NationStates Jolt Archive

Now that it looks like Tony Blair is about to do a U-turn and allow a referendum on the new EU constitution I was wondering what other people thought about it.

Papers like the Mail etc will lie to the electorate (as it has with MMR) and present a very biased anti-EU view on this.

Papers like the Mail etc will lie to the electorate (as it has with MMR) and present a very biased anti-EU view on this.
Good!

Now that it looks like Tony Blair is about to do a U-turn and allow a referendum on the new EU constitution I was wondering what other people thought about it.
HAWAWOOYA!
Perhaps Tony Bliar looked at Spain and realised what happens to politicians who ignore the citizens' desire to have a say in major decisions affecting their country.

The EU is destroying the rights of Europeans... they need to revolt before it's too late!

The EU is destroying the rights of Europeans... they need to revolt before it's too late!


Good God, a giant European Superstate - and it's coming right for us!!!! (high pitched scream).

I think that increased integration and co-operation between European nations can only be a good thing, not just in economic terms. (Can't be bothered to say more than that at the moment because I'm too tired and lazy at the moment).

I think that increased integration and co-operation between European nations can only be a good thing

why? Is the power of the EU infallable? Do you really think it is good that an organization that is removed from the people should have power over them? I think the European nations can take care of themselves without a SuperState micro-manageing them...

The EU is destroying the rights of Europeans... they need to revolt before it's too late!


Good God, a giant European Superstate - and it's coming right for us!!!! (high pitched scream).

I think that increased integration and co-operation between European nations can only be a good thing, not just in economic terms. (Can't be bothered to say more than that at the moment because I'm too tired and lazy at the moment).
Uh-huh. More regulations on the appropriate height of playground swings, the minimum curvature of bananas and the chunkiness of pasta sauce is just what Europe needs. All bow to the colourless gnomes of Brussels!

I think that increased integration and co-operation between European nations can only be a good thing, not just in economic terms. (Can't be bothered to say more than that at the moment because I'm too tired and lazy at the moment).

well, you know what they say: nothing improves efficency like oppressive regulations dictated down by an unquestionable authority!

The EU is destroying the rights of Europeans... they need to revolt before it's too late!


Good God, a giant European Superstate - and it's coming right for us!!!! (high pitched scream).

I think that increased integration and co-operation between European nations can only be a good thing, not just in economic terms. (Can't be bothered to say more than that at the moment because I'm too tired and lazy at the moment).
Uh-huh. More regulations on the appropriate height of playground swings, the minimum curvature of bananas and the chunkiness of pasta sauce is just what Europe needs. All bow to the colourless gnomes of Brussels!

It's better than that "my banana ain't curved so I'll sue" system a certain country makes do with...

The EU is destroying the rights of Europeans... they need to revolt before it's too late!


Good God, a giant European Superstate - and it's coming right for us!!!! (high pitched scream).

I think that increased integration and co-operation between European nations can only be a good thing, not just in economic terms. (Can't be bothered to say more than that at the moment because I'm too tired and lazy at the moment).


I agree in some ways, more co-operation insome ways would be good for Europe as it would decrease the chances of another Hitler in power, Europe also needs more Economic co-operation to spread economic prosperity all over Europe, Political and Economic co-operation would be a great thing for Europe, I just don't think a European State is needed for that.

Don't listen to the Daily Mail!

I fear that people will vote 'No' just because they don't like the EU, and not because of the Constitution.

I haven't seen any of the final draft so can't say how I would vote at the moment, but to be honest I am against a political union but all for an economic union.

Britain has never had a written Constitution, though I wouldn't mind the country having one, I would rather it was written by Brits and not French or Germans.

I've always believed that the EU was the future. Europe has been it's fractured landscape for millenia..yet it is almost strange to me that I can be partying in Rota, Spain, take the train into France, cross over into Germany and head south into Austria in probably less time then it takes for me to go from New Jersey to Tennessee.

I can appreciate and understand each nation wishing to keep their national identities..what would be Spain without the running of the bulls, the Canals of Venice..France and it's out-there artists....yet...I believe that if Europe is ever going to truly challenge the US on anything, a united Europe free of nationalistic tendencies is the way to go...the economic power, the military resources (Heckler and Koch, Krupp armaments are in my opinion the finest in the world bar none)

this:


I fear that people will vote 'No' just because they don't like the EU, and not because of the Constitution.

seems to contradict this:


Britain has never had a written Constitution, though I wouldn't mind the country having one, I would rather it was written by Brits and not French or Germans.

once the European nations give up their freedoms to the EU that's it for them; the'll be locked under the authority of power-mad world bankers until they violently revolt...

Europeans have two options: Stop the EU dead in its tracks, allow the EU to seal its power and become a slave to it...

I agree in some ways, more co-operation insome ways would be good for Europe as it would decrease the chances of another Hitler in power

You think that consolidating the power of several nations under the control of a vary small regeime will decrease the chances of someone abusing power? Your logic astounds me!

Tex, do you think that the 13 colonies should have remained automonous? How exactly is the EU eroding rights? (I have a few examples but I want to hear yours).

As a brit, I'm all for the idea of European intergration. Economic definatley, and political to a lesser extent. However a major reason why I dislike the EU is due to the fact that it is a "bureacracy choked morass" and it keeps on passing stupid resolutions.

I agree in some ways, more co-operation insome ways would be good for Europe as it would decrease the chances of another Hitler in power

You think that consolidating the power of several nations under the control of a vary small regeime will decrease the chances of someone abusing power? Your logic astounds me!

Very small regime?

I agree in some ways, more co-operation insome ways would be good for Europe as it would decrease the chances of another Hitler in power

You think that consolidating the power of several nations under the control of a vary small regeime will decrease the chances of someone abusing power? Your logic astounds me!

Very small regime?

Yes, the Gnomes of Zurich.
:oops:
Sorry, I meant Brussels. The Gnomes of Brussels.

I agree in some ways, more co-operation insome ways would be good for Europe as it would decrease the chances of another Hitler in power

You think that consolidating the power of several nations under the control of a vary small regeime will decrease the chances of someone abusing power? Your logic astounds me!

Very small regime?

Yes, the Gnomes of Zurich.
:oops:
Sorry, I meant Brussels. The Gnomes of Brussels.

Brussels is a regime?

Brussels is a regime?

Bavarian Remains of the Union of Socialist Soviets of the Elevated Luxembourg School.

I wouldn't mind the EU without the UK.
The EU is the way forward. I can go and work anywhere, spend my money where I want. But I don't want countries half in half out, benefiting from it but not contributing. I don't want the UK to manipulate its interest rates ad its advantage and take everything they can.
I also have the feeling that the UK people have a culture that put their country first. I think they believe their national interest is above the global interest. It doesn't fit in the EU.

Brussels is a regime?

Bavarian Remains of the Union of Socialist Soviets of the Elevated Luxembourg School.

It's masonic, right?

Tex, do you think that the 13 colonies should have remained automonous?

They should have retained their right to withdraw from the union!

How exactly is the EU eroding rights? (I have a few examples but I want to hear yours).

It dissolves national sovereignty... nations are forced to submit to EU rules even if their own governments do not want them!

As a brit, I'm all for the idea of European intergration. Economic definatley, and political to a lesser extent.

Why do you find your current government so inefficent that you want to change it? Why do you think that making the government bigger and further removed from you will also make it more efficent?

However a major reason why I dislike the EU is due to the fact that it is a "bureacracy choked morass" and it keeps on passing stupid resolutions.

Until there is a terrorist attack and the EU Anti-Terrorism Czar declairs Martial Law and never bothers to reverse the order...



*I'd like to not that this is my 1776th post... the American Declaration of Independence was signed in the year 1776, and it can be read here: http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolution/decindep2.htm

I'm with Texas on this.. EU consolidation is straight outta the Communist gameplan.. Europeans' say is going to weaken as their governments give up sovereignty, not strengthen. But the again, they're asking for it, so it's thier choice.

I'm with Texas on this.. EU consolidation is straight outta the Communist gameplan.. Europeans' say is going to weaken as their governments give up sovereignty, not strengthen. But the again, they're asking for it, so it's thier choice.

How is it communist?

I'm with Texas on this.. EU consolidation is straight outta the Communist gameplan.. Europeans' say is going to weaken as their governments give up sovereignty, not strengthen. But the again, they're asking for it, so it's thier choice.

How exactly is joining nations together to form a trading block straight out of the Communist gameplan? :roll: Has this sort of ridiculous claim had anyone convinced since the 50s?

How is it communist?

Because the power of the government is increasing while the people's say is decreasing...

I'm with Texas on this.. EU consolidation is straight outta the Communist gameplan.. Europeans' say is going to weaken as their governments give up sovereignty, not strengthen. But the again, they're asking for it, so it's thier choice.

How is it communist?

Dissolution of borders/nations, single-party rule, consolidation of economic resources.. eventually the end of property rights.. not to mention the already-present socialist agenda of the majority of Europe.. It's straight ticket to hell in a handbasket. I'm just glad I don't live there. :wink:

How is it communist?

