fter Secretary of State Rice??????s visit here but prior to the President??????s arrival, this writer wrote in an article titled "Fence Mending" that not too much should be expected from these trips. Now, after the dual event, if the surface is peeled off the product, the emerging substance confirms the essentials of the cautionary note. All things considered, arguably Ms. Rice??????s trip, given the rules by which diplomacy is played, constituted a political necessity. It was to prove US flexibility regardless of Iraq and the recent past. That was useful even if it was unlikely that the transatlantic spat has gone bye-bye. The attempt to discuss issues face-to-face on a lit stage could be expected to marginally pacify the domestic Euro-fan community. Additionally, it could have invalidated some of the European leftist-multicultural appeasers?????? grumble about needing to confront the crazed superhawks perched atop Washington. Moreover, there was a chance to be taken, to dispel through direct contact any misunderstandings. After all, some genuine misperceptions might have been floating around in the background of the quarrel that came into the foreground wrapped in the Iraq matter. Iraq being only one component in which all other remaining, growing disagreements crystallized, preventive action on the remaining items on the agenda could be seen as having some urgency. At the same time, an excess of eagerness and high hopes for blue skies over the common horizon were to be avoided. The weakness of the idea justifying the tour and speaking for lowered expectations is in the word, ??????misunderstanding.?????? The significant -- though in the course of the visits soft-peddled -- policy differences regarding Iraq were in no way a ??????misunderstanding.?????? A misunderstanding is when a situation is misjudged because it is not decoded properly. The drift apart of America and most of Europe is not propelled by ??????getting it wrong?????? but by prejudices. The difference is significant. A misunderstanding can be resolved if the positions are restated and this is done clearly. A prejudice is impervious to arguments, clarification and facts. An expository dialogue that dispels dogmatically held prejudices is necessarily an effort in the service of a lost cause. Let the case be made by a few quotes from the Letters to the Editor lifted from the February 21st issue of the German weekly Der Spiegel. The writers quoted reacted to the feature article, ??????The Nut With the Bomb,?????? about baby Kim??????s nukes. ??????A supposed nut ??????who possibly disposes over a few bombs gives me less to worry about than one that endangers world peace with more than 10 000...?????? Rest assured -- not Chinese or Russian nuclear inventories were meant by Mr. Gr????tzkau.His concerns are shared by Ms. Winterstetter with this: ??????Funny, when I think of a nut with a bomb then somehow it is not Kim ...that comes to my mind."

fter Secretary of State Rice??????s visit here but prior to the President??????s arrival, this writer wrote in an article titled "Fence Mending" that not too much should be expected from these trips. Now, after the dual event, if the surface is peeled off the product, the emerging substance confirms the essentials of the cautionary note. All things considered, arguably Ms. Rice??????s trip, given the rules by which diplomacy is played, constituted a political necessity. It was to prove US flexibility regardless of Iraq and the recent past. That was useful even if it was unlikely that the transatlantic spat has gone bye-bye. The attempt to discuss issues face-to-face on a lit stage could be expected to marginally pacify the domestic Euro-fan community. Additionally, it could have invalidated some of the European leftist-multicultural appeasers?????? grumble about needing to confront the crazed superhawks perched atop Washington. Moreover, there was a chance to be taken, to dispel through direct contact any misunderstandings. After all, some genuine misperceptions might have been floating around in the background of the quarrel that came into the foreground wrapped in the Iraq matter. Iraq being only one component in which all other remaining, growing disagreements crystallized, preventive action on the remaining items on the agenda could be seen as having some urgency. At the same time, an excess of eagerness and high hopes for blue skies over the common horizon were to be avoided. The weakness of the idea justifying the tour and speaking for lowered expectations is in the word, ??????misunderstanding.?????? The significant -- though in the course of the visits soft-peddled -- policy differences regarding Iraq were in no way a ??????misunderstanding.?????? A misunderstanding is when a situation is misjudged because it is not decoded properly. The drift apart of America and most of Europe is not propelled by ??????getting it wrong?????? but by prejudices. The difference is significant. A misunderstanding can be resolved if the positions are restated and this is done clearly. A prejudice is impervious to arguments, clarification and facts. An expository dialogue that dispels dogmatically held prejudices is necessarily an effort in the service of a lost cause. Let the case be made by a few quotes from the Letters to the Editor lifted from the February 21st issue of the German weekly Der Spiegel. The writers quoted reacted to the feature article, ??????The Nut With the Bomb,?????? about baby Kim??????s nukes. ??????A supposed nut ??????who possibly disposes over a few bombs gives me less to worry about than one that endangers world peace with more than 10 000...?????? Rest assured -- not Chinese or Russian nuclear inventories were meant by Mr. Gr????tzkau.His concerns are shared by Ms. Winterstetter with this: ??????Funny, when I think of a nut with a bomb then somehow it is not Kim ...that comes to my mind."

Iran should not arouse concern. Georgia is a flashpoint in Russia's tense relations with the West. The Bible says: "At the appointed time [the king of the north = Russia] will return and come into the south, but it will not be as the former [1921] or as the latter [2008]. For shall come against him the dwellers of coastlands of Kittim [the West], and he will be humbled, and will return." (Daniel 11:29,30a) What logical conclusions can be drawn from this forecast? Much suggests that the present economic crisis will deepen, making it possible for Russia to regain the influence, which it lost after the break-up of the Soviet Union. In relationship to this, unavoidable will be the split or even a complete break-up of the European Union and NATO. After that, Russia will come somewhere into the south. Many indicate that this might be Georgia. When this happens, the West will come against Russia. Then Iran will be humbled also. "But ships will come from the direction of Kittim, troubling Asshur [Russia] and troubling Eber [inhabiting on the other side the Euphrates]." (Numbers 24:24a, BBE) At that time, peace will be taken from the earth and the "great sword" - nuclear sword - will be used. (Revelation 6:4) However, it will be neither the great tribulation nor "the end of the world" (Armageddon). As Jesus foretold, that will be "the beginning of birth pains". (Mathew 24:7,8)

When President Obama stood last week with the leaders of Britain and France to denounce Iran??????s construction of a secret nuclear plant, the Western powers all appeared to be on the same page. Behind their show of unity about Iran??????s clandestine efforts to manufacture nuclear fuel, however, is a continuing debate among American, European and Israeli spies about a separate component of Iran??????s nuclear program: its clandestine efforts to design a nuclear warhead. The Israelis, who have delivered veiled threats of a military strike, say they believe that Iran has restarted these ??????weaponization?????? efforts, which would mark a final step in building a nuclear weapon. The Germans say they believe that the weapons work was never halted. The French have strongly suggested that independent international inspectors have more information about the weapons work than they have made public India should join Israel and Europe with USA to condemn Iran

When President Obama stood last week with the leaders of Britain and France to denounce Iran??????s construction of a secret nuclear plant, the Western powers all appeared to be on the same page. Behind their show of unity about Iran??????s clandestine efforts to manufacture nuclear fuel, however, is a continuing debate among American, European and Israeli spies about a separate component of Iran??????s nuclear program: its clandestine efforts to design a nuclear warhead. The Israelis, who have delivered veiled threats of a military strike, say they believe that Iran has restarted these ??????weaponization?????? efforts, which would mark a final step in building a nuclear weapon. The Germans say they believe that the weapons work was never halted. The French have strongly suggested that independent international inspectors have more information about the weapons work than they have made public India should join Israel and Europe with USA to condemn Iran