder, but only in the pro-Putin part you are right. All the other things you said is nonsens.

1) All politicans are opportunistic
2) He made nothing against Poland and when you mean the pipeline than it's more than funny
3) That he don't make your favourite politics is one thing, but he make very difficult reforms against his own party and changes the social system more than Kohl in his time. He risk his majority for economic reforms and this you can say about no other chancellor.

Schröder don't believe the lies from Bush and was against his Iraq War. Yes he used it for his campain, but only a very stupid politician wouldn't do this. Only Republican nutheads are this opinion.

1) OK but there are levels in opportunism...

2) Being pro-Putin is enough for me not to be very favorable to Poland. Some may say Poland was too pro-American at the time and so, Schröder wasn't responsible. But I think that, on the contrayr, Poland was pushed even more towards the US because of Chirac-Berlusconi-Schröder pro-Russian trio.

3) Maybe I wasn't clear, but he did the right economic policy for me: on the contrary I acknowledge that he was able to fight his own party.

Anyways, I don't like his personality.
At least, Kohl, who wasn't able to let the place soon enough, who ended too proud of himself, etc, was a real pro-European leader and relaunched the EU with Mitterrand and Delors in a way we have alreadt forgotten.
And Kohl managed well the international aspect of the reunification with Gorbachev and Shevardnadze (the internal side of the story is another thing).

Sure, I may see modern chancellors too much from an outside viewpoint.
But that's the game
and it's nice to see that there are surprises in here, with Kohl suddenly becoming the "favorite" this round, even though I will be a bit sad...

[Antonio the Sixth]

Kohl

No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).

You just seem to forget that Chirac, Villepin, Schröder were right and that Bush, Rumsfeld, H. Clinton and Blair were wrong ( or even liars for the first two ) on Iraq. You can't honestly blame someone for having been right just because you supported those who were wrong.

[Franzl]

Kohl

No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).

You just seem to forget that Chirac, Villepin, Schröder were right and that Bush, Rumsfeld, H. Clinton and Blair were wrong ( or even liars for the first two ) on Iraq. You can't honestly blame someone for having been right just because you supported those who were wrong.

Being "right" doesn't have anything to do with Schröder's opportunism.

[Hans-im-Glück]

At least, Kohl, who wasn't able to let the place soon enough, who ended too proud of himself, etc, was a real pro-European leader and relaunched the EU with Mitterrand and Delors in a way we have alreadt forgotten.
And Kohl managed well the international aspect of the reunification with Gorbachev and Shevardnadze (the internal side of the story is another thing).

European Union:
Kohl's EU politics wasn't very bad, special for the other countries. He says to everything Okay and Germany must pay it. When I'm from France I see Kohl as a better chancellor, maybe.

German Reunification:
I don't think he made something very good. The politics of him in this time was to react not to operate. Every German Politician, the best and the worst from every party, would do the same.

[Hans-im-Glück]

Kohl

No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).

You just seem to forget that Chirac, Villepin, Schröder were right and that Bush, Rumsfeld, H. Clinton and Blair were wrong ( or even liars for the first two ) on Iraq. You can't honestly blame someone for having been right just because you supported those who were wrong.

Being "right" doesn't have anything to do with Schröder's opportunism.

@Franzl
He was right in the question of the Iraq war and only this is important. That he is a opportunistic politician is a other problem, but I wrote it before, you can say it about every chancellor.

By the way, Schröder's economic politics was nearly FDP politics. You must love him

[Franzl]

Kohl

No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).

You just seem to forget that Chirac, Villepin, Schröder were right and that Bush, Rumsfeld, H. Clinton and Blair were wrong ( or even liars for the first two ) on Iraq. You can't honestly blame someone for having been right just because you supported those who were wrong.

Being "right" doesn't have anything to do with Schröder's opportunism.

@Franzl
He was right in the question of the Iraq war and only this is important. That he is a opportunistic politician is a other problem, but I wrote it before, you can say it about every chancellor.

