NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_24-9-2004_pg4_7
Just thought this was interesting. I know that Europeans tend to be divided on this subject, so it'd be interesting for me to see the debate stemming from this.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_24-9-2004_pg4_7
Just thought this was interesting. I know that Europeans tend to be divided on this subject, so it'd be interesting for me to see the debate stemming from this.
I am against it. Turkey is far from meeting the human rights standards we require in the EU. I don't trust the politicians to see clearly in this. Also seeing the immigration we can expect here in Germany from Turkey, with the existing issues we have, this is a most worrying development in my opinion.

i don't thats a very good idea because i have been observing turkey's human rights record and it is not very good. i hope the EU will not that point and realize that letting Turkey join the european union will a very bad mistake. i am totally against it.

I am against it. Turkey is far from meeting the human rights standards we require in the EU. I don't trust the politicians to see clearly in this. Also seeing the immigration we can expect here in Germany from Turkey, with the existing issues we have, this is a most worrying development in my opinion.
To tell you up front, it's not my Union, and I could care less what happens to Turkey. So I'll just moderate. I want o ask you why more immigration would be bad for Germany, especially with an aging population.

As a non-European (and damn proud), I say that perhaps they should get a sort of 'trial period', let them join for X years under the condition that they improve their human rights/whatever else, if they dont, boot 'em.
Maybe the US can invade them and make them part of the North American Union :P

To tell you up front, it's not my Union, and I could care less what happens to Turkey. So I'll just moderate. I want o ask you why more immigration would be bad for Germany, especially with an aging population.
I don't want to see any more immigrants with the bad employment situation we already have. While it's true that we have an aging population, it does not mean that foreigners immigrating will fix this problem. Especially not since Turks have a vastly different culture and heritage, which would not mix well with German culture and heritage. I fear the "Islamisation" of Germany since the Christian bias our politicians already have, is bad enough the way it is. Call me right-extreme if you want, but I don't want to see more Turks in Germany. We're called Germany for a reason, which is, the land of the Germans. Not the land of the Turks and Polish and Vietnamese and Russians, etc. :)

As a non-European (and damn proud), I say that perhaps they should get a sort of 'trial period', let them join for X years under the condition that they improve their human rights/whatever else, if they dont, boot 'em.
Maybe the US can invade them and make them part of the North American Union :P
Sorry, I'm aswell damn proud to be a European and German and as such I am against giving Turkey a trial period. Once in, they are in, but they shall not be in the EU before they meet the requirements.

I don't want to see any more immigrants with the bad employment situation we already have. While it's true that we have an aging population, it does not mean that foreigners immigrating will fix this problem. Especially not since Turks have a vastly different culture and heritage, which would not mix well with German culture and heritage. I fear the "Islamisation" of Germany since the Christian bias our politicians already have, is bad enough the way it is. Call me right-extreme if you want, but I don't want to see more Turks in Germany. We're called Germany for a reason, which is, the land of the Germans. Not the land of the Turks and Polish and Vietnamese and Russians, etc. :)
So, Germany is for Germans only. I know that has been a common theme in all European politics lately. But is this bordering xenophobia?

So, Germany is for Germans only. I know that has been a common theme in all European politics lately. But is this bordering xenophobia?
Not really, but I see myself being outnumbered by Russians in my neighborhood. That does not help much with keeping any sort of national identity. Adding more Turks to our population (which already is suffering from insane unemployment) is unacceptable.

Not really, but I see myself being outnumbered by Russians in my neighborhood. That does not help much with keeping any sort of national identity. Adding more Turks to our population (which already is suffering from insane unemployment) is unacceptable.
So you value national identity?

So you value national identity?
Among keeping those who are working employed and improving the situation for those who need work by having less competition, yes. But it's also the culture of Turkey. Ya know death penalty and more scarfed women is not something we need here. Germany is German and Turkey is Turkish. Please, don't ask me to explain why I value staying in the majority in our own country.

We're called Germany for a reason, which is, the land of the Germans. Not the land of the Turks and Polish and Vietnamese and Russians, etc. :)

Where I live it's always been different. The USA has so many different kinds of people and I find it kind of cool. I hear that in Europe Spain is a country with a lot of diversity as well.

I don't know about Turkey joining the EU. I don't live in Europe, but I know geography and most of it isn't even located in Europe.

Where I live it's always been different. The USA has so many different kinds of people and I find it kind of cool. I hear that in Europe Spain is a country with a lot of diversity as well.

I don't know about Turkey joining the EU. I don't live in Europe, but I know geography and most of it isn't even located in Europe.
I got no problem with diversity. But we are already diverse enough for most Germans :)

Among keeping those who are working employed and improving the situation for those who need work by having less competition, yes. But it's also the culture of Turkey. Ya know death penalty and more scarfed women is not something we need here. Germany is German and Turkey is Turkish. Please, don't ask me to explain why I value staying in the majority in our own country.
I won't. It's just that the idea of an ethnic group forming a single nation is just alien to me. In my view, whoever wants to be an American is an American. In this sense, I agree with one of my favorite Founding Framers, Thomas Jefferson, that any human can live wherever he damn pleases (as long as he isn't a criminal). But that's just my two cents. If immigrants come, trust me, you'll learn to adapt and tolerate them, if not completly accept and celebrate them.

I won't. It's just that the idea of an ethnic group forming a single nation is just alien to me. In my view, whoever wants to be an American is an American. In this sense, I agree with one of my favorite Founding Framers, Thomas Jefferson, that any human can live wherever he damn pleases (as long as he isn't a criminal). But that's just my two cents. If immigrants come, trust me, you'll learn to adapt and tolerate them, if not completly accept and celebrate them.
We already have problems keeping our own language from being "Englishified" - which feels like pollution to me. We are losing our own culture by foreign influence and mass production (Pop Idol ring a bell?). Germany like all other European nations, grew to it's position in over one thousand years of history. I am not willing to give that up just so we ca nall be diverse. Some (imo) wise people in the US already found out that humans retain their culture they are born in and try to keep it alive in their new host country. If many millions of Turks do that in Germany, the consequences for our country could be devastating. Not to mention that our social security system is already overburdened with the mass of unemployed people who cannot support themselves due to lack of jobs. The US has been a mix of a few European countries forever. It is a big land with a lot of empty space and many cultural centres for each culture (like Chinatown). This insulated culture-building cannot function in our country. We are much much smaller and limited in space. We "evolved" and made our country ourselves over a long time. I see all of this in danger if we allow a country as large as Turkey (and as US friendly aswell) into the EU.

Some diversity is fine. Too much diversity destroys a nation by the cultural pull in many directions on the entire community.

I do hope they admit Turkey to the EU

I do hope they admit Turkey to the EU
Why? They do not meet the requirements which apply for each and everyone. Turkey is not a free land and "democracy" as you might think. While our own system is far from perfect and should be reformed asap, I do not think that Turkey is ready - politically and economically - to be part of the European Union.

We already have problems keeping our own language from being "Englishified" - which feels like pollution to me. We are losing our own culture by foreign influence and mass production (Pop Idol ring a bell?). Germany like all other European nations, grew to it's position in over one thousand years of history. I am not willing to give that up just so we ca nall be diverse. Some (imo) wise people in the US already found out that humans retain their culture they are born in and try to keep it alive in their new host country. If many millions of Turks do that in Germany, the consequences for our country could be devastating. Not to mention that our social security system is already overburdened with the mass of unemployed people who cannot support themselves due to lack of jobs. The US has been a mix of a few European countries forever. It is a big land with a lot of empty space and many cultural centres for each culture (like Chinatown). This insulated culture-building cannot function in our country. We are much much smaller and limited in space. We "evolved" and made our country ourselves over a long time. I see all of this in danger if we allow a country as large as Turkey (and as US friendly aswell) into the EU.

Some diversity is fine. Too much diversity destroys a nation by the cultural pull in many directions on the entire community.
Actually, most of our ethnic groups tend to live in cities. Very few people live outside metropolises. The suburbs tend to be a mostly white, but have plenty of Asians and a few blacks. Cities are a cornucopia of ethnicities. New York City is a prime example. Interestingly enough, isolationists existed in large numbers in the 1800s, when the most immigrants came. They gained power in the 1920s with those rediculous quota laws and bans on Chinese immigrants, but they fell victim to the Civil Rights movement of the sixties. As I see it, change like this is inevitable, and in the long run, there is little anyone can do about it, for people always find ways to emigrate to certain countries.

Actually, most of our ethnic groups tend to live in cities. Very few people live outside metropolises. The suburbs tend to be a mostly white, but have plenty of Asians and a few blacks. Cities are a cornucopia of ethnicities. New York City is a prime example. Interestingly enough, isolationists existed in large numbers in the 1800s, when the most immigrants came. They gained power in the 1920s with those rediculous quota laws and bans on Chinese immigrants, but they fell victim to the Civil Rights movement of the sixties. As I see it, change like this is inevitable, and in the long run, there is little anyone can do about it, for people always find ways to emigrate to certain countries.
Maybe so, but we do not need to allow it nor make it possible if we do not want it. There is no right to be part of the EU and you can ask just about any German. I am sure that the vast majority is against this - yet again - ignorant behaviour of the politicians who care not at all for what the people want.

Maybe so, but we do not need to allow it nor make it possible if we do not want it. There is no right to be part of the EU and you can ask just about any German. I am sure that the vast majority is against this - yet again - ignorant behaviour of the politicians who care not at all for what the people want.
Well, as JFK said in his memoirs, a good politician does very unpopular things if he thinks it is right.

Well, as JFK said in his memoirs, a good politician does very unpopular things if he thinks it is right.
I disagree with this. Politicians are representatives of the people to represent their will. Not their personal will. Otherwise, it would be called monarchy.

Some recent research into the general attitudes of the turkish population should quell some of your fears Gigatron. A mass exodus from Turkey to Germany is not feasible although the already steady transaction might speed up.

Turkey is still a small power in terms of the rest of the EU and their policies as a dominantly islam nation show promise as a beacon to demonstrate that secular democratic policies will win internation support. Their human rights record shows improvement and they are the only nation other than france with a school headscarf ban. They should be rewarded for at least trying to gain some elements of western democracy, and should be given benefit of the doubt when it comes to whether they want merely aid or actual foreign investement.

Some recent research into the general attitudes of the turkish population should quell some of your fears Gigatron. A mass exodus from Turkey to Germany is not feasible although the already steady transaction might speed up.

Turkey is still a small power in terms of the rest of the EU and their policies as a dominantly islam nation show promise as a beacon to demonstrate that secular democratic policies will win internation support. Their human rights record shows improvement and they are the only nation other than france with a school headscarf ban. They should be rewarded for at least trying to gain some elements of western democracy, and should be given benefit of the doubt when it comes to whether they want merely aid or actual foreign investement.
Since it's mainly Germany who pays the bills of the EU, I say no. If a country wants the money of the EU and wants the "prestige" of being a EU member, then it should at least 100% fulfil the requirements. Anything else is hypocrisy towards the other nations who would like to join but are not allowed on the same grounds or who were required to fulfil the requirements before being allowed to join. Seeing that Turkey would be a powerful US ally in the EU, next to Britain, I don't think that having them in would be benefitial for our foreign policy independence of US pressure. It is not within our European interests to have yet another nation that parrots everything the US says and does even if it is against international law.

I disagree with this. Politicians are representatives of the people to represent their will. Not their personal will. Otherwise, it would be called monarchy.

But JFK said it! It must be true!

