A country of our size, with its focus on exports and thus reliance on foreign trade, must be aware that military deployments are necessary in an emergency to protect our interests, for example, when it comes to trade routes, for example, when it comes to preventing regional instabilities that could negatively influence our trade, jobs and incomes.Whoops! Someone told the truth! And then he resigned!
The funny thing is, Köhler's a politician. So even when he was telling the truth, he was still lying, and doing it all for the wrong reasons:
I regret that my comments in an important and difficult question for our nation were able to lead to misunderstandings.This is hilarious on several levels. First of all, "able to lead to misunderstandings." I concede that it could just be an awkward translation from the Deutschlandish (he may actually have said that Israel needs to be wiped off the map for all I know), but really, how perfect is that little bit of politicianese?
Second of all, it's funny because most sane human beings would take a statement like "military deployments are necessary in an emergency to protect our [economic] interests" as being definitively unmisunderstandable; that is, your average every day sane human being would hear that an interpret it, correctly, as meaning "We kill people for profit every day, isn't that evil?"
But you see, that's not what Horst meant. For whatever reason, he forgot himself while making those statements. He thought he was talking to his friends; you know, the other shapeshifting reptilians from other dimensions who rule the world. These are not your average every day sane human beings. To them, the statement "military deployments are necessary in an emergency to protect our [economic] interests" means "Who should we kill today in order to maximize our profits?" This is the spirit in which Köhler intended his remarks to be not able to have been regrettably misunderstood. Imagine his surprise when he remembered the species that made up the majority of his audience!
Here's my favorite part of the NYT article:
He complained that some critics had suggested he supported military “missions that are not covered by the Constitution.”Now let me get this straight. The mere suggestion that he might have suggested breaking the Constitution is "lacking in the necessary respect" for the office of the President of Germany?!?! Well, sieg heil, I mean really.
“This criticism lacks any basis,” he said. “It also is lacking in the necessary respect for the presidential office.”
Some added funny is that while I am no expert in the intricacies of the German political system, it is my understanding that the President is pretty much a ceremonial figurehead. So I'm like, exactly how much respect is necessary, when we really get down to it? (Answer: None now, he's not the President any more!)