By the way, Schröder's economic politics was nearly FDP politics. You must love him

well now FDP..?

Still, I think Schröder's reforms were necessary and I do commend him for going against his party, but I have major issues with his overall character and especially his connections to Russia.

For what it's worth, I probably would have voted SPD in 2002.

[big bad fab]

Kohl

No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).

You just seem to forget that Chirac, Villepin, Schröder were right and that Bush, Rumsfeld, H. Clinton and Blair were wrong ( or even liars for the first two ) on Iraq. You can't honestly blame someone for having been right just because you supported those who were wrong.

Be careful: I've said that Chirac, Schröder, Berlusconi were pro-Putin. I haven't refered to Iraq on this.
And on Iraq, I'm not saying that Schröder was wrong, I'm saying that he over-exploited this in his own advantage.
He was so glad to hide his own unpopular reforms -especially in his own camp- behind the Iraq war.
Without a warmonger in the WH, Schröder would probably have been beaten.

Even Chirac hasn't tried to use Iraq in 2004 elections (granted, they were local; except that the socialists made them national, so he could have used Villepin and all this foreign stuff).

Again, I agree with many things and policies Schröder led. And I'm of course convinced that the Iraq war was a big strategic mistake, based on a big lie.

I just don't like the man and his "career" afterwards...

[big bad fab]

At least, Kohl, who wasn't able to let the place soon enough, who ended too proud of himself, etc, was a real pro-European leader and relaunched the EU with Mitterrand and Delors in a way we have alreadt forgotten.
And Kohl managed well the international aspect of the reunification with Gorbachev and Shevardnadze (the internal side of the story is another thing).

European Union:
Kohl's EU politics wasn't very bad, special for the other countries. He says to everything Okay and Germany must pay it. When I'm from France I see Kohl as a better chancellor, maybe.

German Reunification:
I don't think he made something very good. The politics of him in this time was to react not to operate. Every German Politician, the best and the worst from every party, would do the same.

Everybody reacted in the West: the only actors were the Baltic and East European people, some Polish leaders (opposition and government), some Hungarian leaders and Gorbachev, Shevardnadze and even Kriuchkov by not stopping things.
When Kohl gathered with Gorbachev and Shevardnadze in North Caucasus, he was alone to gain Soviet OK for German reunification and for a quick one.

Bush Sr wouldn't have obtained it so early. He was too careful for this.
And Mitterrand tried to slow things as much as he could, which was unfair and historically stupid.
Thatcher wasn't really in it, even though her good relations with Gorbachev might have helped a bit.

Kohl was able to grasp an historic moment to make a political BlitzKrieg. That's not too bad.

About 1:1 exchange rate between Ostmark and DM, it was economically awful, but politically unavoidable. Who could have done better ?

The 6 last months of 1989 and the 3 first months of 1990 were really crazy: Poland's Mazowiecki government, East Europeans fleeing through Hungary, Hungary's communists reforming themselves, fall of the Berlin wall, fall of communists elesewhere, Romania "revolution" and coup, first end of Yugoslavia through the end of the Communist League, German reunification, first "free" elections in Russia and Soviet Union, comeback of Eltsin, first troubles in the Baltic States, death of Sakharov, nationalist troubles in the Caucasus.
Remember that nothing was sure. We now view reunification as obvious but it wasn't even in December 1989.

Come on, Kohl, Gorbachev, John Paul II, Walesa were good in this absolutely fantastic period, with not many dead (except in Romania). Bush, Baker, Thatcher were correct. Mitterrand was bad.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Kohl

No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).

You just seem to forget that Chirac, Villepin, Schröder were right and that Bush, Rumsfeld, H. Clinton and Blair were wrong ( or even liars for the first two ) on Iraq. You can't honestly blame someone for having been right just because you supported those who were wrong.