Because the power of the government is increasing while the people's say is decreasing...

How so?

I'm with Texas on this.. EU consolidation is straight outta the Communist gameplan.. Europeans' say is going to weaken as their governments give up sovereignty, not strengthen. But the again, they're asking for it, so it's thier choice.

How is it communist?

Dissolution of borders/nations, single-party rule, consolidation of economic resources.. eventually the end of property rights.. not to mention the already-present socialist agenda of the majority of Europe.. It's straight ticket to hell in a handbasket. I'm just glad I don't live there. :wink:

Single party rule? Maybe you should look it up.
The end of property rights? Can you supply any logic which backs your claim up?

Dissolution of borders/nations, single-party rule, consolidation of economic resources.. eventually the end of property rights.. not to mention the already-present socialist agenda of the majority of Europe.. It's straight ticket to hell in a handbasket. I'm just glad I don't live there. :wink:

http://www.stoptheftaa.org/

The globalists have their eyes set on America too!

Dissolution of borders/nations, single-party rule, consolidation of economic resources.. eventually the end of property rights.. not to mention the already-present socialist agenda of the majority of Europe.. It's straight ticket to hell in a handbasket. I'm just glad I don't live there. :wink:

http://www.stoptheftaa.org/

The globalists have their eyes set on America too!The EU is not the US. This site is about the US.
Secondly, about handling over individual power, since when the UK government listen to the people?
Thirdly, the UK is one of the most socialist country in Europe.

The EU is destroying the rights of Europeans... they need to revolt before it's too late!

Aren't the Europeans already revolting? 8)

Thirdly, the UK is one of the most socialist country in Europe.

:lol:

Dissolution of borders/nations, single-party rule, consolidation of economic resources.. eventually the end of property rights.. not to mention the already-present socialist agenda of the majority of Europe.. It's straight ticket to hell in a handbasket. I'm just glad I don't live there. :wink:

http://www.stoptheftaa.org/

The globalists have their eyes set on America too!
The EU is not the US. This site is about the US.


your a quick one, aren't you...

The EU is doing it all wrong. If they keep on like this, we should leave them altogether. They persistently keep Britain out of important decisions, and the choice to allow Spanish fishermen free rights to fish in our water, whilst we poor Scots have to lose our jobs, is foolish and stupid. If we can't fish in our water, why should they be allowed to? Then, there's the Republic of Ireland. We already waste enough money subsidising them, so they don't need to develop their own economy. That's why they were opposed to the new E.U nations with poor economies. Dilutes what they will get. (I know that Ireland is doing better at the moment, but it still isn't self sufficient, economically. It is on an upswing, yes?) I can't agree with increased E.U power, especially when it becomes more political. Why don't we stick to who we know? (The commonwealth.)

The EU is doing it all wrong. If they keep on like this, we should leave them altogether. They persistently keep Britain out of important decisions, and the choice to allow Spanish fishermen free rights to fish in our water, whilst we poor Scots have to lose our jobs, is foolish and stupid. If we can't fish in our water, why should they be allowed to? Then, there's the Republic of Ireland. We already waste enough money subsidising them, so they don't need to develop their own economy. That's why they were opposed to the new E.U nations with poor economies. Dilutes what they will get. (I know that Ireland is doing better at the moment, but it still isn't self sufficient, economically. It is on an upswing, yes?) I can't agree with increased E.U power, especially when it becomes more political. Why don't we stick to who we know? (The commonwealth.)

This Daily Mail headline generator is just for you

http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/other/dailymail.php

I'm not sure I've ever read such a lot of unsubstantiated rubbish.

I'm with Texas on this.. EU consolidation is straight outta the Communist gameplan.. Europeans' say is going to weaken as their governments give up sovereignty, not strengthen. But the again, they're asking for it, so it's thier choice.

How is it communist?

Dissolution of borders/nations, single-party rule, consolidation of economic resources.. eventually the end of property rights.. not to mention the already-present socialist agenda of the majority of Europe.. It's straight ticket to hell in a handbasket. I'm just glad I don't live there. :wink:

Did you just describe the united states of america or the european union?

]

This Daily Mail headline generator is just for you

http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/other/dailymail.php

I'm not sure I've ever read such a lot of unsubstantiated rubbish.

I tried it and got this (rather fitting) headline.

"WILL BRUSSELS BUREAUCRATS DESTROY YOUR DAUGHTERS?"

Never read the daily mail in my life. Anyway, if it was unsubstantiated, why are the fishermen complaining. Loudly. Because they are only allowed to fish for about 2 or 3 months a year, whilst anybody else can turn up and fish. Iceland? (that was a long time ago though.)
I don't like the EU assuming more power. If it starts to make sense with the power it has now, maybe I would have some confidence in it. So much of the proposals it comes up with (like the one that was passed that makes using imperial measurements illegal. That was sensible use of money, eh?) are stupid, time wasting and pointless. What do we gain by giving more power to Brussels? Also, the part about Europe keeping us out is true. France and Germany said that we could never be as important in the EU as them, because they wouldn't allow it. (naturally it was in diplo-speak, but the message was the same.)

Anyway, if it was unsubstantiated, why are the fishermen complaining. Loudly. Because they are only allowed to fish for about 2 or 3 months a year, whilst anybody else can turn up and fish. Iceland? (that was a long time ago though.)

Iceland is not a member of the EU. If you're suggesting that other nations within the EU are not subject to fishing quotas then you are just plain wrong. The reason that the quotas are so restricted is that overfishing has made it necessary if we don't want to destroy fish stocks forever.

2004 quotas (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_344/l_34420031231en00010119.pdf) show that every EU country is under similar restrictions.

I think the spannish, by pulling out of iraq, have been defeated by the terroist jihad strugglers. when bombed they didn't seek to defend themselves from the cause but to run away.


typical.

I think the spannish, by pulling out of iraq, have been defeated by the terroist jihad strugglers. when bombed they didn't seek to defend themselves from the cause but to run away.


typical.

:?: :?: :?: :?:

What in God's name has that got to do with the EU?

I think the spannish, by pulling out of iraq, have been defeated by the terroist jihad strugglers. when bombed they didn't seek to defend themselves from the cause but to run away.


typical.

:?: :?: :?: :?:

What in God's name has that got to do with the EU?

I think he's trying in his own illiterate way that Spain's withdrawal from Iraq in the face of terrorism might pave the way for Muslim terrorists to target other EU nations. At least I think that's what he's trying ineptly to say.

Do you really think it is good that an organization that is removed from the people should have power over them?

I can't think of any organisation or government that has power over the people that isn't removed from them...

Now that it looks like Tony Blair is about to do a U-turn and allow a referendum on the new EU constitution I was wondering what other people thought about it.

Tony Blair sucks.

I think the spannish, by pulling out of iraq, have been defeated by the terroist jihad strugglers. when bombed they didn't seek to defend themselves from the cause but to run away.


typical.

:?: :?: :?: :?:

What in God's name has that got to do with the EU?

I think he's trying in his own illiterate way that Spain's withdrawal from Iraq in the face of terrorism might pave the way for Muslim terrorists to target other EU nations. At least I think that's what he's trying ineptly to say.

Oh, stupid me. :oops:

I thought his point was that the Spanish people elected a new government after that the first one had a) lied to the people on several occasions b) gone to war against the will of the people, and through this example show that every nation within the EU still have their sovereignity and that the people in every nation can choose a new government when they aren't happy with old one. And by new I mean a government who doesn't do exactly the same as the last one. Very communistic by the way.

Also, the part about Europe keeping us out is true. France and Germany said that we could never be as important in the EU as them, because they wouldn't allow it. (naturally it was in diplo-speak, but the message was the same.)You have to admit the UK is not doing much to become an important part of the EU.

The EU will inevitably fail. The whole approach is mired in petty squabbles between governments and endless meetings about very boring details. There is no single event like the drafting of the U.S. constitution with some type of inspiring and personable figures leading it.

Combined with the fact that the national governments take every opportunity to change the rules whenever it doesn't suit them. Like Germany and France failing to cut down on their deficit below EU requirements and simply getting a majority of governments to agree to change the requirements.

Wait till all these Eastern European states join up and start asking for help and money. Combined with the fact that Poland alone accounts for 40 million people which is a sizable majority in the EU parliament. I doubt the Western European governments are going to accept a massibe spending spree in order to boost their Eastern neighbors.

As for the EU challenging the U.S., economically yes. But military, the EU states for the most part have laughable military spending budgets, R&D, and production numbers. Combined with the fact that ALOT of people are unwilling to serve.

why did tony blair perform his U-turn?
Simple he wanted to give the voter a chance to "punish" him before the general election...

and the structure of the EU has ensured that a single power can not become to strong due to the way various treaties were drawn up, no nation has all of the material necessary to form and power a large military with out the aid of several other European nations...

I mean there hasn't been a real war in Western Europe since the end of WW2 which is the longest peacful patch in Europes history...

