atlantiker.de

First Al Gore invented the internet. Then President Barack Obama invented hope and change. And now he proudly claimed in his address to the joint session of Congress:

I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it. None of this will come without cost, nor will it be easy.  But this is America. We don't do what's easy. 

Apparently Americans invented everything, including history. And it's only other nations that walk away, give up, quit and cry like babies when they hit an obstacle. Only other nations do things the easy way, like signing up for three or four credit cards or borrowing money from China and from future tax payers.

SuperFrenchie is glad that FOX News sets the record straight and even speaks out on behalf of the French:

The credit for internal combustion engines generally is given to German engineer, Karl Benz, who designed and built the world's first practical automobile in 1885. A steam-powered car was invented in 1769 by French inventor Nicolas Cugnot. Americans, on the other hand, are given credit for the mass production of cars.

Yes, Henry Ford and his team should get credit for empowering the middle class by making cars more affordable. Ford's invention was also about maximizing profits, I believe.

President Obama also claimed:

We invented solar technology, but we've fallen behind countries like Germany and Japan in producing it.

Marc Ambinder, however, says that credit should go to English and French scientists.

Obama invented internet campaigning and is credited as the first Internet president. Bloggers usually post corrections and admit screw-ups on their website. Obama has conceded in numerous TV interviews having "screwed up" by pushing the appointment of Tom Daschle. And I give him credit for his openness. Thus, I am wondering why the White House has not posted any correction to his address to Congress.

This is a guest post by Peter Männer, who is commenting regularly here under the pseudonym of 'Zyme' and working without it as a pupil barrister in Regensburg for the judiciary branch of Bavaria. 

Transatlantic relations as well as Franco-German relations are expected to suffer from the latest development of Siemens' engagement in Russia.

On February 2nd, Siemens declared that it was going to make use of its "Put"-option regarding its 34 % share of a joint venture with the French nuclear company Areva. This step has been made due to the fact that Paris had blocked Siemens for years from gaining influence on decision making within the 'AREVA NP joint venture'.

In Moscow on February 3rd, when Siemens CEO Peter Löscher and his board were presenting the operational results of the last quarter, they also announced an agreement with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin containing an alliance between Siemens and the Russian Atomenergoprom. The latter has been founded in 2007 as a means of consolidating the entire chain of nuclear industry in Russia, covering all aspects from uranium mining to nuclear research, production and management of nuclear power plants as well as propulsions for nuclear submarines.

The Russian Prime Minister called the agreement a "large-scale partnership, ready to work in Russia, in Germany as well as in third countries", while the coordinator of energy policy for the conservative CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the German Parliament, Joachim Pfeiffer, explained that "politics must have an interest in Siemens maintaining and expanding its competence in nuclear energy, to be able to play a significant role on the world market."
Rather negative reactions followed from France and the United States.

Claude Mandil, a former executive director of the Paris-based International Energy Agency, pronounced his regret about the loss of a "European Partnership" between Siemens and the French Areva company due to Siemen's intentions. 

Le Monde went even further in considering this agreement as just the latest of Vladimir Putin's efforts about dividing the Europeans, calling it a "Looming German-Russian Axis in nuclear affairs".

From the United States, Stephen Szabo, the executive director of the Transatlantic Academy in Washington, warned Berlin from taking the road of the traditional German Seesaw policy between Washington and Moscow. In such moves he is seeing substantial differences between Germany and the United States regarding national interests, political cultures and their respective methods, which could endanger the revivement of the relationship between both countries.

Bernhard Lucke: As a chilled peace process turned into hot war in December 2008, there was still no legitimate partner for an Israeli dialog among the Palestinians. The Hamas election victory had eliminated the last possibility for this. Thus, a three-state-solution of Israel-Egypt-Jordan should be enforced.

2500 feste Mitglieder aus der ganzenz Welt liefern täglich Beiträge, aus denen jeden Tag fünf herausragende Meinungsstücke veröffnetlicht werden.

http://www.faz.net/s/RubDDBDABB9457A437BAA85A49C26FB23A0/Doc~ECAE2291D3BE6416BB5E8B274BF165279~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html?rss_aktuell

Dorly Castaneda: European and American approaches to Colombia's troubled democracy are currently hindered by a lack of coordination. Whilst each party has different interests in the region, Obama's new multilateralism offers the perfect umbrella under which to use their different leverage powers to secure peace.

Yasser Abumuailek: If NATO applies global governance principles, it will be able to become the global leader in combating terrorism. Its military expertise and success in security provision, a sense of global legitimacy and its civilian-military approach to security promise success.

Kay-Michael Dankl: If the UNSC is to maintain its international legitimacy specific procedural features should be reformed, and the principle of equity of states should be strengthened.

Markus Drake: Europe has spent the time since it was split into "old" and "new" Europe avoiding engagement with Iraq, ignoring its large interests in the country and in the region. This, according to a new publication by the Heinrich Böll Foundation, must change. For reasons of moral obligation, if nothing else.

Dr. Stefanie Babst, NATO Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Public Diplomacy Strategy, argues that public diplomacy needs to respond to the challenges of the Web 2.0 world:

NATO should be more courageous in using digital tools to directly interact with the public. Why not host a permanent blog on the NATO website? Why not widen the debate about NATO's new Strategic Concept beyond the 'usual suspects' and try to obtain new thinking through, for instance, online discussions with citizens on specific aspects of NATO's future role? Let us hope that when Allies discuss NATO's future strategic course at the forthcoming Summit in Strasbourg and Kehl, they will also take a moment to sign up to a 21st century public diplomacy approach.

Dear readers,

Do you think NATO would benefit from engaging the blogosphere? Do you think bloggers have constructive advice for NATO's specific challenges?

Do you think NATO would manage to identify and then listen to the smart bloggers and their readers and implement the best suggestions? Here I mean citizen bloggers, not the wonks who blog.