But JFK said it! It must be true!
While I know that it's sarcasm, I don't give a flying Eurocent what JFK said, other than that "Ich bin ein Berliner" was a saying of freedom and relief in the time when he said it ;)

While I know that it's sarcasm, I don't give a flying Eurocent what JFK said, other than that "Ich bin ein Berliner" was a saying of freedom and relief in the time when he said it ;)

Does that actually mean 'I am a donut'? :)

Does that actually mean 'I am a donut'? :)
It does not. A Berliner is not a donut but something similar. On the other hand, a citizen of Berlin is also a Berliner, thus why both terms need to be seen in context.

Since it's mainly Germany who pays the bills of the EU, I say no. If a country wants the money of the EU and wants the "prestige" of being a EU member, then it should at least 100% fulfil the requirements. Anything else is hypocrisy towards the other nations who would like to join but are not allowed on the same grounds or who were required to fulfil the requirements before being allowed to join. Seeing that Turkey would be a powerful US ally in the EU, next to Britain, I don't think that having them in would be benefitial for our foreign policy independence of US pressure. It is not within our European interests to have yet another nation that parrots everything the US says and does even if it is against international law.

actually on an interesting note. The economist intelligence unit recently did a survey on what people in europe think of the US. About 51% of germans were pro US while only 21% of Turks were pro US.
Of course its a broad swath and does not represent the whole pop. but it was interesting

They are only considering if the EU can start accession NEGOTIATIONS with Turkey. It's estimated, that if the EU summit gives the green light on december 17th, the negotiations will last for 10-15 years. Of course Turkey must meet the preconditions of acquis communitaire before allowed to actually join the union (all new members have to). It's not like the Turkish hordes are coming to Germany after this christmas -maybe after the christmas of 2019. If the talks begin, I'm sure Turkey is more willing to actually improve its human rights and whatnot.

Turkey should join one day.
but, first off its should prove its a proper democracy, as in the army should not have so much power within the nation.
The kurds should not be as prosecuted
1/3 of turkey is still involved in rural farming. so they are still relatively poor. they need more investment within their nation.
They need to improve their human rights record.
need to be more accepting of other religions.

I think one of the main fears for the current EU leaders, is that turkey will have the largest population in europe within 15 years or so. This means they will have the largest voting block. not good for france and germany.
Also up till now the EU has been a christian club. with the entry on muslim countries or the one or two predominantly mulsim countries in the balklands, there could be a change in the social views.
Also if the EU wants to become a superpower in the future there should be a more cohesion, which with such a mix may not be possible.
On the same note, turkey has the largest army in europe, 500,000 soldiers i beleive. This would benefit the EU should it wish to flex its military muscles in the future.

And about the idea of th EU being flooded with turks. from what i've seen so far with the introduction of the former soviet countries, whom everyone thought would flood western europe, only a few people have moved west, been a trickle, not a flood.

so even if we say yes to turkey, it will take 10 to 20 years to get in. But in the mean time, it will give them a boost. as companies and countries will invest there, and they have a reason to improve their standards.

when turkey joins the eu its the end of it. and it would mean a civilwar in about 6-8 years in germany. sure im absolutly against it. and in any poll about this it was 80%again, 10%for, 10% i dont care.

there are a some post in the n24 forum that explain my view in more detail. but they are in german and im not in the mood and too lazy to translate them. maybe someone else will?

People of Turkish descent living in Germany with German citizenship = Germans.

Since it's mainly Germany who pays the bills of the EU, I say no. If a country wants the money of the EU and wants the "prestige" of being a EU member, then it should at least 100% fulfil the requirements. Anything else is hypocrisy towards the other nations who would like to join but are not allowed on the same grounds or who were required to fulfil the requirements before being allowed to join. Seeing that Turkey would be a powerful US ally in the EU, next to Britain, I don't think that having them in would be benefitial for our foreign policy independence of US pressure. It is not within our European interests to have yet another nation that parrots everything the US says and does even if it is against international law.

All i have to say is this is a bunch of bull. For one thing not even France cant even uphold 100% requirements and seeing as how you are from Germany i would think you would know a little more about your own country than i do. Your country (Germany) is not in compliance with EU requiremnts along with France and Itally which got a little slap on the wrist for not staying within economic requirements. I would at least expect people that live in the EU to know more about what is going on in their own continant. And as far as your earlier post about Turkey being to big and also being US friendly i say why not? Is that the real reason you dont want Turkey to be admitted into the EU? because Turkey is US friendly? So much for allies whenever you guys need help who does the EU come crying to???

I think more ethnic diversety is a good thing, when you think about it, all the idears of nationalism are prety stupid, nations change, many didnt even exist as a single state afew hundred years ago, and the culture and language that people prize and dont want to be "corrupted" is just a corruption of of an older version, witch is corrupted from an even older version. If we didnt all mix and swap idears we would still be living in caves, turkey may be idiologicaly and cultruly different to other EU members, but so what, if they can proov they cna meet the criteria to join, they should be alowed too, it dosnt matter that they have cultural differences, the countrys in the EU still have to deal with them, wether there in the EU or not, but if they are in the EU, then exchanges of culture can happen more readely, so by that logic, if they join the EU, cultural friction should start to reduce, and it will probalby be become less of a problem, its not asif there arnt countries in the EU with great cultural differences alredy, compare the cultures of France, the UK or Ireland to some of the new ex communist members for example

if you americans like the turks so much, take them!
and cause i cant find my post from the n24 forum (deleted?), here is a report from http://www.welt.de/data/2004/09/24/337062.html

1. Die Türkei gehört nicht zu Europa


Das tat sie nie, weder geografisch noch kulturell. Das Erbe der Antike, die jüdisch-christliche Ethik, die Renaissance und die Aufklärung sind an ihr genauso vorübergegangen wie an uns die Kultur des Harems. Zwar standen die Osmanen 1683 vor Wien, Polen und Reichstruppen aber konnten sie glücklicherweise vertreiben. Heute gehört nur noch ein Zipfel der Türkei, Türkisch-Thrakien, zu Europa. Sollte die Geografie ins Spiel gebracht werden, ließe sich über Istanbul reden: die Stadt am Bosporus als erste Polis der Neuzeit und Mitglied der EU! Im Ernst, wer ein außereuropäisches Land aufnimmt, muss sich auch Israels und der Maghrebstaaten, der Ukraine, Weisrusslands und Russlands annehmen. Europa als geografische Einheit, als gemeinsamer Geschichts- und Kulturraum ginge zu Grunde.


2. Ankara missachtet Menschenrechte


Zu Europa gehört die Gabe, sich beständig selbst infrage zu stellen. Ankara hat diese Fähigkeit zu keiner Zeit besessen. Bis heute leugnen die Regierung, das Parlament und viele türkische Historiker den Völkermord an den Armeniern in den Jahren 1895/96 und 1914/15. Prekärer noch: Selbst nach Amtsantritt Erdogans wird in der Türkei flächendeckend gefoltert. Das stellt die türkische Menschenrechtsorganisation Human Rights Foundation fest. Allein bis August seien 600 Folterfälle dokumentiert. Zwar versprach der Ministerpräsident gestern in Brüssel, von der Folter zu lassen, die Wahrung der Menschenrechte scheint dennoch nicht gewährleistet. Sie aber gehört zu Europa wie der Eiffelturm zu Paris.


3. Es droht eine Völkerwanderung


In der Europäischen Union herrscht das Prinzip der Freizügigkeit. Jeder darf dort hinziehen, wo es ihm gefällt. Das gilt auch für die Türken als Mitglieder der EU – selbst wenn Brüssel Übergangsfristen von bis zu sieben Jahren wie im Falle Polens einführen sollte. Die Freiheit brächte viele anatolische Bauern auf die Beine. Experten fürchten, dass bis zu drei Millionen Menschen gen Nordwesten ziehen könnten. Etwa 15 Millionen Moslems leben in der EU, allein in Deutschland 2,5 Millionen Türken. Von Ausnahmen abgesehen, ist ihre Integration gescheitert. Eine türkische Masseneinwanderung würde die Probleme nur noch verschärfen.


4. Die Unionsidee wird zerstört


In dem Versuch, Europa aus den Trümmern des Weltkrieges zu führen und es zu einen, lag stets auch die Idee, „eine Art Vereinigte Staaten von Europa“ zu schaffen, wie es Winston Churchill 1946 in seiner Züricher Rede formulierte. Bis heute halten die meisten Mitglieder der EU daran fest. Beleg dafür ist die Umbenennung der „Europäischen Gemeinschaft“ in „Europäische Union“, von der Einführung einer gemeinsamen Währung zu schweigen. Will man den Unionscharakter bewahren, will man die Union vertiefen, ist ein europäisches Wirgefühl vonnöten. Ein EU-Beitritt der Türkei – in 20 Jahren das bevölkerungsreichste Land der EU – brächte die wirklich europäischen Staaten auseinander. Aus diesem Grund sind übrigens die Briten für den Beitritt Ankaras. Sie hoffen, die EU mithilfe der Türkei in eine Freihandelszone zu verwandeln und die politische Vertiefung zu unterlaufen.


5. Die Kosten sind nicht zu bewältigen

Und das in allen Bereichen: finanziell, politisch und in sozialer Hinsicht. Experten verschiedener unabhängiger Institute haben errechnet, dass der Beitritt der Türkei weitaus teurer wäre als die Aufnahme aller zehn neuen Länder am 1..Mai. Nimmt man an, dass Ankara genauso behandelt wird wie jene zehn, hätte es Anspruch auf über 45 Milliarden Euro. Doch damit nicht genug: Der türkische Agrarmarkt – er macht immer noch über 14 Prozent des türkischen Bruttoinlandsproduktes aus – brächte Brüssel und seine Agrarpolitik in schwerste Bedrängnis. Darüber hinaus würde die Türkei als größter Staat innerhalb der europäischen Institutionen den gleichen Rang wie Frankreich, Deutschland und Großbritannien erhalten. Zum ersten Mal in der Geschichte der EU erhielte das ärmste Land eine politisch dominierende Rolle.


6. Die EU ist keine karitative Anstalt


Die Entwicklung in der Türkei ist eine innertürkische Angelegenheit. Die Türkei selbst und viele Anhänger eines Beitritts sehen das anders. Sie instrumentalisieren die EU, um eine bestimmte politische Linie im Land durchzusetzen. Die Türkei muss ein Eigeninteresse an Reformen und der Modernisierung haben. Die Türkei muss ihre politischen Hausaufgaben selbst lösen.


7. Das Strategie-Argument zieht nicht


Die Befürworter betonen sinngemäß: Um den Konflikt der Kulturen im Kampf gegen den Terrorismus zu entkrampfen, müsse das EU-Mitglied Türkei als Modell eines verwestlichten, wohlhabenden islamischen Staates auf die moslemisch-arabische Welt ausstrahlen. Dort aber ist Ankara etwa so beliebt wie die Japaner in Korea. Viele Araber haben die Türken als Kolonialmacht noch immer nicht vergessen. Die Türkei ist keine Brücke zwischen Ost und West. Zudem ist für strategische Fragen vor allem die Nato zuständig. Ihr gehören die Türken seit 1949 an.
´
8. Die EU kommt in üble Nachbarschaft


Wäre Ankara Mitglied in der EU, stießen Europas Grenzen an die zentralen Konfliktregionen der Erde. Plötzlich wären wir Nachbarn höchst unappetitlicher Regime mit der Neigung zu unberechenbaren Drohgebärden und unglaublichen Potenzialen an Extremisten. Viele Tausend Grenzkilometer müssten streng bewacht werden, um all die Menschen abzuhalten, die aus Asien, der Arabischen Halbinsel, vielleicht sogar aus Afrika über die Türkei nach Europa wollen.