And maybe they don't have a great budget but we still have a targeting system that can see American uber expensive stealth planes ;c)

Off topic
To Gruntles
What are you babbeling about with your "typical" statement, the socialists had said long before the bombing that they would pull their troops out if there wasn't a un mandate, the party was in a catch-22 do they brake a promise made long before the bombings and hence betray the electorate or do they pull out their forces and look bad... They made the difficult choice, to stick to their promises unlike so many other governments. Also we have to remember that the spanish public was very anti the whole idea of war on Iraq... becouse fundementally it was a bad move...

end of my off topicness

why did tony blair perform his U-turn?
Simple he wanted to give the voter a chance to "punish" him before the general election...

and the structure of the EU has ensured that a single power can not become to strong due to the way various treaties were drawn up, no nation has all of the material necessary to form and power a large military with out the aid of several other European nations...

I mean there hasn't been a real war in Western Europe since the end of WW2 which is the longest peacful patch in Europes history...

And maybe they don't have a great budget but we still have a targeting system that can see American uber expensive stealth planes ;c)

Off topic
To Gruntles
What are you babbeling about with your "typical" statement, the socialists had said long before the bombing that they would pull their troops out if there wasn't a un mandate, the party was in a catch-22 do they brake a promise made long before the bombings and hence betray the electorate or do they pull out their forces and look bad... They made the difficult choice, to stick to their promises unlike so many other governments. Also we have to remember that the spanish public was very anti the whole idea of war on Iraq... becouse fundementally it was a bad move...

end of my off topicness

why did tony blair perform his U-turn?
Simple he wanted to give the voter a chance to "punish" him before the general election...

and the structure of the EU has ensured that a single power can not become to strong due to the way various treaties were drawn up, no nation has all of the material necessary to form and power a large military with out the aid of several other European nations...

I mean there hasn't been a real war in Western Europe since the end of WW2 which is the longest peacful patch in Europes history...

And maybe they don't have a great budget but we still have a targeting system that can see American uber expensive stealth planes ;c)

Off topic
To Gruntles
What are you babbeling about with your "typical" statement, the socialists had said long before the bombing that they would pull their troops out if there wasn't a un mandate, the party was in a catch-22 do they brake a promise made long before the bombings and hence betray the electorate or do they pull out their forces and look bad... They made the difficult choice, to stick to their promises unlike so many other governments. Also we have to remember that the spanish public was very anti the whole idea of war on Iraq... becouse fundementally it was a bad move...

end of my off topicness

As for the EU challenging the U.S., economically yes. But military, the EU states for the most part have laughable military spending budgets, R&D, and production numbers. Combined with the fact that ALOT of people are unwilling to serve.Instead we have brains in command and we don't shoot allies.

As for the EU challenging the U.S., economically yes. But military, the EU states for the most part have laughable military spending budgets, R&D, and production numbers. Combined with the fact that ALOT of people are unwilling to serve.Instead we have brains in command and we don't shoot allies.

I'm fine with the idea of greater cooperation in trade, and the removal of artificial restrictions of the freedom of trading. But I don't like the idea of anything more than that. The idea of power to be centralised in the form of a federal government in Brussels is ridiculous and I will always oppose something like that. There's just no point in it. The harmonisation of trading laws is essential as the entire world is linked together when it comes to trade. But our domestic laws are of no concern to anybody else but the British public. But no, the Eurocrats couldn't just stop at trade, they have to destroy the rights of individual nations and try and absorb all of Europe into one giant superstate.

I don't think there should be a referendum, because I want us to sign up, and the British people blatantly don't. However, I don't think its because of intelligent, reasoned debate and conclusions, but rather whipped up xenophobia by the right-wing media. I think, frankly, if it weren't for the Mail and Sun, the public wouldn't give a toss, and it'd be perfectly logical to agree to the constitution, because its a pretty simple 'tidying up' exercise. Of course, I think it doesn't go far enough. I want there to be a 'European Superstate'. I just want it to be more democratic.

I am not British but I know that Britons have never and probably will never consider themselves European.

We see this throughout history.

Religion - continental Europe is strongly Catholic, whereas the majority of Britain is Protestant.

Economics - Britain even up until the end of its Empire in the 1950's maintained stronger links with its colonies and the USA than European economies. I see it quite futile for UK politicians now to consider merging with continental Europe especially when you are all manufacturers. Britain would be better off striking deals with those nations which thrive on raw materials as it once did - Britain was the manufacturer and its colonies the provider of raw materials. Britain sold manufactures to the colonies. Now Britain is trying to sell manufactured goods to European nations who are also selling manufactured goods. Quite silly really.

Heritage/Culture - Britain is very much different to continental Europe in this are and this is one of two reasons as to why the pound remains whilst Europe adopted the Euro Dollar. The pound has been the currency of Britain for hundreds of years and the other reason of course is that the pound is far superior to most global currencies and is likely to be so for many decades to come.

Politics/Geography - Britain has often stayed out of European affairs (bar the two world wars) unless it was a matter of colonial upkeep. It has been able to enjoy a measure of splendid isolation due to the English Channel and its once proud navy. To even suggest Britain has any real ties with Europe (most of the continental European royal families are dead or powerless) is fantasy at best.

Britain is its own land and I for one believe it should not merge with the European Union - a union I might add which is suffering massive amounts of unemployment, produces the same thing and has a currency that is far below that of previous European currencies (mark and franc).

Rule Britannia.

The EU is destroying the rights of Europeans... they need to revolt before it's too late!


Good God, a giant European Superstate - and it's coming right for us!!!! (high pitched scream).

I think that increased integration and co-operation between European nations can only be a good thing, not just in economic terms. (Can't be bothered to say more than that at the moment because I'm too tired and lazy at the moment).
Uh-huh. More regulations on the appropriate height of playground swings, the minimum curvature of bananas and the chunkiness of pasta sauce is just what Europe needs. All bow to the colourless gnomes of Brussels!

It's better than that "my banana ain't curved so I'll sue" system a certain country makes do with...
Nah. Pox on them all.
Europe needs to cut down the numbers of regulation-writing eurocrats and put an end to creeping federalisation of the continent.
And the U.S. would do well to reform its tort laws. Alas, that is not easy to do, due to the resistance of the Democrat Party (bankrolled by the American Trial Lawyers Association). After that Americans can start rethinking their sanctimonious, hubristic foreign policy. ...But perhaps it's a self-regulating process: every time they get cocky they march right in to a do-it-yourself 3rd-world morass.

Sorry, no advice for Iceland today. Maybe tomorrow :wink:

2 Lord Pheonix Benicius,

I believe you might want to:
1. Find out what's the predominant religion in the Netherlands, Northern Germany and Scandinavia.
2. Study some economics beyond the mercantilist ideas ("quite silly, really") that you seem to entertain.
3. Do some research on what Eurodollar is and how it's different from the Euro.
4. Read up on English military activities in Europe throughout the centuries (100 Year War... Duke of Marlboro... Waterloo... - ya know, the works.)
5. Discover if the UK isn't already a member of the EU.
6. Poke around the internet and enlighten yourself as to how the Euro has been trending against the U.S. Dollar lately.
7. Learn to spell "phoenix".

2 Lord Pheonix Benicius,

I believe you might want to:
1. Find out what's the predominant religion in the Netherlands, Northern Germany and Scandinavia.
2. Study some economics beyond the mercantilist ideas ("quite silly, really") that you seem to entertain.
3. Do some research on what Eurodollar is and how it's different from the Euro.
4. Read up on English military activities in Europe throughout the centuries (100 Year War... Duke of Marlboro... Waterloo... - ya know, the works.)
5. Discover if the UK isn't already a member of the EU.
6. Poke around the internet and enlighten yourself as to how the Euro has been trending against the U.S. Dollar lately.
7. Learn to spell "phoenix".

I never said Britain was not an EU member, I am well aware that it is thank you. It simply has not merged into the framework as others (accept Euro amongst other things which have been touched on previously) or accepted the EU as others have.

The Euro is nowhere near as valuable or as influential as the pound and it is highly doubtful that it ever will be. As for the US dollar, it has lost ground against many currencies in recent months (fallen against its TWI). My point was about the pound, not the Greenback. Please don't confuse yourself.

As for economics, I am not sure as to your point (you display no economic knowledge, just a bit of whinging) but any economist will tell you (perhaps write to a university scholar or a leading economist in the UK) that two countries or trade blocs trying to sell the same thing to each other are not being very economical.

You will find that America exports many manufactures to NIE's, transition and developing economies and in turn is supplied with raw materials. America is the most power economy on Earth. Wonder why when ETM's fluctuate far less than STM's (also refer to the BOP of these economies) and the US is manufacturing for nations which at the moment are not as industrial. The EU and the UK are both manufacturers and logic (plus economic reality) dictates that trying to sell a country what they already possess is not only "silly" but irresponsible (Britain's economic dominance relied on less industrial economies buying manufactured good from the motherland and in turn supplied the raw materials needed).

As for religion, ever noticed how those countries you mentioned were all staunch allies of Britain and in fact quite dependent on Britain throughout history? Meanwhile, when one speaks of continental Europe they really mean: France, Germany (as a whole is more Catholic - especially in politics) and Spain - just to clarify that.

