And this is exactly the kind of infrastructure that is being built in the USA.
Example: German bike paths etc.: The German bike paths you speak of were not so, but simply a part of the sidewalk. Noone would think that kind of infrastructure particularly effective in getting people to bike, would they? Extremely narrow, interrupted, with poor division between cyclists and pedestrians - in effect, MUPs. (And then there are all the socio-economial realities of Germany at present...)
In the USA one of the common arguments for physically-separated infrastructure is that it is better associated with increased mode share than other infrastructure (or reforms). I have provided examples of a doubling in separated infrastructure in Holland with only a tiny increase in mode share. If its not obvious to you why I cite this and the unfortunate decline in cycling mode share in Denmark then you are clearly being intentionally obtuse.
Example: Bike infrastructure in Holland: You're dead wrong. They built tons of separated paths before 1990, and they made woonerfen, and lots of other bike friendly things. And cycling has certainly increased up till then, and it certainly has increased since then, too. I have no idea where you got your strange ideas from.
You are twisting reality, or you don't know what you're talking about. Either way, it's most annoying.