Be careful: I've said that Chirac, Schröder, Berlusconi were pro-Putin. I haven't refered to Iraq on this.
And on Iraq, I'm not saying that Schröder was wrong, I'm saying that he over-exploited this in his own advantage.
He was so glad to hide his own unpopular reforms -especially in his own camp- behind the Iraq war.
Without a warmonger in the WH, Schröder would probably have been beaten.

Even Chirac hasn't tried to use Iraq in 2004 elections (granted, they were local; except that the socialists made them national, so he could have used Villepin and all this foreign stuff).

Again, I agree with many things and policies Schröder led. And I'm of course convinced that the Iraq war was a big strategic mistake, based on a big lie.

I just don't like the man and his "career" afterwards...

So what you are doing is judging him on mere intent, saying "yes, I would have done what he did, but he did it for the bad reasons". Probably you are right and he did it for political reasons, and so what ? The only thing that counts is that he refused to follow Bush and Blair in their crusade against the Evil, and I would prefer a crook that takes the good decision in order to be elected, than an honest idealist who really thought he was going to free Iraq but in fact ruined his country and destroyed all the Middle East.

[Franzl]

but in fact ruined his country and destroyed all the Middle East.

Please explain.

[big bad fab]

Kohl

No, I hated his hugely opportunistic behaviour (Irak war e.g.).

You just seem to forget that Chirac, Villepin, Schröder were right and that Bush, Rumsfeld, H. Clinton and Blair were wrong ( or even liars for the first two ) on Iraq. You can't honestly blame someone for having been right just because you supported those who were wrong.

Be careful: I've said that Chirac, Schröder, Berlusconi were pro-Putin. I haven't refered to Iraq on this.
And on Iraq, I'm not saying that Schröder was wrong, I'm saying that he over-exploited this in his own advantage.
He was so glad to hide his own unpopular reforms -especially in his own camp- behind the Iraq war.
Without a warmonger in the WH, Schröder would probably have been beaten.

Even Chirac hasn't tried to use Iraq in 2004 elections (granted, they were local; except that the socialists made them national, so he could have used Villepin and all this foreign stuff).

Again, I agree with many things and policies Schröder led. And I'm of course convinced that the Iraq war was a big strategic mistake, based on a big lie.

I just don't like the man and his "career" afterwards...

So what you are doing is judging him on mere intent, saying "yes, I would have done what he did, but he did it for the bad reasons". Probably you are right and he did it for political reasons, and so what ? The only thing that counts is that he refused to follow Bush and Blair in their crusade against the Evil, and I would prefer a crook that takes the good decision in order to be elected, than an honest idealist who really thought he was going to free Iraq but in fact ruined his country and destroyed all the Middle East.

No, no, that's not the point.

Don't mix the decision to say "no" to Bush and the campaign. Refusing to take part in the war was a good decision based on good motives, no problem. I don't have any remark on this: I agree with you, with Schröder, with Chirac (even though the personal behaviour of Villepin was ridiculous... many French thought he was almost a hero then because he "resisted" the USA; I thought about REAL acts of resistance: those of de Gaulle, Moulin, Frenay, Aubrac, etc).

No. I'm talking about the over-exploitation of this subject during the campaign. I.e. I'm talking about the fact that, during the campaign, he tried to hide any other debate about any other question than Iraq. That's the point.

Anyway, if Schröder is able to beat Brandt in this survivor, I will be happy

[big bad fab]

but in fact ruined his country and destroyed all the Middle East.

Please explain.

Errrr.... no, please, do not explain, Antonio, as it's a German Chancellors Survivor... not a topic on the Middle East.
I agree with Franzl, who will probably tell you that the Middle East has been a mess for, well, many centuries, but at least since 1917 (Sykes-Picot) and that the evil Bush (yes, he was a bad, a very bad president) isn't the only and first cause of all this.
But you'll start again on the only question that gathered all French people in modern times... (and so not an interesting question....) and discuss on Palestine/Israël, etc, the most sterile debate in the world ever !

So, no, please, don't explain....

It's already hard for me to see Kohl go so early, please stick to the topic !