9. Das Beitrittsversprechen ist Legende


Um die Südostflanke der Nato auch wirtschaftlich zu stabilisieren, baten die Amerikaner in der Hochzeit des Kalten Krieges darum, der Türkei wirtschaftlich auf die Beine zu helfen. Aus diesem Grund eröffnete der europäische Klub der sechs in Artikel.28 des Assoziierungsvertrages von 1964 Ankara die prinzipielle Möglichkeit eines Beitritts. Nur war damit die Europäische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft gemeint. Ein Beitritt zu einer politischen Union stand nie zur Diskussion. Die Europäer werden nicht wortbrüchig, wenn sie die Türkei nicht als Vollmitglied in die EU integrieren.


10. Es gibt sinnvolle Alternativen


Setzt Ankara seinen Reformkurs fort, wird es auch ohne Vollmitgliedschaft – assoziiertes Mitglied der EU ist es bereits – eine moderne Demokratie werden. Geschützt würde sie im Rahmen der Nato. Darüber hinaus könnten ihr weitere Vorzüge in der Zollunion gewährt werden. Auch ließen sich schon bestehende Hilfsprogramme aufstocken. Die Türkei gehört zu Europas Nachbarn, sie ist Bündnispartner in der Nato. Wo liegt das Problem?

sorry don't speak german.
do you know where i can find the article in english/spanish/french?

Also to the americans that feel that turkey should join the EU.
What do you think of mexico becoming part of the US or of the US devolving some of its powers to NAFTA in the future?
curious...

I'm in favour of negotiations that would eventually bring Turkey into the EU. The fact that there are cultural differences is not a obstacle as I see it; if anything, it's rather a good thing. Most importantly, however, negotiating to get into the EU is forcing Turkey to improve its human rights record. If we break off talks, they'll have no reason for doing so any more.

I.M.H.O.

While I do not think Turkey should join the E.U. in the foreseeable future (my teacher says they should give up part of their country to the Kurds. I agree with him!) I sense a trace of xenophobia and nationalism in the iron belief that Europe will suffer from a horde of immigrants if Turkey joins. I do not believe that would be the case. Not as many people as the East-West immigration after german reunion. People tend to want to stay in their own country.
Sure, too many immigrants in a short amount of time may lead to civil unrest, but one must remember that our ancestors were immigrants too. (if one goes far enough back in history) It says so in the Old Testaments that the Israelis should not be hard against the new people because of that (that they themselves were newcomers).

Europe is a lovely old continent, and I wish one of my home countries (Norway) would join, but it doesn't mean that we're better then anyone or will even manage to keep them out. Germany is a nice place and I've friends there, so I don't mean to be offend when I say: Sachsen just got a 10% vote for you-know-what. And it's not like east germans don't crowd job positions in the west.

I'm xenophobic myself, 'bit about Islam, more about other things, issues. Fear of the uknown is natural. The world would be a better place if people could deal with it.

That said, I agree with Germany needs to deal with it's issues regarding it's new citizens (yes, 'Turks' can 'feel' German and love German soil as well) before it lets in another large wave of immigrants.

Well that said, now I'm done, have a nice discussion.

And the Norwegians fought the Swedes
- And the Swedes fought the Finnish
- And the Finnish killed the Russians
- And the Russians slaughtered the Tcechnyans
- And the Tchecnyans bombed Moscow'
- And Russia was attacked by Japan
- And the Mongols tried to invade Japen
and so on and so on and so on and so on AND IT ALL grows old.

(The more the things change, the more they stay the same.)

I'm not saying the world doesn't need nationstates, it does need them for order among other things, but the world would be an easier place if it could do without them.
I long for a time when time has passed, and a new world will come. No matter how much we immigrate or emigrate we will never find Eden, not on this world.
(Might as well post this..)

Exactly, in the end it all grows old and things always change

I am against it. Turkey is far from meeting the human rights standards we require in the EU. I don't trust the politicians to see clearly in this. Also seeing the immigration we can expect here in Germany from Turkey, with the existing issues we have, this is a most worrying development in my opinion.

Well if your worried about the immigration into Germany, then we in the UK should be shitting ourselves, since along with France, Germany has a nice get out clause over immigration from new members for a number of years, whereas we don't. But hey i guess the grass is always greener on the otherside.

An reffering to the article that orginally started this stream, i agree with the French.... for once.

All i have to say is this is a bunch of bull. For one thing not even France cant even uphold 100% requirements and seeing as how you are from Germany i would think you would know a little more about your own country than i do. Your country (Germany) is not in compliance with EU requiremnts along with France and Itally which got a little slap on the wrist for not staying within economic requirements. I would at least expect people that live in the EU to know more about what is going on in their own continant. And as far as your earlier post about Turkey being to big and also being US friendly i say why not? Is that the real reason you dont want Turkey to be admitted into the EU? because Turkey is US friendly? So much for allies whenever you guys need help who does the EU come crying to???


to be fair it does work the otherway round you know.... when little President Bush wanted the Iraqi oil to whom did he come crying.... OH WAIT I remember... BLAIR.... and we alllll love a good little Blair who will spend Billions of British pounds and waste countless lives on an American lead "Coalition" aka You do what your told or we will bomb you.... Though i'm not sure that Even George Bush is insane enough to go all out against Britain... entertaining thought though....

As far as I remember anyway, Bush (US) went to the UN to cry for help, he got the stinky middle finger (France, Germany and Russia) and instead went out into the world to buy together his own lil coalition of the weak and willing. Bush has bought "friends" who are now slowly but surely dropping down from the bandwagon. I want to see the US carry the full burden (militarily and financially) of what they created in Afghanistan and Iraq. Maybe it will be enough to remind them that war is damn expensive and is an economic boost for only a short time.

And Blair is like the worst politician I've ever seen, next to Aznar or his Polish collegue. No principles, no lasting arguments to support his position and stubbornness to insist on failing politics because acknowledging failure would cost him his politicial power. This is the most detestable form of politician - looking out for his personal power, not the well-being of his country and the demands of the people.

Well if your worried about the immigration into Germany, then we in the UK should be shitting ourselves, since along with France, Germany has a nice get out clause over immigration from new members for a number of years, whereas we don't. But hey i guess the grass is always greener on the otherside.
.
Austria and Germany got this clause and that was a smart thing to do. Though it ends in 2011. But lets be honest about Turkey. They would be the biggest country of the EU. Today they have 60 million people and an exploding population. In 2030 it is going to be more than 100 million. What to you think that is going to lead in future developments given the situation in Turkey? It would cause mass immigration into the EU especially into those countries which already have huge Turkish communities (like Germany). And especially Kurds would migrate.
And lets be honest about the situation in Turkey. They want to punish criminally breaking the marriage. Their cultue is not in compliane with western values of free, open and democratic societies. They are ruled by (moderate?) islamists who want EU membership in order to get rid of the power of the Turkish military which has in the last 85 years prevented them from seizing power. EU membership of Turkey would end that and would cause the rise of Islamism in Turkey and Europe.
I´m all for a partnership with Turkey. I´m in favour of a priviliged partnership between Turkey and the EU. But I´m against a full membership in the foreseeable future.
And by the way: Who would pay for it? The answer is clear: Germany mainly. Britain has still Thatchers pay deduction.
Britain should contribute more to the EU than it has more right to have a say. But wanting to pay less and to have more say will not do. And to put it rather plain. I observe British politics closely: Britain is obviously completly unwilling to do more.

People of Turkish descent living in Germany with German citizenship = Germans.
That is right. But Turkish people without German citizenship living in Gemany = Turks.
And that is the case for more than 90% of them. Many don´t want that anyway. They want to remain Turks.

Don't know if this has been pointed out already or not, haven't read through the entire thread, but here goes...

An influx of Turks would not help the Germans solve their aging population problem for the simple fact that what Germany would get are mostly the Turks from the villages in East Turkey, which is for the most part a rather backwards area. Meaning that they'd get a horde of mainly uneducated individuals who besides having little to no education also uphold a set of standards that are at odds with those of the Germans themselves. Eventually this will only further the problems that already exist between the Germans and the non-German population, which I suspect will eventually only work in favor of the extreme right movements.

Don't know if this has been pointed out already or not, haven't read through the entire thread, but here goes...
An influx of Turks would not help the Germans solve their aging population problem for the simple fact that what Germany would get are mostly the Turks from the villages in East Turkey, which is for the most part a rather backwards area. Meaning that they'd get a horde of mainly uneducated individuals who besides having little to no education also uphold a set of standards that are at odds with those of the Germans themselves. Eventually this will only further the problems that already exist between the Germans and the non-German population, which I suspect will eventually only work in favor of the extreme right movements.
I´ve this concern as well. We should not be blind to the realities. France has this problem with its arabic population. Look at the results of Mr. Le Pen. With 17% he got more than any right-wing populists in Germany every got post-World-War II. Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands won in a landsline by speaking about the inferiority of Muslim culture. That are facts.
And in Austria Mr. Haider got 27% in 1999 in a nation wide election. We all now how dangerous such Austrian nationalists could be. Hitler was one of them actually.
Every country has a responsibility. And that is to think about itself first. Turkey has to solve its problems within its own country and not by trying to export their massiv population growth and their Kurd problem them to the EU.
They should get support. But that could be done via an privileged partnership but not a full memership in the EU.
That is the best way to deal with the issue for the foreseable future. Turkey just don´t fit into the EU at least for the foreseable future.

Maybe the US can invade them and make them part of the North American Union :P
I'm all for it. But make it quik.

Well, as JFK said in his memoirs, a good politician does very unpopular things if he thinks it is right.
Yeah. And what did it get him? A bullet in the head. :D

Some recent research into the general attitudes of the turkish population should quell some of your fears Gigatron. A mass exodus from Turkey to Germany is not feasible although the already steady transaction might speed up.
Oh. So those 300,000+ Turks that apply for a visa to Germany every year are just imaginative?

People of Turkish descent living in Germany with German citizenship = Germans.
Not if you ask most of them it's not.

Oh. So those 300,000+ Turks that apply for a visa to Germany every year are just imaginative?
What kinds of visas are they? Are they purely for working or for visiting relatives. Lot of Turks already live in Germany, so I'd imagine they get a lot of relatives visiting. Germany isn't such a swell place to live in. Britain has always been a top destination for immigrants in Europe and they haven't been flooded with immigrants from East Europe.

I'm all for allowing Turkey to join the EU. Turkey would do a lot for the EU's weight in diplomatic and military issues. The EU could even invade Syria by land!

Turkey's GDP is very low compared to even the EU average, but then again, its also growing faster than the average. And all those Turks that are farmers will be a lot less of a problem once they start buying enough tractors and other farming tools, because there will be less of them.

I'm all for allowing Turkey to join the EU. Turkey would do a lot for the EU's weight in diplomatic and military issues. The EU could even invade Syria by land!
Probably the EU doesn´t want that. There is no CFSP (common foreign and security policy). If the UK and the US want to invade Iraq they could do it via Iraq and - if Turkey doesn´t make problems that time - via Turkey. That is not a reason for EU membership. Or should we allow Iraq to be a member of an EU. After all it is such an "European" country?