I don't think there should be a referendum, because I want us to sign up, and the British people blatantly don't. However, I don't think its because of intelligent, reasoned debate and conclusions, but rather whipped up xenophobia by the right-wing media. I think, frankly, if it weren't for the Mail and Sun, the public wouldn't give a toss, and it'd be perfectly logical to agree to the constitution, because its a pretty simple 'tidying up' exercise. Of course, I think it doesn't go far enough. I want there to be a 'European Superstate'. I just want it to be more democratic.
So you want there to be a more democratic eurpoe but you don't want to give the people the right to vote on it. Any other rights you don't think us thick people should have?
How about stopping any one printing things you don't agree with. Then you could lock up any political opponenents ... then ooh ooh lets get a new flag and march up the street in a funny way.
Or we could let the democratic process takes its' course. And once we vote to stay out, let's not have any more votes on the subject ever. Unless we have a vote to see if we should come out of the EU altogether.

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

Rome?

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?
No what we need for that is say three or four nations in the south not wanting to join. Then we manufacture a war, win, re write history and all live happy ever after.

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

Sounds like the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation combined. (which is not good)

The EU is not and will not work because Europe is such a vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix. The EU is about as feasible as one world government where we all live in harmony and have no militaries. There are too many differences.

Rome?

*Looks to judges...*

"Judges?"

*Turns back*

"Sorry, that's a bunch of nations getting together under a centralized government because the centralized government threatened to kill them all if they didn't pay taxes to the wealthyest 28 families of the state. Then they stole the concept of coinage from the Carpathians and thought they invented inter-state trade."

"Oh, so close it's painful"

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

I think that your quote above could refer to the USSR, Yugoslavia and any other political union that does not take into account different cultures and histories. Especially one that is ruled by a corrupt centralist government with no accountability to the people it rules. Welcome to the European Union!

I am a British Tory and I think that trade with europe is great, but why should we hand over control of the rest of our policies? The EU make up a law and we, being British, pass the law and then enforce it regardless of how much it may be against our national interest, Scottish Fishermen stand up and be counted! But when that same law goes to France they will ignore it!

Vote No to the EU Constitution! Vote No to the EU!

And by the way, I am a reader of the Daily Mail! :twisted:

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

I think that your quote above could refer to the USSR, Yugoslavia and any other political union that does not take into account different cultures and histories. Especially one that is ruled by a corrupt centralist government with no accountability to the people it rules. Welcome to the European Union!

I am a British Tory and I think that trade with europe is great, but why should we hand over control of the rest of our policies? The EU make up a law and we, being British, pass the law and then enforce it regardless of how much it may be against our national interest, Scottish Fishermen stand up and be counted! But when that same law goes to France they will ignore it!

Vote No to the EU Constitution! Vote No to the EU!

And by the way, I am a reader of the Daily Mail! :twisted:
What fisher men of Scotland? Have they not gone down the same road as all Britisher fisher men and become Spanish?
Look what the EU did for Hull! We shoud have taken a leaf from the Iclandic school of fishermen.

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?
The UK?

So you want there to be a more democratic eurpoe but you don't want to give the people the right to vote on it. Any other rights you don't think us thick people should have?
How about stopping any one printing things you don't agree with. Then you could lock up any political opponenents ... then ooh ooh lets get a new flag and march up the street in a funny way.
Or we could let the democratic process takes its' course. And once we vote to stay out, let's not have any more votes on the subject ever. Unless we have a vote to see if we should come out of the EU altogether.I have an idea : why not ask Tony's government if they want to listen to the people or not, that would be democratic, wouldn't it? After all if the UK can decide unilaterally without listening to its neightbors, why couldn't Tony decide unilaterally without listening to the people?

So you want there to be a more democratic eurpoe but you don't want to give the people the right to vote on it. Any other rights you don't think us thick people should have?
How about stopping any one printing things you don't agree with. Then you could lock up any political opponenents ... then ooh ooh lets get a new flag and march up the street in a funny way.
Or we could let the democratic process takes its' course. And once we vote to stay out, let's not have any more votes on the subject ever. Unless we have a vote to see if we should come out of the EU altogether.I have an idea : why not ask Tony's government if they want to listen to the people or not, that would be democratic, wouldn't it? After all if the UK can decide unilaterally without listening to its neightbors, why couldn't Tony decide unilaterally without listening to the people?
Yes but Two faced Tony was voted in. Our neighbours are accidents of geography.

The Euro is nowhere near as valuable or as influential as the pound ????? Is that a joke?

As for religion, ever noticed how those countries you mentioned were all staunch allies of Britain and in fact quite dependent on Britain throughout history? Meanwhile, when one speaks of continental Europe they really mean: France, Germany (as a whole is more Catholic - especially in politics) and Spain - just to clarify that.I don't know about Germany, but in France we are secular. We have the largest jewish community in Europe and the largest community of muslims. If you want to your country to stay backward, white and protestant fine please get out of the EU.

If you want to your country to stay backward, white and protestant fine please get out of the EU.

Fortunately Australia has no desire to be part of the EU. I did state before that I was not British. Don't people read?

As a politics student, and a follower of European policy for the last three years (and yes, it is sad, i know), I am not that relieved that we are going to have a referendum. Although this will mean that the comstitution in its current form will be rejected, unless the EU as a whole is brought back under control, it is only a matter of time before all nations in Europe are controlled by one supranational body led by a group of liberal elitists, who are elected by themselves

Well the EU was doomed from the start. I mean, does anybody truly believe that even France, Germany and the UK would all get along given their history and political differences? And they make up a small fraction of member states!

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

Sounds like the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation combined. (which is not good)

The EU is not and will not work because Europe is such a vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix. The EU is about as feasible as one world government where we all live in harmony and have no militaries. There are too many differences.

So because there's some diversity it will not work? With more trade and travel between member states, I think it'll work fine.

If you want to your country to stay backward, white and protestant fine please get out of the EU.

Fortunately Australia has no desire to be part of the EU. I did state before that I was not British. Don't people read?
If we say sorry for the snub, can we come back to deal with you Ausies and New Zealanders? Can we go back to our relations before we joined the EU? Go on, we promise to behave and not desert you this time.
Then may be we can fish in our own waters again, and the countries we export our produce to will stick to the rules that they introduced (yet fail to follow) and we follow.
Go on. Let us come back to the fold.

Yes but Two faced Tony was voted in. Our neighbours are accidents of geography.And the people are accident of nature?
I'm sorry but I'm impacted when your fishers make a race of fish extinct and you're impacted when our immigrants in sangate go to the UK. I want a say on how much fish species you make extinct and you want a say on how we treat immigrants who go to the UK. What if my government decides to do nuclear tests in the channel?
You say it is not democratic if the UK people can't decide to shut up the foreigners, but this has no sense at all.

unless the EU as a whole is brought back under control, it is only a matter of time before all nations in Europe are controlled by one supranational body led by a group of liberal elitists, who are elected by themselves

Gotta love mindless rethoric.

If we say sorry for the snub, can we come back to deal with you Ausies and New Zealanders? Can we go back to our relations before we joined the EU? Go on, we promise to behave and not desert you this time.
Then may be we can fish in our own waters again, and the countries we export our produce to will stick to the rules that they introduced (yet fail to follow) and we follow.
Go on. Let us come back to the fold.

Desert us? If you mean WW2 nobody really cares now days, the US saved us anyway. But as for trade, the UK is one of Australia's biggest markets still...true your not #1 (The USA is #1 now) on our trading list, but it isn't like we've grown apart as countries.

I am not really sure as to what you are getting at with the fish though.

Well the EU was doomed from the start. I mean, does anybody truly believe that even France, Germany and the UK would all get along given their history and political differences? And they make up a small fraction of member states!It looks like it has been relatively successful though. When was the last time we had a war in the EU? Are you suggesting we suppress the EU and go back to military negociation?

Yes but Two faced Tony was voted in. Our neighbours are accidents of geography.And the people are accident of nature?
I'm sorry but I'm impacted when your fishers make a race of fish extinct and you're impacted when our immigrants in sangate go to the UK. I want a say on how much fish species you make extinct and you want a say on how we treat immigrants who go to the UK. What if my government decides to do nuclear tests in the channel?
You say it is not democratic if the UK people can't decide to shut up the foreigners, but this has no sense at all.
Our waters our fish, your land your crops, your land your mines. We take the bad points of being surrounded by the sea but are not allowed the good points. And I think you will find that UK fishermen take less from our waters than those of other nations take from our waters.
I don't want to have any say what goes on in your country.
Immigrants! Supposed political refugies. Why don't they stop where they land/disembark? Let's not go there. Sangat, thanks very bloody much for that one.
And the channel test, would not suprise me one bit.

Well the EU was doomed from the start. I mean, does anybody truly believe that even France, Germany and the UK would all get along given their history and political differences? And they make up a small fraction of member states!It looks like it has been relatively successful though. When was the last time we had a war in the EU? Are you suggesting we suppress the EU and go back to military negociation?

