Quote of the Day: Is Europe Finished?

 

Let’s cut through the diplo-speak: If Mr. Biden and the Europeans don’t get Ukraine right, Europe’s future is finished.

Putin is Hitler. He is attempting the extermination of a people and the obliteration of their cities. World War II wasn’t fought in Europe to prevent a future nuclear exchange between Russia and the U.S. It was fought because Europe was experiencing the indiscriminate murder of civilians under Nazi military doctrine, now revived by Mr. Putin and the Russian general staff.— Daniel Henninger

In an ambitious flurry of activity, Europe is speaking out and taking action against Vladimir Putin, canceling some of their commitments to him and stepping in to help Ukraine. Most of the Ukrainian refugees are landing in Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia. The EU has established an emergency protection system, offering jobs, shelter, and medical treatment. They have also worked at streamlining their entry procedures. The invasion of Putin has been criticized harshly, and Europe has stepped up.

But how long will they enthusiastically deal with this new reality?

At this writing, 4 million people have fled Ukraine; another 6.5 million people are displaced. It’s impossible to know how long the conflict will drag on, or whether the EU countries will be able to support millions of refugees, or how many of the Ukrainians will stay. Will they be able to find work? Will they be able to adjust if they choose to stay? Will they be welcomed by the various countries?

And will the U.S. make a sincere and reasonable effort to supply arms and compassionate support, and for how long?

And yet . . . and yet . . .

Does Europe really have a choice? Over time will they try to ignore the threats that Putin poses to the European continent?

Will they realize that helping Ukraine and Ukrainians and standing up to Putin could determine the very future of Europe?

Published in Foreign Policy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 223 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    But there was something different about Hitler’s genocide because it was concentrated on one religion/ethnicity that was always persecuted throughout history no matter what country they lived in.

    The Rom?

    • #211
  2. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    But there was something different about Hitler’s genocide because it was concentrated on one religion/ethnicity that was always persecuted throughout history no matter what country they lived in.

    Well, 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis, but another 6 million were also killed–gypsies, gays, professors, doctors, and other innocent people.

    Yes they did branch out quite a bit!

    • #212
  3. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    I think for me, the difference lies in the motivation. Hitler wanted to create a Master Race. It was the stuff of nightmarish myth. Putin just wants territory and he doesn’t care who gets in his way, its all the same to him. The results, of course, are similar. A lot of dead people.

    • #213
  4. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    I think for me, the difference lies in the motivation. Hitler wanted to create a Master Race. It was the stuff of nightmarish myth. Putin just wants territory and he doesn’t care who gets in his way, its all the same to him. The results, of course, are similar. A lot of dead people.

    You make a good point.  But I think that the motivations of both Putin and Hitler is/was expansion, politically, territorially, and in national grandeur.  And the things they wanted were wrapped in a desirable mythology that identified the people as just heirs to a mythologized history (the Third Reich, the Third Rome) and a future destiny of greatness.

    • #214
  5. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Flicker (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    I think for me, the difference lies in the motivation. Hitler wanted to create a Master Race. It was the stuff of nightmarish myth. Putin just wants territory and he doesn’t care who gets in his way, its all the same to him. The results, of course, are similar. A lot of dead people.

    You make a good point. But I think that the motivations of both Putin and Hitler is/was expansion, politically, territorially, and in national grandeur. And the things they wanted were wrapped in a desirable mythology that identified the people as just heirs to a mythologized history (the Third Reich, the Third Rome) and a future destiny of greatness.

    Yes, both wanted territory, both were totalitarian dictators, etc. There are commonalities for sure. But to me, the attempt to actually create a Master Race, right in front of the world, really sets Hitler apart in the panoply of despots.

    In my 20s, I knew a man named Rick. He had pale blond hair brushed back, ice blue eyes, an aquiline nose.  He was  born in Germany. He told me he’d never known his parents because he was born into Hitler’s (Himmler actually) Lebensborn program. They mated Aryan women with SS officers to produce Aryan children. The women had to pass a racial purity test and their families were traced back several generations. After the war, a retired German general brought him to America and adopted him. An interesting guy. And the whole thing makes my arm hairs stand on end. I mean mating humans like show dogs.

    • #215
  6. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    And Europeans cover health insurance of their entire population. I certainly don’t advocate a socialist healthcare system, but our system does leave a good percentage without it.

    Ask any hospital or healthcare worker and they will tell you that absolutely nobody is denied healthcare services in this country, and the ones who can’t afford it don’t even have to pay for it, not even through taxes. I’ve known people in those circumstances. You can’t say that about European countries where the poor people pay similar tax rates as the rich people. Others criticize the U.S. for not having universal healthcare without knowing the actual circumstances.

    Yes, hospital emergency service, but walk into a doctor’s office and tell them you have no insurance and see what you get. See if you get follow ups and physical therapy and other outpatient services. There is most decidedly a difference between those that have insurance and those that don’t.

    I still think you are not quite aware of how much the poor get. A friend of mine developed brain cancer. He and his wife had lost everything previous to this, lost his job, kicked out of their house, and living off of friends and welfare. Since they had no means of payment whatsoever, the hospital put him in some sort of assistance program for indigents (I’m not sure if governmental or private). He stayed in the hospital for nearly two months, received experimental treatments and had surgery, and eventually slipped away into the next world while his wife and I sat with him in the hospital room. His wife was never charged for his treatment which had to have run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    I said I’m not disputing emergency services. But nonetheless regular medical is still pretty important. And expensive to an individual. Otherwise why am I bothering with carrying health insurance?  You mean I can get everything I need without it?  