...I'm all for allowing Turkey to join the EU. Turkey would do a lot for the EU's weight in diplomatic and military issues. The EU could even invade Syria by land!

Would you care to explain this a little further? So we should let Turkey to join the EU so we could invade Syria by land? Has this been a big issue somewhere? Just curious.

What kinds of visas are they? Are they purely for working or for visiting relatives. Lot of Turks already live in Germany, so I'd imagine they get a lot of relatives visiting.
Sure it is. But the idea isn't to leave once it expires.
Germany isn't such a swell place to live in. Britain has always been a top destination for immigrants in Europe and they haven't been flooded with immigrants from East Europe.
Unfortunatly Germany is the main destination goal for Turks who are itching to get out of Turkey.

And all those Turks that are farmers will be a lot less of a problem once they start buying enough tractors and other farming tools, because there will be less of them.
Unfortunatly most of those farmers from east Anatolia don't have the money to buy lot's of farming tools. And therefor are looking for a way to get to Europe, mainly Germany.

The EU should also make up rules for kicking out members or suspending their benefits if enough rules are broken. Something like this:

If member X breaks rule Y, then a majority of other members can vote to suspend all farm subsidies to member X. No farm subsidies = angry farmers = political death in most countries for the government.

Or maybe we ought to get rid of most of the agricultural subsidies anyway. That would also make the idea of 30 million Turkish farmers a lot less scary.

Would you care to explain this a little further? So we should let Turkey to join the EU so we could invade Syria by land? Has this been a big issue somewhere? Just curious.
Don´t you watch the news? Iran and Syria are the next problematic countries. While I agree with the US that a regime change in those countries would be desireable I don´t which to take them into the EU.

farm subsidies
And Turkey would slorp up some 11.5 billion Euro's a year in farm subsidies alone.

Or maybe we ought to get rid of most of the agricultural subsidies anyway. That would also make the idea of 30 million Turkish farmers a lot less scary.
And what do you think those farmers would do then? Some would go bancrupt and would need to look for other work. And since many wouldn´t find them in Turkey they would migrate to Europe. Turkey has an exploding population. Today 60 million and that is going to grow up to 100 million in 2030. Turkey really is an developing country with even the same demographic structure. Eastern Europe doesn´t have this problem.
Therefore I´m for a partnership with Turkey but against full membership in the foreseable future. We could offer them a privileged partnership though - also in the economic and defense field. After all. It is a member of Nato. And since an European defense policy DOESN´T exist that is the instituition for dealing with that issues.

Unfortunatly Germany is the main destination goal for Turks who are itching to get out of Turkey.
I can't argue with this, because I don't really know all the details, but because of all those Turks already in Germany it does seem plausible.

We have to bear in mind that if we allow Turkey to join the EU in say 2015-2020, then there'll be a lot less itching there. Foreign investment in Turkey is really low at the moment, but I bet that the prospect of EU membership would in itself do wonders for the Turkish economy by making it a more attractive place to invest in and forcing it to adhere to all our wonderful economic regulations.

Besides, Germany and other member states can also restrict the free movement of people as they have done with the present enlargement.

More GDP = less itching

The EU should also make up rules for kicking out members or suspending their benefits if enough rules are broken. Something like this:

If member X breaks rule Y, then a majority of other members can vote to suspend all farm subsidies to member X. No farm subsidies = angry farmers = political death in most countries for the government.
That would only work for countries who get more out of the EU than they pay in. The others would just Veto the EU budget and wouldn´t pay their pay.
BTW. Every country has the right to leave the EU anyway. Therefore such a sword is at least doubtfull and against the more powerful countries not useable. And Turkey would be potentially the most powerfull country of the EU since it would have the highest population - and that with a fast growing tendency.

Don´t you watch the news? Iran and Syria are the next problematic countries. While I agree with the US that a regime change in those countries would be desireable I don´t which to take them into the EU.

Oh. I watch plenty of news. I just hadn't heard that argument before. Do you mean to say I somehow argued that Iran and Syria should be adopted to the EU aswell? Now I'm really confused... I just wanted to know if somebody has stated we should accept Turkey to the EU just because it would be too hard to invade Syria otherwise (I wasn't even aware the EU was dead set to invade Syria...). Sounds stupid, but I'm quite sure there is some convincing rationale behind it.

WTF? Are they admitting birds to the EU?

Would you care to explain this a little further? So we should let Turkey to join the EU so we could invade Syria by land? Has this been a big issue somewhere? Just curious.
I'm not for invading anyone and I can't think of any reason why the EU should invade Syria. I just highlighted the geographical proportions of the EU if Turkey would join the EU. At the moment if I look at a map Syria is far, far away, but its still Turkey's neighbor.

Thanks Dalekia. I thought so. Just couldn't resist... :)

Turkey has an exploding population. Today 60 million and that is going to grow up to 100 million in 2030. Turkey really is an developing country with even the same demographic structure.
And they'd all be buying European goods. German cars, Swedish porn, Nokia's cell phones and whatever stuff those French national champions make.

I can't argue with this, because I don't really know all the details, but because of all those Turks already in Germany it does seem plausible.
It is plausible.

We have to bear in mind that if we allow Turkey to join the EU in say 2015-2020, then there'll be a lot less itching there. Foreign investment in Turkey is really low at the moment, but I bet that the prospect of EU membership would in itself do wonders for the Turkish economy by making it a more attractive place to invest in and forcing it to adhere to all our wonderful economic regulations.
Besides, Germany and other member states can also restrict the free movement of people as they have done with the present enlargement.
More GDP = less itching
That is only partly true. You forget the political destability within Turkey and the nationality conflict within it. And you forget the islamists tedencies within the country.
And additionally you fail to see that the restrictions regarding free movement against East Europe are limitted till 2011. We haven´t chewed this enlargement, we haven´t reformed the EU instituition yet, we haven´t agreed to a new budget plattform, e.g. The EU has enough to do by itself. It is not possible to get such a big country in in the foreseable future - at least till 2020-30.
And given the developments within Turkey and the cultural differences which go from minority issues up until criminal law and human rights (there are islamists tendencies) I would prefer a privileged partnership with Turkey. If Turkey wants to reestablish the Ottoman Empire I would not reject it. They could take care about Iraq, Iran and Syria if the US gets unwilling to do so. We shall support it. But it is better to deal with those issues outside of EU membership. I would prefer Turkey to found an union of Turkmen states which could include Central Asia. That could be closely linked to the EU, like the EU and Nafta are politically linked. But I don´t see a prospect to merger those regional pacts.

WTF? Are they admitting birds to the EU?

twit

Oh. I watch plenty of news. I just hadn't heard that argument before. Do you mean to say I somehow argued that Iran and Syria should be adopted to the EU aswell? Now I'm really confused... I just wanted to know if somebody has stated we should accept Turkey to the EU just because it would be too hard to invade Syria otherwise (I wasn't even aware the EU was dead set to invade Syria...). Sounds stupid, but I'm quite sure there is some convincing rationale behind it.
There is: But we have to have discussion in Europe how far the EU should be enlarged. I think we all agree that it can´t expand indefinately. But where should, ought, might be the appropiate border of an EU? That is the real question. Turkey is one area of dispute. Another one would be Israel and Georgia. Probably the Ukraine. What about Russia?
I wouldn´t exclued all of those. But Russia, Israel or Marocco I wouldn´t see as European countries. The same for Iraq, Syria or Iran.
Turkey is 95% an Asian country. So, I would prefer a privileged partnership rather than a full membership to the EU.

And they'd all be buying European goods. German cars, Swedish porn, Nokia's cell phones and whatever stuff those French national champions make.
Porn is illegal in Turkey. And they can buy those stuff even if they aren´t a member of the EU. In the US and China people also buy European products.

Turkey should join one day.
but, first off its should prove its a proper democracy, as in the army should not have so much power within the nation.
The kurds should not be as prosecuted
1/3 of turkey is still involved in rural farming. so they are still relatively poor. they need more investment within their nation.
They need to improve their human rights record.
need to be more accepting of other religions.

I think one of the main fears for the current EU leaders, is that turkey will have the largest population in europe within 15 years or so. This means they will have the largest voting block. not good for france and germany.
Also up till now the EU has been a christian club. with the entry on muslim countries or the one or two predominantly mulsim countries in the balklands, there could be a change in the social views.
Also if the EU wants to become a superpower in the future there should be a more cohesion, which with such a mix may not be possible.
On the same note, turkey has the largest army in europe, 500,000 soldiers i beleive. This would benefit the EU should it wish to flex its military muscles in the future.

And about the idea of th EU being flooded with turks. from what i've seen so far with the introduction of the former soviet countries, whom everyone thought would flood western europe, only a few people have moved west, been a trickle, not a flood.

so even if we say yes to turkey, it will take 10 to 20 years to get in. But in the mean time, it will give them a boost. as companies and countries will invest there, and they have a reason to improve their standards.

I'm not for invading anyone and I can't think of any reason why the EU should invade Syria. I just highlighted the geographical proportions of the EU if Turkey would join the EU. At the moment if I look at a map Syria is far, far away, but its still Turkey's neighbor.
That is actually one reason for me to reject Turkish membership for the foreseable future. We in Europe aren´t capable to formulate a common foreign and security policy towards Iraq, Iran and Syria.
Enlarging the EU to their borders would make things even worse since then they would be our next-door neighbours. The EU in its current form and due to the deep splits between its members couldn´t stand that anymore, because them we couldn´t afford such disagreements from repreting itself and the EU could collapse.

Where I live it's always been different. The USA has so many different kinds of people and I find it kind of cool. I hear that in Europe Spain is a country with a lot of diversity as well.

To a point. I draw the line when tax dollars are being spent to duplicate everything in other languages.

Visiting another country and not knowing the native language is one thing. Living there--it's a sign of respect for the country you are living in, to either already know, or learn the language quickly.

This Turkish issue in Germany sounds a great deal like the Mexican issue we're seeing in America. I don't know how many illegal aliens you get from Turkey in Germany, but we're in the millions in the US.

And some are enjoying benefits like welfare and student grants.

That is only partly true. You forget the political destability within Turkey and the nationality conflict within it. And you forget the islamists tedencies within the country.
And additionally you fail to see that the restrictions regarding free movement against East Europe are limitted till 2011. We haven´t chewed this enlargement, we haven´t reformed the EU instituition yet, we haven´t agreed to a new budget plattform, e.g. The EU has enough to do by itself.
I have to admit, that I am a bit too idealistic about the EU. We are in a pretty shitty state right now. I don't really see any chance of getting the new constitution in place and I'm not sure if that's such a bad thing. I'm afraid that the EU will be pretty much paralysed with all the new members and old voting rules. Maybe we should just sit tight for a while and digest all the East Europeans.

Anyway, I think the human rights stuff is just an excuse for want of better reasons. The EU has clear levels regarding human rights that all member states must pass and Turkey is doing a lot to reach that level. The Kurds do seem to be a real problem, but if Turkey can't handle it, then of course membership is out of the question. If Turkey is shown the door, then I bet the human rights progress will start going the same way too.

Porn is illegal in Turkey.
I bet they still buy it.

I think one of the main fears for the current EU leaders, is that turkey will have the largest population in europe within 15 years or so. This means they will have the largest voting block. not good for france and germany..
I don´t now why you always see Franco-German conspiracies everywhere. As a matter of fact the voting right of the new Eu constituition was changed to the principal of the double majority meaning that a qualified majority means 55% of the states who represent 65% of the population. Germany is the main beneficiary from that. But due to the double-majority no country can ever dominate Europe, since it always needs to be a majority of states as well.