War in the EU...the EU really isn't that old, and frankly what reason would Europe have for an internal war nowdays? It isn't that simple.

The EU is an economic bloc, not a military one (although that's on the cards apparently). Can I ask though, why Europe feels the need for a military? It obviously doesn't think there are threats in the world (hence their rejection of the Iraq war).

Well the EU was doomed from the start. I mean, does anybody truly believe that even France, Germany and the UK would all get along given their history and political differences? And they make up a small fraction of member states!It looks like it has been relatively successful though. When was the last time we had a war in the EU? Are you suggesting we suppress the EU and go back to military negociation?

War in the EU...the EU really isn't that old, and frankly what reason would Europe have for an internal war nowdays? It isn't that simple.

The EU is an economic bloc, not a military one (although that's on the cards apparently). Can I ask though, why Europe feels the need for a military? It obviously doesn't think there are threats in the world (hence their rejection of the Iraq war).
Hey. UK here. Part of EU (worst luck). In Iraq (worst luck).

Well the EU was doomed from the start. I mean, does anybody truly believe that even France, Germany and the UK would all get along given their history and political differences? And they make up a small fraction of member states!It looks like it has been relatively successful though. When was the last time we had a war in the EU? Are you suggesting we suppress the EU and go back to military negociation?

War in the EU...the EU really isn't that old, and frankly what reason would Europe have for an internal war nowdays? It isn't that simple.

The EU is an economic bloc, not a military one (although that's on the cards apparently). Can I ask though, why Europe feels the need for a military? It obviously doesn't think there are threats in the world (hence their rejection of the Iraq war).

Even without a direct threat nations will maintain armies just because the other country does too. An EU army should be more efficient than twelve small armies.

War in the EU...the EU really isn't that old, and frankly what reason would Europe have for an internal war nowdays? It isn't that simple.Read some history book. before the EU, 25 years without a war in Europe is quite a peaceful time.

The EU is an economic bloc, not a military one (although that's on the cards apparently). Can I ask though, why Europe feels the need for a military? It obviously doesn't think there are threats in the world (hence their rejection of the Iraq war).Well if my country decides to do nuclear tests in the pacific, it is because they think they need to defend themselves (or attack yourself).

And the channel test, would not suprise me one bit.If it happens, don't ever complain then. You are offered a voice in european politics which implies responsibilities.

Even without a direct threat nations will maintain armies just because the other country does too. An EU army should be more efficient than twelve small armies.

Yes, and what if one country disagrees on say going to war. Their own National laws would outrank any EU decision. That is the same problem with the UN...too much disagreement.

Our waters our fish, your land your crops, your land your mines. We take the bad points of being surrounded by the sea but are not allowed the good points. And I think you will find that UK fishermen take less from our waters than those of other nations take from our waters.

Territorial waters extend 12 nautical miles from the coast. Most commercial fishing takes place substantually further out to sea than that! I posted the 2004 quotas a couple of pages back. If you would like to check then you will see that Britain has as much of a restriction placed on it as the rest of the EU. If I remember correctly the French minister stormed out of the negotiations because his nation's fishing industry came out of it so badly...

And the channel test, would not suprise me one bit.If it happens, don't ever complain then. You are offered a voice in european politics which implies responsibilities.
We have a voise now. Doesn't stop our sheep being burnt or our now clean beef being illegaly refused etc. Stuff the two faced EU.

Yes, and what if one country disagrees on say going to war. Their own National laws would outrank any EU decision. That is the same problem with the UN...too much disagreement.

Qualified Majority Voting - one of the cornerstones of EU expansion...

I don't think there should be a referendum, because I want us to sign up, and the British people blatantly don't. However, I don't think its because of intelligent, reasoned debate and conclusions, but rather whipped up xenophobia by the right-wing media. I think, frankly, if it weren't for the Mail and Sun, the public wouldn't give a toss, and it'd be perfectly logical to agree to the constitution, because its a pretty simple 'tidying up' exercise. Of course, I think it doesn't go far enough. I want there to be a 'European Superstate'. I just want it to be more democratic.
So you want there to be a more democratic eurpoe but you don't want to give the people the right to vote on it. Any other rights you don't think us thick people should have?
How about stopping any one printing things you don't agree with. Then you could lock up any political opponenents ... then ooh ooh lets get a new flag and march up the street in a funny way.
Or we could let the democratic process takes its' course. And once we vote to stay out, let's not have any more votes on the subject ever. Unless we have a vote to see if we should come out of the EU altogether.

:roll: Classic Strawman,
Referenda are only part of a parliamentary democracy when there is a constitutional issue at stake. I can't see why Tony B. Liar was given Britain a referenda on an issue which doesn't affect the constitution, yet refuses to give them on stuff like Lords reform.
I don't mind there being a referendum, I just would prefer it if there wasn't, because my side (Europhile) will lose, though not (in my opinion) through constructive adult debate, but through the sort of Europhobic crap spouted out my Daily Mail et al. A wonderful example being the slippery slope that you describe above. So- a referenda on a non-constitutional issue is NOT a right, so by saying we shouldn't have one, I am not denying rights.
My view is those right-wing Euro-sceptics clamoring for a referenda don't actually give two hoots about the EU Constitution, they just want us out of Europe. And I think that this view is driven more by foul English Xenophobia than genuine political ideology.

Frankly, I'd much prefer closer relationship with Europe and perhaps a cooling of our sycophantic relationship with the United States, who perhaps need the EU as a stopper.

We have a voise now. Doesn't stop our sheep being burnt or our now clean beef being illegaly refused etc. Stuff the two faced EU.

:roll: You just made a fantastic argument for the EU. France (a nation) illegally banned British Beef. The EU (the devil! ARGH! RUN! RUN FROM JOHNNY FOREIGNER!) overturned the ban as illegal. So without the EU, France could perfectly legally ban our meat. Which newspaper do you read?

I don't think there should be a referendum, because I want us to sign up, and the British people blatantly don't. However, I don't think its because of intelligent, reasoned debate and conclusions, but rather whipped up xenophobia by the right-wing media. I think, frankly, if it weren't for the Mail and Sun, the public wouldn't give a toss, and it'd be perfectly logical to agree to the constitution, because its a pretty simple 'tidying up' exercise. Of course, I think it doesn't go far enough. I want there to be a 'European Superstate'. I just want it to be more democratic.
So you want there to be a more democratic eurpoe but you don't want to give the people the right to vote on it. Any other rights you don't think us thick people should have?
How about stopping any one printing things you don't agree with. Then you could lock up any political opponenents ... then ooh ooh lets get a new flag and march up the street in a funny way.
Or we could let the democratic process takes its' course. And once we vote to stay out, let's not have any more votes on the subject ever. Unless we have a vote to see if we should come out of the EU altogether.

:roll: Classic Strawman,
Referenda are only part of a parliamentary democracy when there is a constitutional issue at stake. I can't see why Tony B. Liar was given Britain a referenda on an issue which doesn't affect the constitution, yet refuses to give them on stuff like Lords reform.
I don't mind there being a referendum, I just would prefer it if there wasn't, because my side (Europhile) will lose, though not (in my opinion) through constructive adult debate, but through the sort of Europhobic crap spouted out my Daily Mail et al. A wonderful example being the slippery slope that you describe above. So- a referenda on a non-constitutional issue is NOT a right, so by saying we shouldn't have one, I am not denying rights.
My view is those right-wing Euro-sceptics clamoring for a referenda don't actually give two hoots about the EU Constitution, they just want us out of Europe. And I think that this view is driven more by foul English Xenophobia than genuine political ideology.

Frankly, I'd much prefer closer relationship with Europe and perhaps a cooling of our sycophantic relationship with the United States, who perhaps need the EU as a stopper.
Hmm. 'Thinks'
Accepted points.
But some of the problems with the voting public have with the EU is the percetion that we play by the rules, but others choose to ignore them when it suits (brtish lamb, beef etc).
I'm very uncomfortable with the whole thing, and I know some of that discomfort has nothing to do with logic. I can't help it, but I try.

And the channel test, would not suprise me one bit.If it happens, don't ever complain then. You are offered a voice in european politics which implies responsibilities.
We have a voise now. Doesn't stop our sheep being burnt or our now clean beef being illegaly refused etc. Stuff the two faced EU.That would be perfectly legal if it was not for the EU. I agree with you there the french government is not playing by the rules and it is a shame, but it doesn't mean we should remove the rules, it means we should enforce them. The constitution would be a step in enforcing the rules. Once the EU has more power than the french government, those kind of things will not happen anymore.

I dont want a vote on the European Constitution as I dont believe I will understand it. I certainly dont believe the general public will be independantly well informed, especially by the Brittish media.

Polititians are paid to make desicions and should know the constitution through and through, why cant they have a free vote in paliment with no party line based on whats best for the country and not whats best for tony, micheal or that lib dem guy (only joking mr Kenedy)

Our waters our fish, your land your crops, your land your mines. We take the bad points of being surrounded by the sea but are not allowed the good points. And I think you will find that UK fishermen take less from our waters than those of other nations take from our waters.