    • #216
  7. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    On a more general note, one reason for the shrinking in family size across Europe generally is that the Climate Change crew have convinced parents that large families will destroy the planet. Having a large family is treated as environmental terrorism. I suspect there is an element of this in the USA also

    This idea of it being bad to bring children into the world goes back at least 50 years in the United States. The first time I heard of it was when watching the television series “All in the Family” in the 1960’s. In one episode, Archie Bunker was angry because his daughter and son-in-law didn’t want to have children. Their stated reason was that it would be a bad thing to bring children into such a “terrible” world, with crime, injustice, environmental degradation and such.

     

    I remember that episode myself!  That’s probably the first time I heard it too. But All in the Family was in the 70s, not the 60s. 

    • #217
  8. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    But there was something different about Hitler’s genocide because it was concentrated on one religion/ethnicity that was always persecuted throughout history no matter what country they lived in.

    Well, 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis, but another 6 million were also killed–gypsies, gays, professors, doctors, and other innocent people.

    Come on, you make the Nazis sound like radical muslims or something!

    They were sympathetic with each other. They learned from each other. Evil draws from the same source. 

    • #218
  9. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    But there was something different about Hitler’s genocide because it was concentrated on one religion/ethnicity that was always persecuted throughout history no matter what country they lived in.

    Well, 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis, but another 6 million were also killed–gypsies, gays, professors, doctors, and other innocent people.

    Well if we make a distinction between the killing of a group for its genetic identity versus the killing of people for their political ends I can see RightAngle’s point. Though I think Gypsies would probably be considered a genetic identity as well. 

    • #219
  10. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Manny (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    And Europeans cover health insurance of their entire population. I certainly don’t advocate a socialist healthcare system, but our system does leave a good percentage without it.

    Ask any hospital or healthcare worker and they will tell you that absolutely nobody is denied healthcare services in this country, and the ones who can’t afford it don’t even have to pay for it, not even through taxes. I’ve known people in those circumstances. You can’t say that about European countries where the poor people pay similar tax rates as the rich people. Others criticize the U.S. for not having universal healthcare without knowing the actual circumstances.

    Yes, hospital emergency service, but walk into a doctor’s office and tell them you have no insurance and see what you get. See if you get follow ups and physical therapy and other outpatient services. There is most decidedly a difference between those that have insurance and those that don’t.

    I still think you are not quite aware of how much the poor get. A friend of mine developed brain cancer. He and his wife had lost everything previous to this, lost his job, kicked out of their house, and living off of friends and welfare. Since they had no means of payment whatsoever, the hospital put him in some sort of assistance program for indigents (I’m not sure if governmental or private). He stayed in the hospital for nearly two months, received experimental treatments and had surgery, and eventually slipped away into the next world while his wife and I sat with him in the hospital room. His wife was never charged for his treatment which had to have run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    I said I’m not disputing emergency services. But nonetheless regular medical is still pretty important. And expensive to an individual. Otherwise why am I bothering with carrying health insurance? You mean I can get everything I need without it?

    Yeah, you pretty much can.  They can still hound you for money if you’ve got any, however.

    • #220
  11. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Funnily enough, I know several Catholic families of 10 or more children, and they seem to manage.

    Our Rabbi has nine children, but he and his wife are mere pikers. The Rabbi living two doors away from him has 13. The Rabbi living across the street from him, a dynastic leader, has 16 children. They take this “be fruitful and multiply” thing seriously.

    I’m glad SOMEONE does.

    There is a virtual population explosion among Orthodox Religious Jews, both in Israel and in America (and I suppose everywhere else). And they vote greater than 85% Republican!

    Baptist.

    Only 7 kids.

    We’re a couple of amateurs.

    Seven kids!  You should be Catholic. Or Orthodox Jew. ;)

    • #221
  12. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Manny (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    But there was something different about Hitler’s genocide because it was concentrated on one religion/ethnicity that was always persecuted throughout history no matter what country they lived in.

    Well, 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis, but another 6 million were also killed–gypsies, gays, professors, doctors, and other innocent people.

    Well if we make a distinction between the killing of a group for its genetic identity versus the killing of people for their political ends I can see RightAngle’s point. Though I think Gypsies would probably be considered a genetic identity as well.

    They were to Hitler. He considered them to be subhuman. Which is funny since they’re Aryans.

    • #222
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    But there was something different about Hitler’s genocide because it was concentrated on one religion/ethnicity that was always persecuted throughout history no matter what country they lived in.

    Well, 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis, but another 6 million were also killed–gypsies, gays, professors, doctors, and other innocent people.

    Well if we make a distinction between the killing of a group for its genetic identity versus the killing of people for their political ends I can see RightAngle’s point. Though I think Gypsies would probably be considered a genetic identity as well.

    They were to Hitler. He considered them to be subhuman. Which is funny since they’re Aryans.

    But not the RIGHT Aryans!  You know, like that whole shiite and sunni muslims kililng each other…

    • #223
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.