And about the idea of th EU being flooded with turks. from what i've seen so far with the introduction of the former soviet countries, whom everyone thought would flood western europe, only a few people have moved west, been a trickle, not a flood.
Have you ever heard about the fact that countries can restrict and ban immigration from eastern Europe till 2011. Austria and Germany have done so.
And have you ever heard about the exploding population of Turkey (today 60 million, in 2030 100 million). The population of Eastern Europe is not exploding, it is declining actually. So: Wrong comparison. F - Failed argument.

This Turkish issue in Germany sounds a great deal like the Mexican issue we're seeing in America. I don't know how many illegal aliens you get from Turkey in Germany, but we're in the millions in the US.
And some are enjoying benefits like welfare and student grants.
It is I think. And people here compare it to that. And that is why many are annoyed by President Bush demanding Turkish membership of the EU. After all: We don´t tell the US how it should conduct is relationship with Mexico.

I have to admit, that I am a bit too idealistic about the EU. We are in a pretty shitty state right now. I don't really see any chance of getting the new constitution in place and I'm not sure if that's such a bad thing. I'm afraid that the EU will be pretty much paralysed with all the new members and old voting rules. Maybe we should just sit tight for a while and digest all the East Europeans..
If we don´t get a reform of the EU it is simply not able to take on other members after 2007. And there is the risk that it gets paralysed. It was actually planned to do those things before the enlargement. Now, we try to do it afterwards. The EU needs really a period of consolidation. If we look to its history there were periods of enlargements and of consolidation. And after the biggest enlargement in its history in 2004 and the next one in 2007 the EU is needing a break for consolidation. Between the Western enlargement in 1973 and the Southern one were also 13 years. I don´t see that the EU can allow more new members in -except the three for 2007 - up until at least 2020. And there are many other candidates as well: The others Balkanic nations for example (Albania, Maceonia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Montenegro, possibly Serbia). We have limmited capacities. Turkey can´t be a full member of the EU in the foreseable future.

Anyway, I think the human rights stuff is just an excuse for want of better reasons. The EU has clear levels regarding human rights that all member states must pass and Turkey is doing a lot to reach that level. The Kurds do seem to be a real problem, but if Turkey can't handle it, then of course membership is out of the question. If Turkey is shown the door, then I bet the human rights progress will start going the same way too.
Let me be a bit provocative. What would have happened if the Turkish military would not have intervened several times into Turkish politics? The Islamists would have taken over. Mendres (1950-60 prime minister) was hanged for that, in 1981 it prevented a left-wing uprsining and in the 1990s it pushed for the ban of the islamists Refah partisi (of prime minister Erbakan). Mr. Erdogan was a member of this islamists party. Of course: they want to get rid of the power of the military because it is standing in the way of their goals. And that is the reason why they are pushing for EU membership. Therefore EU membership could actually mean more Islamism in Turkey and not less.

The Kurds do seem to be a real problem, but if Turkey can't handle it, then of course membership is out of the question. If Turkey is shown the door, then I bet the human rights progress will start going the same way too.

Just had to reply that I read this whole thread and the Kurds have been mentioned many times!

Right first off - the EU doesn't care about the Kurds as a group.

The EU will insist on reform in human rights for the individual not the group- they're two completely different sets y'see!

While this may eventually in the next century allow gay marriage in Ankara, it will not, I repeat NOT do anything for the Kurds, even as the largest ethnic group without a country.

And you know the reason why they won't? cause if they started complaining to the Turks the Turks would just point to a certain ethnic group the resides in Spain and France that neither is willing to emancipate.. the Basque peoples.

I'm not pro-Basque or anything I'm just laying it out!

Also I'm Irish and I'm currently living in Finland - two of the places in the EU about as far from Turkey as possible. WOuld I like to see Turkey join?...yeah if they clean up their human rights record and have efficient and transparent police system that ensure the church is separate from the state!

Cause the catholic church is not innocent of that and I'm not talking about the middle ages, but rather there were places in Ireland up until the 50's called magdalen houses that were government sponsored asylums where women who had children outside of marriage were sent to and committed as insane and forced to live out their lives there.

So I think before people keep slinging stones at turkey for its human rights records - remember your countries aren't that far removed from injustices either.

Anyways as regards the dilution of cultures and all that well Turkey has wonderful cultures (plural) and a classical history as rich as Greece and Italy

There is: But we have to have discussion in Europe how far the EU should be enlarged. I think we all agree that it can´t expand indefinately. But where should, ought, might be the appropiate border of an EU? That is the real question. Turkey is one area of dispute. Another one would be Israel and Georgia. Probably the Ukraine. What about Russia?
I wouldn´t exclued all of those. But Russia, Israel or Marocco I wouldn´t see as European countries. The same for Iraq, Syria or Iran.
Turkey is 95% an Asian country. So, I would prefer a privileged partnership rather than a full membership to the EU.

Yes. Seems like we aren't on the same page. I was just yanking Dalekia's chain because of that Syria thing. Let's put that to bed now.

What comes to future members, I'd wait for formal applications before discussing who might fit in and who not. Turkey, Macedonia and Croatia have applied for certain (there are more, I'm sure). I don't think I'm alone in saying Turkey has more problems becoming a member that those other two. Would I entertain myself speculating if Israel could become a member? Please!

Just to refresh something you all most likely know already: So, first we need applications. If the application is approved, there's acquis which the applicants must adopt before considered to become members (this may take years). It's not like we throw darts in the map and invite a new member in.

Now, about Turkey. I agree just about everything said in here. Few points: somebody said the military involvement in Turkish politics is bad and should be reduced. Partly true, but the army is the one thing insisting Turkey to remain secular. Nowhere is Atatürk's legacy more alive than in the Turkish army. Good or bad? Both. Secondly, there has been discussion within EU that the Turkish army could be just what the EU needs in order to become more militarily potent. Wise? Who knows.
...
Dang! Ran out of time. later...

I think that the Turks do belong within the European Union. While their current human rights record isn't 'up-to-par', they've had a better human rights record than all of Europe for well over a thousand years, with religious tolerance in place ages before the Catholics dropped their rather violent Inquisitions.
To me, this is all historical - the Turks pressured and conquered throughout Europe going as shortly back as 300-400 years. They were always more advanced, politically and technologically, than Europe. But now they fell behind, and Europe wants to keep them in their place.
It doesn't help that all this background history probably left dissident amongst the populace. Not to mention the Islamic tensions since 9/11.
This is just another sign of Nationalism and National Pride putting up walls that we thought were down.
Equality is being destroyed by Nationalism. And it's doing worse in the states.

I don´t now why you always see Franco-German conspiracies everywhere. As a matter of fact the voting right of the new Eu constituition was changed to the principal of the double majority meaning that a qualified majority means 55% of the states who represent 65% of the population. Germany is the main beneficiary from that. But due to the double-majority no country can ever dominate Europe, since it always needs to be a majority of states as well.

Have you ever heard about the fact that countries can restrict and ban immigration from eastern Europe till 2011. Austria and Germany have done so.
And have you ever heard about the exploding population of Turkey (today 60 million, in 2030 100 million). The population of Eastern Europe is not exploding, it is declining actually. So: Wrong comparison. F - Failed argument.

So if turkey were to join, they would be the main beneficiary, not germany then? it would help shift the balance of power eastwards more.
franco-german conspiracies???? we're did that come from. but historically they have been the driving force in europe, and this appears to be diluting with the new members, and will happen further with the introduction of turkey.
Britain did not. and they have not been flooded by immigrants. that ,ay be due to the fact that the immigrants can't travel through germany and austria, but the argument still stands.
If the population of eastern europe is declining, why the ban in the first place?

I can't argue with this, because I don't really know all the details, but because of all those Turks already in Germany it does seem plausible.

We have to bear in mind that if we allow Turkey to join the EU in say 2015-2020, then there'll be a lot less itching there. Foreign investment in Turkey is really low at the moment, but I bet that the prospect of EU membership would in itself do wonders for the Turkish economy by making it a more attractive place to invest in and forcing it to adhere to all our wonderful economic regulations.

Besides, Germany and other member states can also restrict the free movement of people as they have done with the present enlargement.

More GDP = less itching
Investors can invest in Turkey and improve the living conditions without Turkey beeing an EU member as well.

Britain did not. and they have not been flooded by immigrants. that ,ay be due to the fact that the immigrants can't travel through germany and austria, but the argument still stands.
Britain gets lots of immigrants. Although they mostly don't come from Turkey.

What comes to future members, I'd wait for formal applications before discussing who might fit in and who not. Turkey, Macedonia and Croatia have applied for certain (there are more, I'm sure). I don't think I'm alone in saying Turkey has more problems becoming a member that those other two. Would I entertain myself speculating if Israel could become a member? Please!
Just to refresh something you all most likely know already: So, first we need applications. If the application is approved, there's acquis which the applicants must adopt before considered to become members (this may take years). It's not like we throw darts in the map and invite a new member in....
I disagree with you here. We - as EU - have the right to defind ourself what the EU should be. We - of course - can´t force countries to join. But we can limit the potential scope of the EU in order to keep its structure and unity.
After all: It is the European Union and not the World Union. That is one reason the EU works and the UN doesn´t. We have - allthough of many differences - a lot in common.
Therefore we need a discussion about what the EU should be and how big it could get. The EU treaties themself say: every European country can join. Is Turkey an European country? That is a thing we need to decide, not Turkey.
The same is the case for Georgia or Armenia which would be the next candidates. A bit of geography knowledge is enough that those are - if at all - countries at the end of Europe and to a huge part in Asia. And Russia is more of an Asian country and more and more developing into an authoritarian state again.
And that Marocco and Israel are not part of Europe is really visible at any map. The US isn´t either.
That doesn´t mean that we can´t cooperate with them, but it does mean that they can´t become members of the EU.

Now, about Turkey. I agree just about everything said in here. Few points: somebody said the military involvement in Turkish politics is bad and should be reduced. Partly true, but the army is the one thing insisting Turkey to remain secular. Nowhere is Atatürk's legacy more alive than in the Turkish army. Good or bad? Both. Secondly, there has been discussion within EU that the Turkish army could be just what the EU needs in order to become more militarily potent. Wise? Who knows.
That is more or less amusing, since the EU doesn´t even have a common foreign and defense policy. And given Turkeys record I don´t think that they wouldn´t take action if other European countries say, please don`t. So I think that is an illusion, really.
I prefer for defense NATO. The EU should better stay out of it and should care about the things it is capable of like economic questions.

And you forget the islamists tedencies within the country.

And that the current PM of Turkey is an Islamist himself. Who tried to make adultery criminal under the law.

Britain gets lots of immigrants. Although they mostly don't come from Turkey.

was talking in terms of the new EU members of eastern europe.
Alot of politicians at the time said the UK would be flooded by poles, czecks, etc... and it never happened.
I admit it could be a possibility with turkey. but it does not need to happen.

BTW. I'm against Turkey beeing an EU member. In case you were wondering. :p

I disagree with you here. We - as EU - have the right to defind ourself what the EU should be. We - of course - can´t force countries to join. But we can limit the potential scope of the EU in order to keep its structure and unity...

I don't see you disagreeing with me... but if you say so...

What I wanted to add before I was savagely pulled away from my keyboard, was that Turkey is currently technically occupying a part of EU (TRNC - Northern Cyprus). Still we seem to be ready to start negotiations with Turkey. How very BIG of us. :)

in terms of EU being only for european nations.
are we talking political or geographic boundaries.
Turkey was seen as a european power in the past. So had russia for that matter.
waht do others think? geographic or political?