Territorial waters extend 12 nautical miles from the coast. Most commercial fishing takes place substantually further out to sea than that! I posted the 2004 quotas a couple of pages back. If you would like to check then you will see that Britain has as much of a restriction placed on it as the rest of the EU. If I remember correctly the French minister stormed out of the negotiations because his nation's fishing industry came out of it so badly...
Most but not all.
12 miles, tell that to Iceland. They still have a fishing industry.

Hmm. 'Thinks'
Accepted points.
But some of the problems with the voting public have with the EU is the percetion that we play by the rules, but others choose to ignore them when it suits (brtish lamb, beef etc).
I'm very uncomfortable with the whole thing, and I know some of that discomfort has nothing to do with logic. I can't help it, but I try.Funny here we have the perception the UK is not playing by the rules. Maybe there are some wommunication problems?

Most but not all.
12 miles, tell that to Iceland. They still have a fishing industry.I've many icelanders who want to be part of the EU. I hope one of these day they sign in.

Most but not all.
12 miles, tell that to Iceland. They still have a fishing industry.I've many icelanders who want to be part of the EU. I hope one of these day they sign in.
Not with the common fisheries policy in place they won't. they'd be suckers if they did.

Hmm. 'Thinks'
Accepted points.
But some of the problems with the voting public have with the EU is the percetion that we play by the rules, but others choose to ignore them when it suits (brtish lamb, beef etc).
I'm very uncomfortable with the whole thing, and I know some of that discomfort has nothing to do with logic. I can't help it, but I try.

Ah ha. Well thats different. We all have gut feelings. But as someone (I think Stephen Jay Gould, but I'm wrong in that) said - "I try not to think with my gut".
Acknowledge you have gut feelings, but when it comes to our economy, personal rights and future prosperity, put aside such feelings of patriotism and isolationism. All in all, the EU is good for us. We shoudl stop hanging around the edges and get 'in the driving seat', where we can get more benefit form it and make it more democratic and answerable to our people.

Yes, and what if one country disagrees on say going to war. Their own National laws would outrank any EU decision. That is the same problem with the UN...too much disagreement.

Qualified Majority Voting - one of the cornerstones of EU expansion...

And then the German delegate stood up in the League of Nations and walked out never to return again...

Yes, ever considered that as soon as somebody doesn't like something, they will just walk out.

Just as Germany, Italy and Japan left the League during the 1930's, so too will EU members leave the EU as soon as something doesn't suit them.

The Individual (in this case the nation) always outranks the Collective (in this case the EU).

Learn from history...the EU was doomed before it began.

lol
If You say so Lord Pheonix. Somehow this doesn't hold true in the case of United States of America, right?

Just checked. Iceland is now correct. 200 mile limit to a nations seas. Except for those that have signed those rights away with the common fisheries policy.
Well done Iceland, stick to your guns.
All those EU countries with more land that the UK, surely we should be able to come over and farm it.

Well all these fishing laws don't stop the Japanese fishing wherever they please!

Sure You can Kirtondom. Come over and farm. That's what EU is about. It's Your right to move to another EU country to work. I know of any laws prohibiting you from owning land and farming it either.

Sure You can Kirtondom. Come over and farm. That's what EU is about. It's Your right to move to another EU country to work. I know of any laws prohibiting you from owning land and farming it either.
No I don't mean come and live as a citizen, I mean come over paying UK tax etc and subsidies, mine the land, farm it and send the produce where we like paying and dues to the UK.

Should have said so then. :wink:

Should have said so then. :wink:
Ignore me. I'm bitter and twisted today.

Well the EU was doomed from the start. I mean, does anybody truly believe that even France, Germany and the UK would all get along given their history and political differences? And they make up a small fraction of member states!It looks like it has been relatively successful though. When was the last time we had a war in the EU? Are you suggesting we suppress the EU and go back to military negociation?

War in the EU...the EU really isn't that old, and frankly what reason would Europe have for an internal war nowdays? It isn't that simple.

The EU is an economic bloc, not a military one (although that's on the cards apparently). Can I ask though, why Europe feels the need for a military? It obviously doesn't think there are threats in the world (hence their rejection of the Iraq war).

Even without a direct threat nations will maintain armies just because the other country does too. An EU army should be more efficient than twelve small armies.

It's funny the Americans get their panties in a twist every time the EU 'army' is mentioned. The US is pulling it's remaining troops out of Europe and voicing Europe should be able to take care of it's own defence anyways...

I haven't read anywhere the possible future EU force is supposed to be a kind of an army USA has. It's main purpose (to my knowledge) is to act as a rapid reaction force. European Union's proposal is to field an 'army' of mere 60,000 soldiers. It is to be used if NATO as a whole isn't involved in the crisis. Furthermore, this plan doesn't mean there isn't going to be national armies in the future.

Basically this all seems to relieve the burden of USA in possible future crisis in Europe or it's close to it's borders. But I guess Europe should bury this idea and stick to "NATO or nothing".

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

Sounds like the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation combined. (which is not good)

The EU is not and will not work because Europe is such a vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix. The EU is about as feasible as one world government where we all live in harmony and have no militaries. There are too many differences.


You mean like the vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix that make up the United States of America?

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

Sounds like the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation combined. (which is not good)

The EU is not and will not work because Europe is such a vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix. The EU is about as feasible as one world government where we all live in harmony and have no militaries. There are too many differences.


You mean like the vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix that make up the United States of America?

The USA is a country...it is one and indeed because of its multicultural form there are many many problems. However, the EU is far more complex...these are separate countries, with many more languages, histories and economic differences than what you find in the USA.

As for a 60,000 strong rapid defence force...is this a result of European nations being unable to afford defence anymore? You know with high unemployment, budgets going into the red etc.

Even the UK has scrapped plans for 2 aircraft carriers...it cannot even afford 2 anymore...such is the sorry state of Europe. (scrapped over cost, they do need them)

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

Sounds like the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation combined. (which is not good)

The EU is not and will not work because Europe is such a vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix. The EU is about as feasible as one world government where we all live in harmony and have no militaries. There are too many differences.


You mean like the vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix that make up the United States of America?

The USA is a country...it is one and indeed because of its multicultural form there are many many problems. However, the EU is far more complex...these are separate countries, with many more languages, histories and economic differences than what you find in the USA.

As for a 60,000 strong rapid defence force...is this a result of European nations being unable to afford defence anymore? You know with high unemployment, budgets going into the red etc.

Even the UK has scrapped plans for 2 aircraft carriers...it cannot even afford 2 anymore...such is the sorry state of Europe. (scrapped over cost, they do need them)

Uhhh... where to start... Let's start with stating the Europeans of course are much dumber than the Americans, that helps a heep.. And please keep in mind, Lord Pheonix, it was you who stated EU is stillborn idea; "read history" and all that...

Last i checked there were *a big number* languages spoken in america. In that sense it resembles Europe. Economic differences in Europe? Sure I bet there were some in North America when USA was being formed. Do You seriously think we 21st century Europeans are somehow less capable to create a federation than Your ancestors (I believe You are American) were?!? If those guys got over the south-north divide, I can't see why Europeans can't get over their petty quarrels.

About the 'EU force', I thought I made it clear it isn't supposed to be an army designed to invade countries. We gladly leave that job to you americans, you really rule in that. The 60 000 strong force is designed to clean the mess You leave behind.

You don't even want me to go to "high unemployment, budgets going into red"-stuff, do you?

I do believe he mentioned that he's Australian?

Last i checked there were *a big number* languages spoken in america. In that sense it resembles Europe. Economic differences in Europe? Sure I bet there were some in North America when USA was being formed. Do You seriously think we 21st century Europeans are somehow less capable to create a federation than Your ancestors (I believe You are American) were?!? If those guys got over the south-north divide, I can't see why Europeans can't get over their petty quarrels.

About the 'EU force', I thought I made it clear it isn't supposed to be an army designed to invade countries. We gladly leave that job to you americans, you really rule in that. The 60 000 strong force is designed to clean the mess You leave behind.

You don't even want me to go to "high unemployment, budgets going into red"-stuff, do you?

Hmmmm you jumped the gun. I am not America...which proves you have not read my posts properly which gives you very little credit when you go off like that.

Unless a miracle happened, France and Germany are still suffering massive amounts of unemployment and Blair is about to throw a heap of public servants out to save a bit of cash cause the brits are out of dough.

A bunch of nations get together under a centralized government to prevent internal fighting and oversee inter-state trade. Sound familiar to anyone?

Sounds like the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation combined. (which is not good)

The EU is not and will not work because Europe is such a vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix. The EU is about as feasible as one world government where we all live in harmony and have no militaries. There are too many differences.


You mean like the vast ethnic, economic and cultural mix that make up the United States of America?

The USA is a country...it is one and indeed because of its multicultural form there are many many problems. However, the EU is far more complex...these are separate countries, with many more languages, histories and economic differences than what you find in the USA.

