From: poser@vxcrna.cern.ch (Till Poser  -  ZEUS OFFLINE)
Subject: Re: Comparison of voting systems (was: Rule Britannia)
Reply-To: poser@vxdsyc.desy.de
Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 20:36:09 GMT

In article <1e1a61INN6b@fido.asd.sgi.com>, livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com 
(Jon Livesey) writes in soc.culture.british:
|>I don't think that PR is directly responsible for the German Army
|>playing footsy with the neo-Nazis, any more than I accept that PR
|>is directly responsible for German prosperity.   It's just that if
|>pople advance one tenuous argument, they can't complain too much
|>about other tenuous arguments.

Jon, please! 

"The German Army" itself was _not_ playing footsy with the neo-Nazis,
there were incidences of soldiers, some in groups, and some cadet-officers,
who took part in neo-Nazi activity. Most of these guys are now out of the 
army and are now charged in criminal court for their crimes _and_ dereliction 
of duty _and_ violation of their oaths.

What did happen, however, was that that though the new Inspector General
issued a warning to all COs last fall about the possibility, or if You 
will, increased likelyhood of neo-Nazi activity amongst the ranks, these
warnings were not heeded and some guys went on a rampage. There is nothing
at all that indicates official sanctioning, just a surfeit of turning blind
eyes to the situation the ignoring signs of neo-Nazi activism amongst
the troups, which is quite sufficient to have me foam at the mouth.

Just where did _You_ get Your version of the story?

|>On the other hand, I have a concrete worry here.   If it turned 
|>out that the British Army was training the IRA, we'd know exactly
|>whom to blame.   Do we know *exactly* whom to blame in Germany?
|>Was this Kohl's idea, or was it some minorty minister - anyone
|>remember the scary Franz Joseph Strauss? - or was it someone inside
|>the Army taking advantage of the fact that lines of responsibility
|>in a coalition are just a little tenuous?

The responsibility is _very_ clear here, I just don't get Your point at 
all. Primarily the COs, who have disciplinary powers over their soldiers,
derelicted on their duties, and as far as I can make it out, there is
going to be a medium sized bloodbath, a lot of decapitated captains and
a disciplinary shaekup on account of it. The whole thing is primarily a
discipline problem.

The Armed Forces ombudsman, a member of the parliament, is partially 
responsible for not forwarding soldier's complaints about such activities 
fast enough through the appropriate channels, though he has the power to 
make things fly. His record is otherwise very good.

The final responsibility lies with the commander-in-chief, and that, in 
peace time, is the Minister of Defense, Your old friend Volker Ruehe.

This has _nothing_ at all to do with the parliamentary setup. I think You
are blowing this thing, bad as it is, totally out of proportion. You are
ignoring that this are line-of-command-issues known to almost all armies, 
and that the things that happened were in direct conflict with German
criminal law and the Soldatengesetz, specifically the Articles 7 and 8,
which command his loyality to the constitution.

|>That's why I am pointing out what I think are weak points. 

Again, this has nothing to do with the parliamentary system. So You are
barking up the wrong tree.

|>jon. 

       Till Poser         Internet: poser@vxdsyc.desy.de
-F35- ZEUS DESY/Freiburg  Bitnet:   POSER@DESYVAX
bldg.1b-235, Notkestr.85  Hepnet:   VXDESY::POSER (13313::Poser)
   D-2000 Hamburg 52      Tel.: -49-40-8998-2004
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british