So if turkey were to join, they would be the main beneficiary, not germany then? it would help shift the balance of power eastwards more.?
I think you have a little geography problem here. It would shift it to the south, to the mediteranean.
franco-german conspiracies???? we're did that come from. but historically they have been the driving force in europe, and this appears to be diluting with the new members, and will happen further with the introduction of turkey.
Shure, and that is the reason why Britain supports it. Lets be honest. It doesn´t want a close European Union, therefore it wants to enlarge it so much in order to prevent it from being able to form any common foreign and security policy. The EU wouldn´t be what it is today if there weren´t the franco-german initiatives. If it followed the British will we would hardly have even a custums union (probably only a free-trade area). Whether such an EU would work - without being reformed - and I see that Britain is going to reject the constituition anyway - is unseable.

Britain did not. and they have not been flooded by immigrants. that ,ay be due to the fact that the immigrants can't travel through germany and austria, but the argument still stands..
Britain is a bit more far away, my friend. It is like that. People from Poland - often illegally are already working here - but they are living in Poland were the costs of living is less than half as it is here. Admittedly I also use their service.
But quite frankly spoken. How should a low qualified German worker compete to the Poles, given the different costs of living? It is impossible.
Because of that some restrictions are in place. But they are over on May 1, 2011.
If the population of eastern europe is declining, why the ban in the first place?
See above. The decline is happening in the long-run.
And before you say: lets allow immigrants in and islamise Europe. That is going to cause conflicts (see France) and the low-qualification of thoes people are not going to stabilize the economic system. The unemployment rate among migrants is much higher than among other groups mainly due to the lack of qualification.

BTW. I'm against Turkey beeing an EU member. In case you were wondering. :p

ha me too!!!
by that's because i do not like the turkish people i've known. I don't wish to generalise to an entire culture.

I don't see you disagreeing with me... but if you say so...
What I wanted to add before I was savagely pulled away from my keyboard, was that Turkey is currently technically occupying a part of EU (TRNC - Northern Cyprus). Still we seem to be ready to start negotiations with Turkey. How very BIG of us. :)
I disagree with you in that point that you said we can only discuss the issue of the future boundaries of the EU after we receive a membership request from possible future candidates. I disagree with that. We have every right to discuss that before. We should not be that short-sighted to say. Up until we get a request we shouldn´t think about this issue.

To me, this is all historical - the Turks pressured and conquered throughout Europe going as shortly back as 300-400 years. They were always more advanced, politically and technologically, than Europe. But now they fell behind, and Europe wants to keep them in their place.
Sorry to interrupt you. But trying to conquor all of Europe to see as a great historic example is rather ridiculous for me. Also the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler and Stalin wanted to conquor all of Europe.
I don´t have nothing against the Turks personally. They were our allies in World War I and we lost together. They are and remain part of the Middle East. I like Turkey to play a leading role in that region. But it is better able to do so outside the EU. After all: we can´t invite the entire Middle East in. I think Turkey should lead an union of Turkmen state (Central Asia, Middle East). Culturally it has more connection to that region than to Europe.
I´m all for cooperation with Turkey. But a privileged partnership is a better solution for that than full membership at least in a foreseable time-frame and from an realistic perspective.

I disagree with you in that point that you said we can only discuss the issue of the future boundaries of the EU after we receive a membership request from possible future candidates. I disagree with that. We have every right to discuss that before. We should not be that short-sighted to say. Up until we get a request we shouldn´t think about this issue.

Maybe you should re-read my post then. I said "I'd wait...". You can discuss it as much as you like. Frankly speaking, I don't have the time pondering over if Israel could join. You must admit it's so far off in the future (if ever) that we'll be both dead before that happens.

I think you have a little geography problem here. It would shift it to the south, to the mediteranean. .

would shift eastwards and southwards. would not be on the mediteranean.


Shure, and that is the reason why Britain supports it. Lets be honest. It doesn´t want a close European Union, therefore it wants to enlarge it so much in order to prevent it from being able to form any common foreign and security policy. The EU wouldn´t be what it is today if there weren´t the franco-german initiatives. If it followed the British will we would hardly have even a custums union (probably only a free-trade area). Whether such an EU would work - without being reformed - and I see that Britain is going to reject the constituition anyway - is unseable. .

True enough. and??? how does this affect what i said. i'm a spanish citizen? and looks like france will probably reject it as well.


Britain is a bit more far away, my friend. It is like that. People from Poland - often illegally are already working here - but they are living in Poland were the costs of living is less than half as it is here. Admittedly I also use their service.
But quite frankly spoken. How should a low qualified German worker compete to the Poles, given the different costs of living? It is impossible.
Because of that some restrictions are in place. But they are over on May 1, 2011. .

By that logic, the poles and the czecks and all the other new nations should be more worried about turkey joining than western europe. Hell the greeks should be petrified!! yet they are the ones for turkey joining.
This may sound unfair, but if the german has the skills, why not live in poland and do the same as the polish.


See above. The decline is happening in the long-run.
And before you say: lets allow immigrants in and islamise Europe. That is going to cause conflicts (see France) and the low-qualification of thoes people are not going to stabilize the economic system. The unemployment rate among migrants is much higher than among other groups mainly due to the lack of qualification.

actually that's an interesting one. the only 2 countries in europe where school must be secular is france and turkey.
in terms of low qualification and such i agree. but for our nations to piss their pants and close the borders will not work. We (the nations) need to invest money there and help them sort themselves out if only out of self-interest. And the best way to do that would be to make them part of the EU

in terms of EU being only for european nations.
are we talking political or geographic boundaries.
Turkey was seen as a european power in the past. So had russia for that matter.
waht do others think? geographic or political?
Politically: meaning prospect of EU membership. We have to be realistic for that matter.
And I say: Russia, definativly no.
Turkey: rather privileged partnership. Full membership unrealistic at least in the foreseable future.

Politically: meaning prospect of EU membership. We have to be realistic for that matter.
And I say: Russia, definativly no.
Turkey: rather privileged partnership. Full membership unrealistic at least in the foreseable future.

so EU for geographic european nations only. ok i guess

the thing is though, if you talk about EU being only for european countries, what about Cyprus? can that really be considered europe? it would be asia no?

Sorry to interrupt you. But trying to conquor all of Europe to see as a great historic example is rather ridiculous for me. Also the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler and Stalin wanted to conquor all of Europe.
I don´t have nothing against the Turks personally. They were our allies in World War I and we lost together. They are and remain part of the Middle East. I like Turkey to play a leading role in that region. But it is better able to do so outside the EU. After all: we can´t invite the entire Middle East in. I think Turkey should lead an union of Turkmen state (Central Asia, Middle East). Culturally it has more connection to that region than to Europe.
I´m all for cooperation with Turkey. But a privileged partnership is a better solution for that than full membership at least in a foreseable time-frame and from an realistic perspective.

like the argument. Turkey should try and help that region if it can.
never thought of it that way...

True enough. and??? how does this affect what i said. i'm a spanish citizen? and looks like france will probably reject it as well.
I would have prefered Aznar to stay in power. Zapatero is certainly going to demand to keep more subsidies for Spain (paid by Germany) for its shift to the other camp. And France is going to support than anyway. The Romanic connection.

By that logic, the poles and the czecks and all the other new nations should be more worried about turkey joining than western europe. Hell the greeks should be petrified!! yet they are the ones for turkey joining..
They aren´t. They just don´t want to have the black card any more like in the 90s. I´ve spoken with East Europeans. And there are different opinions about the issue. A Polish newspaper called this the most risky and dangerous decision (starting talks with Turkey) the EU has ever done. Regarding wagues. In that respect East Europe has less to fear than the west.


This may sound unfair, but if the german has the skills, why not live in poland and do the same as the polish...
They can´t because Poland rejects that up until 2011 as well. The Poles are also afraid of the Germans. Especially about the many millions they pushed out of the eastern territories (about 12 million). They feel that many would return. This fear is baseless though. Most of them are dead and most of their ancestors don´t care about that. But the same issue is also a problem in Czech-German relations and Czech-Austrian relations.

actually that's an interesting one. the only 2 countries in europe where school must be secular is france and turkey.
France has also a lot of private schools ( a third of the students) and there are a lot of catholic one. And regarding Turkey. The problem of Quran schools played a big role in the 90s. The islamists are actually attacking the scarf ban and try to abuse the EU to archive their goals. I don´t see a peacefull world in the future. I see a clash of civilisations. Marocco and Algeria are already destable. Turkey would be the next candidate. Tearing down borders and letting this problem flowing into the EU won´t solve it, it would worsen it. Up until that changes I don´t see a place for Turkey in the EU since it is having the same islamists tendencies. That even includes its prime minister and some laws he is proposing: like criminalising breaking the marriage. So, that is Scharia direction. The foreign ministr Gül was educated in Saudi-Arabia. Certainly a great qualification for keeping a secular state, though.


in terms of low qualification and such i agree. but for our nations to piss their pants and close the borders will not work. We (the nations) need to invest money there and help them sort themselves out if only out of self-interest. And the best way to do that would be to make them part of the EU
NO, we can´t let the entire world become members of the EU. We can´t solve every problem of the world.
I´m not against opening our markets for their products so that they can develop their economies. I´m not against close cooperation. I would support a privileged partnership which would be a very close cooperation and would even include three of the four liberties (of Europe). Except one: Freedom of labour - or rather the freedom of movement in the entire EU.

the thing is though, if you talk about EU being only for european countries, what about Cyprus? can that really be considered europe? it would be asia no?

Definately not. I sense there are geography enthusiasts here who would argue it's in asia... but the culture is definately Greek.

like the argument. Turkey should try and help that region if it can.
never thought of it that way...
There were such ideas in Turkey itself during the 90s- especially in respect to Central Asia which just escaped Russian hegemony. Though things there are more difficult. Therefore Turkey is prefering the European card. But due to its geographic location it can´t escape that responsibility anyway. So why not supporting it in that position and offering a privileged partnership instead of a full membership?

Definately not. I sense there are goegraphy enthusiasts here who would argue it's in asia... but the culture is definately Greek.
Well Cyprus used to be almost 80% greek. Today it is half Greek and half Turk.

Maybe you should re-read my post then. I said "I'd wait...". You can discuss it as much as you like. Frankly speaking, I don't have the time pondering over if Israel could join. You must admit it's so far off in the future (if ever) that we'll be both dead before that happens.
I´m not so shure about that. Economically Israel would be much more qualified than Turkey: So why not taking both together to counter-weigh the Turkish weaknesses?
The question isn´t that far-fetched as you think.
After all: Turkey and Israel have a close military partnership.

Well Cyprus used to be almost 80% greek. Today it is half Greek and half Turk.

Well, it's 77% -18% in favour of the Greeks. The rest is something else... It's hard to tell the ethnic groups in TRNC, cos there hasn't been a census in 30 years... and the Turks keep shipping people from anatolia to replace the original Turkish Cypriots who have fled the island. Nowhere near 50-50 it is not.

Definately not. I sense there are geography enthusiasts here who would argue it's in asia... but the culture is definately Greek.
Though I think it would have been better to wait with the membership up until the Cyprus question is solved. It didn´t happen though. Guess why? Greece threatened to veto the entire Eastern enlargement if Cyprus doesn´t belong to the first group.