As for a 60,000 strong rapid defence force...is this a result of European nations being unable to afford defence anymore? You know with high unemployment, budgets going into the red etc.

Even the UK has scrapped plans for 2 aircraft carriers...it cannot even afford 2 anymore...such is the sorry state of Europe. (scrapped over cost, they do need them)

That's correct the USA is a single united body, but it used to be merely a collection of independent states. Furthermore it would be foolish to underestimate the gulf between the cultures, lifestyles and histories of many people in those states.

You mention history, but for me if the last century of European history has taught us anything it is that nationalism can be an enormously destructive, divisive and dangerous force. Multilateralism and internationalism on the other hand, embody a willingness to seek consensus and to move towards a common good by emphasising what we have in common rather than why we are so different. Whilst these institutions have failed in the past I hope that society has evolved far enough to prevent this from happening again.

I see the EU constitution as symptomatic of the values I have just stated and little more. I only hope that at least 51% of those who will vote in the referendum agree with me.

Unless a miracle happened, France and Germany are still suffering massive amounts of unemployment and Blair is about to throw a heap of public servants out to save a bit of cash cause the brits are out of dough.[/quote]


Actually the British economy is in excellent shape according to most independent forecasters. It has shown sustained growth coupled with low unemployment and low inflation. I'm certainly no economist but this is widely accepted. The fact that the number of civil servants is to be cut is hardly a fact indicative of economic stagnation and to argue otherwise is symptomatic of a piecemeal knowledge of foreign affairs.

Actually the British economy is in excellent shape according to most independent forecasters. It has shown sustained growth coupled with low unemployment and low inflation. I'm certainly no economist but this is widely accepted. The fact that the number of civil servants is to be cut is hardly a fact indicative of economic stagnation and to argue otherwise is symptomatic of a piecemeal knowledge of foreign affairs.

Well please post the following stats:

unemployment rate
annual growth rate for fiscal year 2003-04
state of the UK budget (surplus, balanced, deficit)

Why else would Blair look to saving vast sums of money, if not because he needed it as they ran out? Everytime govts are out of money, they cut services in the public sector to pay for things.

And why then was the three billion pound carrier project scrapped on grounds of the budget couldnt afford it?

And why then was the three billion pound carrier project scrapped on grounds of the budget couldnt afford it?

The UK's carrier project has not been scrapped.

The carriers that are being lost to cutbacks are the invincible class, which have been in service since the early eighties, and would have been mothballed ages ago, if it wasn't for the falklands war.

The UK's carrier project has not been scrapped.

The carriers that are being lost to cutbacks are the invincible class, which have been in service since the early eighties, and would have been mothballed ages ago, if it wasn't for the falklands war.

The UK was designing 2 new 60,000 ton carriers (i admit they looked very nice in the impression drawing)...the program was scrapped because the UK couldn't budget for it.

Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question. What happens if an EU nation wants to leave the EU? Can they? Or are they forced to remain in the EU? And what kind of action could be taken if, say, Spain tried to break away? Could the other nations invade Spain to force it back into the EU? Sort of like the American Civil War?

edit: I realize this is actually like 5 or 6 questions, and not one.

Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question. What happens if an EU nation wants to leave the EU? Can they? Or are they forced to remain in the EU? And what kind of action could be taken if, say, Spain tried to break away? Could the other nations invade Spain to force it back into the EU? Sort of like the American Civil War?

edit: I realize this is actually like 5 or 6 questions, and not one.

Well...a country can leave the EU and in time it will happen...countries are always at each others throats over something. And what could the other EU members do even if one country left? Sick their 60,000 troops on them perhaps?

The UK's carrier project has not been scrapped.

The carriers that are being lost to cutbacks are the invincible class, which have been in service since the early eighties, and would have been mothballed ages ago, if it wasn't for the falklands war.

The UK was designing 2 new 60,000 ton carriers (i admit they looked very nice in the impression drawing)...the program was scrapped because the UK couldn't budget for it.

I know what you're talking about. I can't find any sources on the scrapping of the CVF project. The only thing I can think of is that you have misinterpreted the recent news that the invincible class are being mothballed due to the afore mentioned budgetary constraints.

I know what you're talking about. I can't find any sources on the scrapping of the CVF project. The only thing I can think of is that you have misinterpreted the recent news that the invincible class are being mothballed due to the afore mentioned budgetary constraints.

The news? Believe me, we don't get British news in Australia (unless on cable). No having recently formulated a paper on defence I came across the UK plan to build two brand new 60,000 ton carriers...I thought, oh wow, that's fantastic...

I kept on the developments because carriers interest me (and were important to my own paper)...sadly the project got scrapped because the UK couldn't afford to construct them.

I know what you're talking about. I can't find any sources on the scrapping of the CVF project. The only thing I can think of is that you have misinterpreted the recent news that the invincible class are being mothballed due to the afore mentioned budgetary constraints.

The news? Believe me, we don't get British news in Australia (unless on cable). No having recently formulated a paper on defence I came across the UK plan to build two brand new 60,000 ton carriers...I thought, oh wow, that's fantastic...

I kept on the developments because carriers interest me (and were important to my own paper)...sadly the project got scrapped because the UK couldn't afford to construct them.

Yes, as I said, I know about the CVF project. I'm simply saying that it is not the plans to build two new carriers that have been scrapped, but it is 2 currently existing carriers of the invincible class that are going to be mothballed because of military cutbacks.

If you can provide any link that supports the cancelling of the CVF project, then please enlighten me. I've just been trawling around google, and found nothing.

If you can provide any link that supports the cancelling of the CVF project, then please enlighten me. I've just been trawling around google, and found nothing.

You probably wont find it on the net yet, I myself did not find out through the internet (papers are not fully comprised of net material). Sometimes, as I have found, it is more reliable to go beyond the world wide web when researching important issues.

Sorry I have no website...I admit it would be easier that way.

If you can provide any link that supports the cancelling of the CVF project, then please enlighten me. I've just been trawling around google, and found nothing.

You probably wont find it on the net yet, I myself did not find out through the internet (papers are not fully comprised of net material). Sometimes, as I have found, it is more reliable to go beyond the world wide web when researching important issues.

Sorry I have no website...I admit it would be easier that way.

Well, it's rather odd that I can find dozens of CVF sites, none of which mention the cancellation of the project. Add to that, the suspiciously similar sounding recent news of the HMS Invincible and HMS Illustrious being removed from service due to budgetary constraints, and you'll see why I'm not convinced.

Also, I don't see why the web is any less reliable than any other media. It tends to be very up to date on news issues; more so than the newspapers, which are only published once per day.

Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question. What happens if an EU nation wants to leave the EU? Can they? Or are they forced to remain in the EU? And what kind of action could be taken if, say, Spain tried to break away? Could the other nations invade Spain to force it back into the EU? Sort of like the American Civil War?

edit: I realize this is actually like 5 or 6 questions, and not one.

Well...a country can leave the EU and in time it will happen...countries are always at each others throats over something. And what could the other EU members do even if one country left? Sick their 60,000 troops on them perhaps?

So it's not a union in the stricter sense of it, like the United States. More like a confederation. So what is preventing the whole EU from dissolving after the first major difference of opinion?

Well, it's rather odd that I can find dozens of CVF sites, none of which mention the cancellation of the project. Add to that, the suspiciously similar sounding recent news of the HMS Invincible and HMS Illustrious being removed from service due to budgetary constraints, and you'll see why I'm not convinced.

Also, I don't see why the web is any less reliable than any other media. It tends to be very up to date on news issues; more so than the newspapers, which are only published once per day.

The media isn't the only source of information you can get. But, I did present my paper last september, so it has been a while (though still recent). Perhaps this is out of range for your carriers?

So it's not a union in the stricter sense of it, like the United States. More like a confederation. So what is preventing the whole EU from dissolving after the first major difference of opinion?Economic colapse.

IF we get a referendum - and it's highly unlikely the Government will actually do as it says - the question will be so skewed as to make sure the Govt gets the answer it wants. And if, by some miracle, people can and do vote against the constitution, the govt will simply ignore the vote. After all, Governments of either party never listen to what the voters say, think, need or want any more - why should they this time? The whole thing is just playing politics and has nothing to do with Europe.

IF we get a referendum - and it's highly unlikely the Government will actually do as it says - the question will be so skewed as to make sure the Govt gets the answer it wants.

:?: :?:
Are you seriously suggesting that the government would go against the result of a referendum?
You are a very funny guy!

IF we get a referendum - and it's highly unlikely the Government will actually do as it says - the question will be so skewed as to make sure the Govt gets the answer it wants. And if, by some miracle, people can and do vote against the constitution, the govt will simply ignore the vote. After all, Governments of either party never listen to what the voters say, think, need or want any more - why should they this time? The whole thing is just playing politics and has nothing to do with Europe.
Just look what happened to Eire. A no vote so the Gov said, you must not have understoodthe question, so we'll have another vote forthe same thing but reword the question and we will keep doing this until you say yes.
Good old democracy at work, at least a dictator would have said stuff you lot this is what we are doing and been honest about it.

Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question. What happens if an EU nation wants to leave the EU? Can they? Or are they forced to remain in the EU? And what kind of action could be taken if, say, Spain tried to break away? Could the other nations invade Spain to force it back into the EU? Sort of like the American Civil War?

edit: I realize this is actually like 5 or 6 questions, and not one.

Well...a country can leave the EU and in time it will happen...countries are always at each others throats over something. And what could the other EU members do even if one country left? Sick their 60,000 troops on them perhaps?

So it's not a union in the stricter sense of it, like the United States. More like a confederation. So what is preventing the whole EU from dissolving after the first major difference of opinion?

The fact that after quite some "major differences of opinion" no nation has left the EU yet? I'm referring to things as the EU constitution here, which was a pretty major difference of opinion. Or those fishing quotas. Or the Euro.

That, and, as Psylos said, economic collapse. The longer a nation is in the EU, the more trade links it will probably have with other EU-countries, the less likely it is it will leave the EU.

IF we get a referendum - and it's highly unlikely the Government will actually do as it says - the question will be so skewed as to make sure the Govt gets the answer it wants.

:?: :?:
Are you seriously suggesting that the government would go against the result of a referendum?
You are a very funny guy!

Of course they could: they'd say the turn-out was too low, so it wasn't representative, or they'd have framed the question anyway so that it wasn't binding. There are a dozen ways they could wriggle out of it.
If you're suggesting you trust the government to do what they say they will do and to abide by their own decisions, then you're the funny guy.

Of course they could: they'd say the turn-out was too low, so it wasn't representative, or they'd have framed the question anyway so that it wasn't binding. There are a dozen ways they could wriggle out of it.
If you're suggesting you trust the government to do what they say they will do and to abide by their own decisions, then you're the funny guy.

:lol: It would be pollitically impossible for a government to go back on the decision of a referendum no matter how small the turnout.

Of course they could: they'd say the turn-out was too low, so it wasn't representative, or they'd have framed the question anyway so that it wasn't binding. There are a dozen ways they could wriggle out of it.
If you're suggesting you trust the government to do what they say they will do and to abide by their own decisions, then you're the funny guy.

:lol: It would be pollitically impossible for a government to go back on the decision of a referendum no matter how small the turnout.
But they could just ask you to vote again, and again and...

2 Lord Pheonix Benicius,

I believe you might want to:
1. Find out what's the predominant religion in the Netherlands, Northern Germany and Scandinavia.
2. Study some economics beyond the mercantilist ideas ("quite silly, really") that you seem to entertain.
3. Do some research on what Eurodollar is and how it's different from the Euro.
4. Read up on English military activities in Europe throughout the centuries (100 Year War... Duke of Marlboro... Waterloo... - ya know, the works.)
5. Discover if the UK isn't already a member of the EU.
6. Poke around the internet and enlighten yourself as to how the Euro has been trending against the U.S. Dollar lately.
7. Learn to spell "phoenix".

I never said Britain was not an EU member, I am well aware that it is thank you. It simply has not merged into the framework as others (accept Euro amongst other things which have been touched on previously) or accepted the EU as others have.

Ah, so when you wrote "Britain is its own land and I for one believe it should not merge with the European Union" the word "to merge" meant "to join the monetary union and ratify the EU Constitution". Well, I better call the editors of the Oxford Dictionary of English Language to alert them to this new definition!

The Euro is nowhere near as valuable or as influential as the pound and it is highly doubtful that it ever will be. As for the US dollar, it has lost ground against many currencies in recent months (fallen against its TWI). My point was about the pound, not the Greenback. Please don't confuse yourself.

The Almighty Pound... ROTFLOL -- I know Australia is a hot country, but maybe you shouldn't be out in the sun so much.
Do check what fraction of their reserves central banks around the world hold in euros and what in pounds.
Also, find out how Gerorge Soros made himself a billion dollars back in '92.

As for economics, I am not sure as to your point (you display no economic knowledge, just a bit of whinging) but any economist will tell you (perhaps write to a university scholar or a leading economist in the UK) that two countries or trade blocs trying to sell the same thing to each other are not being very economical.

You will find that America exports many manufactures to NIE's, transition and developing economies and in turn is supplied with raw materials. America is the most power economy on Earth. Wonder why when ETM's fluctuate far less than STM's (also refer to the BOP of these economies) and the US is manufacturing for nations which at the moment are not as industrial. The EU and the UK are both manufacturers and logic (plus economic reality) dictates that trying to sell a country what they already possess is not only "silly" but irresponsible (Britain's economic dominance relied on less industrial economies buying manufactured good from the motherland and in turn supplied the raw materials needed).

NIE, ETM, STM - WTF?

Thanks for the advice to contact "leading UK economists". A bit odd, though that you fail to mention any that endorse you view (if I may call them that) of international trade. Perhaps if you did get in touch with "scholars and economists" you would learn that:

1. The days of mercantilism -- when Britain, France, Germany imported raw materials from their colonies and exported manufactured products to these captive markets -- are over.
2. Most advanced (N. America, Japan, Europe) and rapidly developing nations (E. and S. Asia) trade mostly manufactured goods -- and very much to the mutual benefit, because manufactured goods are not "the same thing", as you claim, but a huge variety of products. No single nation can have absolute advantage in every segment of trade in manufactures. Nor is it possible for any nation to manufacture all the goods the world needs, hence trade on the basis of comparative advantage.
3. 2/3 of British imports and 2/3 of exports are manufactured goods. ~55% of British trade is with the EU. Businesspeople in the UK and the rest of the EU have created this volume of bilateral trade because trading with each other must have been profitable form them. But here comes "Pheonix" to tell them that British products are not competitive in Europe and that they must trade with the likes of Zimbabwe instead. Now they are doing the ROTFLOL.

As for religion, ever noticed how those countries you mentioned were all staunch allies of Britain and in fact quite dependent on Britain throughout history? Meanwhile, when one speaks of continental Europe they really mean: France, Germany (as a whole is more Catholic - especially in politics) and Spain - just to clarify that.

Defining "continental Europe" as France+Germany+Spain is absurd -- just ask the other continental European nation. Although, coming from someone who has already tried to redefine the meaning of verb "to merge", this is not altogether surprising.
Your original statement - "Religion - continental Europe is strongly Catholic" – makes no sense.
The latest permutation of your "religion" argument - that historically Protestant nations of Europe "were all staunch allies of Britain" is no better: Germany is a very obvious counterexample, and, contrary to your grand theory, Catholic Pollack + right-leaning gov'ts of Spain and Italy sided with the UK and US on Iraq.

Well, it's rather odd that I can find dozens of CVF sites, none of which mention the cancellation of the project. Add to that, the suspiciously similar sounding recent news of the HMS Invincible and HMS Illustrious being removed from service due to budgetary constraints, and you'll see why I'm not convinced.

Also, I don't see why the web is any less reliable than any other media. It tends to be very up to date on news issues; more so than the newspapers, which are only published once per day.

The media isn't the only source of information you can get. But, I did present my paper last september, so it has been a while (though still recent). Perhaps this is out of range for your carriers?

According to the Ministry of Defence website, the future carrier project is still underway (The article I read was updated in february 2004). I can't find any mention anywhere of the project having been cancelled. I also found a press release dated september 2003, which said that the project had entered the 'third assessment phase', but no mention of being scrapped.

And we all are sure that project will end the unemployment in Britain and make it's proud pound once again the best(est) currency in the world.

Most but not all.
12 miles, tell that to Iceland. They still have a fishing industry.I've many icelanders who want to be part of the EU. I hope one of these day they sign in.
Not with the common fisheries policy in place they won't. they'd be suckers if they did.

It won't happen as long as that rule is in place... This is the only thing that stands in the way of Iceland joining the EU. This is something that will be solved eventually, the EU has made changes so that small countries can survive before (luxemburg, for example) so why wouldn't they when it comes to Iceland? Everyone realizes that if Iceland joined on those terms our economy would be ruined.


Oh, and we don't have 12 miles, it's 200 and I'm pretty sure norway has more than 12 too.
We had to fight for those 250 miles though, and we won (British navy? the best in the world? :lol: :P )

Oh, and we don't have 12 miles, it's 200 and I'm pretty sure norway has more than 12 too.
We had to fight for those 250 miles though, and we won (British navy? the best in the world? :lol: :P )

As you are more than likely aware, there wasn't anything even resembling a fight, and the only reason Iceland got its own way is because it threatened to close down an important NATO base. A paper war if ever there was one.

Oh, and we don't have 12 miles, it's 200 and I'm pretty sure norway has more than 12 too.
We had to fight for those 250 miles though, and we won (British navy? the best in the world? :lol: :P )

As you are more than likely aware, there wasn't anything even resembling a fight, and the only reason Iceland got its own way is because it threatened to close down an important NATO base. A paper war if ever there was one.

Well...I guess a huge battleships trying to ram patrol boats doesn't resemble a fight...

Oh...and we still beat them :D