Well, it's 77% -18% in favour of the Greeks. The rest is something else... It's hard to tell the ethnic groups in TRNC, cos there hasn't been a census in 30 years... and the Turks keep shipping people from anatolia to replace the original Turkish Cypriots who have fled the island. Nowhere near 50-50 it is not.
That may be true. I should have explained it clearer:
South Greek, north: Turk. And the population are Turkish Cypriots and immigrants from Turkey.
So the old numbers aren´t true anymore, but I don´t now the new onces I´m afraid.

I´m not so shure about that. Economically Israel would be much more qualified than Turkey: So why not taking both together to counter-weigh the Turkish weaknesses?
The question isn´t that far-fetched as you think.
After all: Turkey and Israel have a close military partnership.

Well, I think it is rather far-fetched. If in some parallel universe Israel did apply for membership (can you honestly see that happening before there is a solution to the Palestinian problem... or even after?), it wouldn't meet the acquis. You have to remember the EU has critisized Israel for the exact same reasons that it has criticized Turkey. But one can always dream...

That may be true. I should have explained it clearer:
South Greek, north: Turk. And the population are Turkish Cypriots and immigrants from Turkey.
So the old numbers aren´t true anymore, but I don´t now the new onces I´m afraid.
Don't worry, I do. Been writing my thesis on Cyprus problem. :D

2 things.
on the point about germany paying. yes as a nation they do pay the most. But you do realise other countries pay as well? I believe, per head, holland pays the most. Maybe we should cut back on those god-awful farm subsidies that cost the EU 40 billion a year!
Yeah, free movement of labour should be restricted for turkey. until they have substantially better standards than they do now anyway. maybe 50 years or so

Definately not. I sense there are geography enthusiasts here who would argue it's in asia... but the culture is definately Greek.

hate geography.
but if we are saying EU is for countries that are part of europe, then cyprus should be out no?
if not should we not also look to russia, belarus, ukraine to join the EU?

Well, I think it is rather far-fetched. If in some parallel universe Israel did apply for membership (can you honestly see that happening before there is a solution to the Palestinian problem... or even after?), it wouldn't meet the acquis. You have to remember the EU has critisized Israel for the exact same reasons that it has criticized Turkey. But one can always dream...
The Israeli foreign minister Silvan Shalom said in 2003 that an EU membership of Israel would be an option. Given the fact that Israel is surrounded by enemies it would make very much sense from an Israeli perspective. Though there are a lot of anti-European sentiments in Israel - just like in the UK - it would be geostrategically interesting. Israel as forefront in the war on terror and posts of Europe in the Middle East. We - in some sense like during the crusades. That is the way many Arabs see Israel anyway.
We can´t avoid to say it: Israel is part of the west. And the conflict is a conflict between the Islamic world and the West and not just a conflict Israel-Palestinians. If it be that easy the conflict would have been solved already. But they are other parties involved, especially others from the Middle East (Hamas -funded from the Arab peninsula), Hizbuallah (funded by Iran and Syria), e.g.

hate geography.
but if we are saying EU is for countries that are part of europe, then cyprus should be out no?
if not should we not also look to russia, belarus, ukraine to join the EU?
EU is not geographic. It is a political union. End of argument.

2 things.
on the point about germany paying. yes as a nation they do pay the most. But you do realise other countries pay as well? I believe, per head, holland pays the most. Maybe we should cut back on those god-awful farm subsidies that cost the EU 40 billion a year!
Yeah, free movement of labour should be restricted for turkey. until they have substantially better standards than they do now anyway. maybe 50 years or so
I doubt that Turkey would have as much interests in EU membership if the restriction would be for such a long period. I´m realistic. If a membership happends between 2020-30 probably it would be hard even to get 20 years as transitional period. More than 10-20 years aren´t realistic. Therefore I´m all against this rush to hurry with begining negotiations with Turkey.
And I´m against starting negotiations which have only the aim of full membership. I would rather prefer open negotiations about the relationship EU-Turkey which may lead to full membership or - as I would prefer - a privileged partnership between Turkey and the EU.

EU is not geographic. It is a political union. End of argument.

yes i know. but should it only be a political union of european countries only?
the argument seems to be that turkey should not be included as only a bit of it is in europe. Cyprus is not in europe yet they were still allowed to join

hate geography.
but if we are saying EU is for countries that are part of europe, then cyprus should be out no?
if not should we not also look to russia, belarus, ukraine to join the EU?

Well, it must be a matter of taste. I've always seen Cyprus as a part of European heritage. I dare not to say anything about Russia. As a Finn my opinion would probably be heavily biased. ;)
...Silvan Shalom said in 2003 that an EU membership of Israel would be an option...

Okay. I'm afraid it's not an option for the EU then. I just don't have enough imagination to see that happening. I'm sorry if I let anyone down. :(

hate geography.
but if we are saying EU is for countries that are part of europe, then cyprus should be out no?
if not should we not also look to russia, belarus, ukraine to join the EU?
Cyprus is counted as a part of Europe though.
And I haven´t said that all European countries should be members of the EU. I´ve said - what is also standing in the declaration of the EU - that it should be open to all European countries who fulfill the requirements.
And then we have to decide what an European country is.
Turkey is 95% an Asian country. Do we count it as a part of Europe?
Russia is also mainly an Asian country. Belarus is a dictatorship which may unites itself with Russia one day.
The Ukraine is undoubtably an European country though, but it has authoritarian tendencies and is economicly still closely linked to Russia.
There are admittedly countries were we can disagree whether they should be considered to be part of Europe or not. Turkey is certainly such an example.
But in the case of Marocco and Tunesia I don´t see any problem to say: NO.

BTW: Argentinia once requested to become a NATO member. The answer was no. Reason: they are not part of the nort atlantic region.

The Israeli foreign minister Silvan Shalom said in 2003 that an EU membership of Israel would be an option. Given the fact that Israel is surrounded by enemies it would make very much sense from an Israeli perspective. Though there are a lot of anti-European sentiments in Israel - just like in the UK - it would be geostrategically interesting. Israel as forefront in the war on terror and posts of Europe in the Middle East. We - in some sense like during the crusades. That is the way many Arabs see Israel anyway.
We can´t avoid to say it: Israel is part of the west. And the conflict is a conflict between the Islamic world and the West and not just a conflict Israel-Palestinians. If it be that easy the conflict would have been solved already. But they are other parties involved, especially others from the Middle East (Hamas -funded from the Arab peninsula), Hizbuallah (funded by Iran and Syria), e.g.
Israel is even less of a European country then Turkey. Under no condition should Israel be allowed to become an EU member. It's bad enough that they are allowed to compete in the Eurocup or the songefestival.

Well, it must be a matter of taste. I've always seen Cyprus as a part of European heritage. I dare not to say anything about Russia. As a Finn my opinion would probably be heavily biased. ;)
(

oh i agree. don't get me wrong! its just people COULD say the same for turkey.

BTW: Argentinia once requested to become a NATO member. The answer was no. Reason: they are not part of the nort atlantic region.

Hehehehhh... yes. It certainly isn't. Unlike Poland for example.

I doubt that Turkey would have as much interests in EU membership if the restriction would be for such a long period.
Even more reason for restrictions like that.

oh i agree. don't get me wrong! its just people COULD say the same for turkey.
I won't get you wrong (I think). That "matter of taste" referred to your dislike of geography. :D

EU is not geographic. It is a political union. End of argument.
It's both. Eventhough they try to get around that by taking in Turkey.

Turkey was seen as a european power in the past.
That can happen if you control most of South East Europe.

Okay. I'm afraid it's not an option for the EU then. I just don't have enough imagination to see that happening. I'm sorry if I let anyone down. :(
I agree with you on that point.
Though you should have a bit more imagination on what could happen. Many things aren´t that far-fetched as you probably think - like for example preventive strikes against Iran or Syria or the destabilisation of Saudi-Arabia. The threat is real. It is also possible that Iran gets nukes so no strike happends. And what then?
Dangerous situation. But the other powers of the region would consider to get nukes as well. Saudi-Arabia could buy some from Pakistan, Turkey - with its strong military -would push for a nuclear program as well and Greece follows immidately. And probably other meditareanan countries (Egypt).
That is not a completly unrealistic scenario.
The same with North Korea. Japan and South Korea are already conducting experiments. If North Korea doesn´t back down there are two alternatives: Either the US stationes nukes in those countries or they get nukes themselves.
In Germany (West) there was actually also a discussion about nukes in - I think - 1959. It was caused by the ministry for defense. There were mass protest against that idea. So the Federal Republic asked the US to station some nukes in the country to protect it. You can actually say: Both solutions have the same effect. But with the latter one noone needs to be afraid of us since they were under US controll. They were of course withdrawn after 1991.
But if a threat does reappear we need to discuss again about a nuclear shild for Europe - with the US, Britain and France. Preferably with all on bord of course.

ha me too!!!
by that's because i do not like the turkish people i've known. I don't wish to generalise to an entire culture.
You are against Turkish membership or in favor? The :( <--smiley confused me.

Well, it must be a matter of taste. I've always seen Cyprus as a part of European heritage. I dare not to say anything about Russia. As a Finn my opinion would probably be heavily biased. ;)(
You have every right to point out your opinion as long as you don´t make the Russians to Mongols or Tatarians - though they were ruled by them for 200 years. That had really devastating impact for the development and form of government of that country. From the czarist era to the red czars and now to Putin, who sees Peter, the great as his historic example. Though Peter, the great was rather one of the more enlightened Russian rulers.

I agree with you on that point.
Though you should have a bit more imagination on what could happen. SNIP

I think I have sufficiently enough imagination to see the kinds of things you mentioned in your post possible. I bet that's because there are no rules and patterns concerning things like those happening. There is, however, rules and regulations concerning countries accession to the EU. When I observe those rules, together with knowledge of the political will of the current member countries, I pretty much can not see Israel becoming an EU member (just as I can't see Turkey becoming one in near future).

Frankly, I see no connection between this last post of yours and this thread in general... could you maybe help me see the light...?

Hehehehhh... yes. It certainly isn't. Unlike Poland for example.
True. And I don´t think we are disagreeing when I say that Marocco, Tunesia, Israel, Syria, Iraq and Iran aren´t part of Europe either and shouldn´t become members of the EU?

We are in total agreement over that. Yes.

Frankly, I see no connection between this last post of yours and this thread in general... could you maybe help me see the light...?
Well the EU is not living in a vacuum. Someone pointed out military reasons for the Turkish membership. Therefore I added this things. Those things play a role and are influencing the EU. Guess why President Bush is the most staunch supporter of an EU membership of Turkey? Geopolitical considerations of course.
And some of those would also speak for an Israeli membership. I think Blair would certainly support it. Turkey and Israel have after all a very close military cooperation. One reason which is here mentioned in favour of Turkish membership is the fact that they are part of Nato. Why shouldn´t Israel become a member of it? It is after all the fore-front in the war on terror. And why not other countries of the region - like the future Iraq. Those considerations exist in the US.
And EU membership for those countries would be very beneficiary since the EU would need to care about the reconstruction and stabilisation of thoes countries. Probably even alone. The US could leave if it is fed up with the situation and could try to leave it to Europe to care about the mess in that region alone.
Ok, far-fetched for shure - but not as far fetched for not having imagination for it. It is a long-term scenario.

OH. I see it now. You just didn't include Turkey in that post there. That must be why i was confused... sort of a chain reaction you are painting there. ok.

One reason which is here mentioned in favour of Turkish membership is the fact that they are part of Nato. Why shouldn´t Israel become a member of it? It is after all the fore-front in the war on terror.
I'd guess Israel doesn't become a member of NATO for the same reason it won't become a member of the EU... cos the current members wouldn't allow it to.

OH. I see it now. You just didn't include Turkey in that post there. That must be why i was confused... sort of a chain reaction you are painting there. ok.
It is included. You may read it again. I mentioned it as part of this military confronation of the Middle East. I just want to say: We have to chose as EU whether the EU - and not only individual members who chose to do so but also neutral countries - want to play an active role in the Middle East - which also means to be ready to use force in that region (invading Syria is not that far-fetched actually) or not. And as long as we ourself don´t agree about that I don´t think we should enlarge up until the Iranian, Iraqi and Syrian border to say the least. I would see that - given the current disagreements in Europe - as irresponsible.
I don´t know how the situation is going to be in twenty years. But I´m not overly optimistic. So, I quite frankly spoken don´t see room for a Turkish membership in the foreseable future also because of that reason. Aside of the economic, social and human rights reasons.

I think that the Turks do belong within the European Union. While their current human rights record isn't 'up-to-par', they've had a better human rights record than all of Europe for well over a thousand years, with religious tolerance in place ages before the Catholics dropped their rather violent Inquisitions.


This is very true of the thousand or so years before the 20th century. The Ottoman empire and Byzantium were some of the most ethnically and religiously diverse groups, and the cities that are now Turkey were filled with Ottoman Turks and Eastern Christians living side-by-side. However, with the Armenian genocide during the 20th century, Turkey went from being one of the most diverse countries in Europe to one of the least, with millions of Christians being killed or fleeing.

Turkey has continued to have a terrible human-rights record, turning next on the Kurdish people, who seem to be persecuted wherever they live. Until they can radically improve their human rights record (as well as taking responsibility for the Armenian genocide, which they still refuse to do), I believe they have no place in the EU.

In truth, however, I have no say. I am not a European.

I'd guess Israel doesn't become a member of NATO for the same reason it won't become a member of the EU... cos the current members wouldn't allow it to.
Who knows. NATO is led by the United States. So, it is the right of the US to decide about this issue. I accept the American leadership and almost every NATO member does as well. France doesn´t. And that is the reason why there is the Franco-American conflict.

Turkey has continued to have a terrible human-rights record, turning next on the Kurdish people, who seem to be persecuted wherever they live. Until they can radically improve their human rights record (as well as taking responsibility for the Armenian genocide, which they still refuse to do), I believe they have no place in the EU.

I agree with you. Every nation has to take responsibility for its history. Post-war Germany was only able to get a place back in the international community because it accepted its responsibility for the Holocaust that caused the death of 6 million people (mostly jews).
Turkey has not to the slightest degree even recognized the genocide on the Armenians during World War I which caused the death of 2 million Armenians.

Who knows. NATO is led by the United States. So, it is the right of the US to decide about this issue. I accept the American leadership and almost every NATO member does as well. France doesn´t. And that is the reason why there is the Franco-American conflict.
Well, you are obviously a bigger person than I am. A bit of an idealist, are we? :D I can't see NATO wanting active enemies when it decides to take in new members. Sure, Russia protested when the Baltic nations and Poland etc. joined, but that was it. I wonder if the smaller NATO countries want country like Israel who has half the arab countries as her enemies. Strange things happen... and one can speculate...but still...

EDIT: I have to say i don't follow NATO discussions that closely. Feel free to prove me wrong.

I agree with you. Every nation has to take responsibility for its history. Post-war Germany was only able to get a place back in the international community because it accepted its responsibility for the Holocaust that caused the death of 6 million people (mostly jews).
Turkey has not to the slightest degree even recognized the genocide on the Armenians during World War I which caused the death of 2 million Armenians.


We totally agree and are on the same side here. If I may, in the interest of precision, I'd like to point out that estimates (which the majority of historians agree are within 10%) are that 6 million jews and 5 million non-jews (gypsies, homosexuals, and prisoners of war, especially Russians) were killed during the Holocaust period. So the Holocaust actually caused the death of at least 11 million people.

http://www.holocaust-history.org/

We totally agree and are on the same side here. If I may, in the interest of precision, I'd like to point out that estimates (which the majority of historians agree are within 10%) are that 6 million jews and 5 million non-jews (gypsies, homosexuals, and prisoners of war, especially Russians) were killed during the Holocaust period. So the Holocaust actually caused the death of at least 11 million people.
If you count the war to that you come to 37 million for Europe thus far as I know.

Well, you are obviously a bigger person than I am. A bit of an idealist, are we? :D I can't see NATO wanting active enemies when it decides to take in new members. Sure, Russia protested when the Baltic nations and Poland etc. joined, but that was it. I wonder if the smaller NATO countries want country like Israel who has half the arab countries as her enemies. Strange things happen... and one can speculate...but still...
They are discussion in the US also to take Arab countries as Nato members like Egypt or Jordan or Iraq. Under this umbrella an Israeli membership may work out.
After all: the most dangerous countries may be taken down in the next years. First Iraq, then probably Iran and Syria.
Libya has become more flexible recently.
So: use your imagination.
Well: Iraq is a problem currently and the nice strategy of the neo-cons hasn´t played out that well yet. But that may probably led to the conclusion that the Iranian problem needs to be solved in order to stabilize the region.
And the US is deciding that in its own souvereignity.
The question is: does Nato follow the US leadership or does it become irrelevant. That is the question which is going to be decided in the next years.
France seems to work in the direction to make NATO irrelevant by trying to reject active NATO engagement in Iraq.

They are discussion in the US also to take Arab countries as Nato members like Egypt or Jordan or Iraq. Under this umbrella an Israeli membership may work out.
After all: the most dangerous countries may be taken down in the next years. First Iraq, then probably Iran and Syria.
Libya has become more flexible recently.
...
The question is: does Nato follow the US leadership or does it become irrelevant. That is the question which is going to be decided in the next years.
Yes. How glad I am my government has been wise enough to stay outside NATO, but still keeping the possibility open. If what you stated is true, I'm double as glad. NATO of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and possibly Israel in it?!? Toss Iran, Syria and Pakistan in, and it renders itself useless.

I'm glad you didn't take the 'bigger person' line the bad way. I was being sincere. People who have the stamina to discuss scenarios - however unlikely - are needed. I just can't be arsed most of the time.

Yes. How glad I am my government has been wise enough to stay outside NATO, but still keeping the possibility open. If what you stated is true, I'm double as glad. NATO of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and possibly Israel in it?!? Toss Iran, Syria and Pakistan in, and it renders itself useless.
I'm glad you didn't take the 'bigger person' line the bad way. I was being sincere. People who have the stamina to discuss scenarios - however unlikely - are needed. I just can't be arsed most of the time.
Probably I´ve just overread the rhetorical attack, hehe. Well, I don´t get that easily offended.
It is just a scenario of course. But I think we have to lock behind the issues and should not remain on the surface. For that we have television.

I think it's probably a bad idea to let Turkey into the EU. The main one is human rights. Despite the progress that's been made, their human rights record is appalling. As was said earlier, they also refuse to make any apologies for the Armenian genocide.

Aside from this, I think there has been a rather unreasonable demand for Turkey. The EU has demanded less military influence in government affairs. Just because something is appropriate for western European countries, doesn't mean it necessarily is elsewhere. It's an idiotic idea because the military has been the only thing keeping the country from becoming an islamic state.

There are also economic issues. Turkey would probably be a burden on the rest of Europe, especially regarding their living standards and the enormous agricultural subsidies that would be given to them.

Another really major issue is culture and immigration. They are culturally too far apart to the rest of us. Despite what other people say, I don't think cultural diversity is a good thing. All it does is serve to undermine existing cultures and destroy people's way of life. Plus many of the people who would seek immigration over here are poorer, unskilled people who would just be a drain on the welfare system. Turkey would probably be better served by forming a Turkmen alliance (As suggested earlier), for an area which they have more historical, geographical and cultural similiarities with.

You are against Turkish membership or in favor? The :( <--smiley confused me.

in terms of my opinion of the turks i know. I would say no. But just because i've disliked the turks i've known, i'm not going to say turkey should not join the EU one day in the future.

I KNOW WHAT WE SHOULD DO!!!!!!!!
MAKE ALL THE COUNTRIES THAT ARE IN THE EURO-VISION SONG CONTEST MEMBERS!
if they can be in euro-vision that good enough for me!!!!

in terms of my opinion of the turks i know. I would say no. But just because i've disliked the turks i've known, i'm not going to say turkey should not join the EU one day in the future.
If i may ask...have they been serving you bad kebabs or what? To be honest, I don't remember/know where you come from. If you are from Germany where there are loads of Turkish people, I can see your point. It's just unbelievable I have only met brilliant Turks. Amazing. I'm sorry you've had such shitty luck. :)

I KNOW WHAT WE SHOULD DO!!!!!!!!
MAKE ALL THE COUNTRIES THAT ARE IN THE EURO-VISION SONG CONTEST MEMBERS!
if they can be in euro-vision that good enough for me!!!!
AAARRRGH! Garlic and crosses! That would mean Israel would be in, right? I propose all countries in Eurovision song contest should be ousted from the EU (that way we Finns could be in it all by ourselves).

If you are from Germany where there are loads of Turkish people, I can see your point. It's just unbelievable I have only met brilliant Turks. Amazing. I'm sorry you've had such shitty luck. :)
I´m the one from Germany. Daroth says that he is from Spain. There are some nice Turkish people and some bad people, just like in any other nationality. I don´t see this personal experience as a criteria though. It is a political, social, economical and cultural question. In short: an issue which needs to be decided in a democratic process within the EU and within the European countries.

I don´t see this personal experience as a criteria though. It is a political, social, economical and cultural question.
I agree 100%. It's not like we are taking individual persons to the EU. It's a sad state of affairs if all the Turks somebody has met have made a bad impression. Personal experiences are important of course, but i think one should visit Turkey in order to better judge their eligibility to join the EU (I suppose taking a closer look via all the available data would do too). What can I add... nothing. Let's wait a few years how they adopt the acquis (if they are indeed accepted to begin talks).
Bunnyducks out (if there isn't some significant new developments in this thread).

If i may ask...have they been serving you bad kebabs or what? To be honest, I don't remember/know where you come from. If you are from Germany where there are loads of Turkish people, I can see your point. It's just unbelievable I have only met brilliant Turks. Amazing. I'm sorry you've had such shitty luck. :)

born and raised in UK. living in spain now. not bad luck just odds. Could meet a turkish person tonight that becomes a life long friend. I just don't want to base my opinions on a nations future solely on a few negative experiences.

if turkey met the criteria for joining that has been set, then they should join.

I´m the one from Germany. Daroth says that he is from Spain. There are some nice Turkish people and some bad people, just like in any other nationality. I don´t see this personal experience as a criteria though. It is a political, social, economical and cultural question. In short: an issue which needs to be decided in a democratic process within the EU and within the European countries.

amen!

anyway guys, this has been an interesting thread. hope to continue the debate later.

Sure. It was fun. Maybe the issue was exhausted already. Hope to see you in some other civilized thread. :D

AAARRRGH! Garlic and crosses! That would mean Israel would be in, right? I propose all countries in Eurovision song contest should be ousted from the EU (that way we Finns could be in it all by ourselves).
So, than Finnland could call itself EU, and the EU could call itself Finnland?

LOL Yeah Kybernetia. As long as other countries can't meet the economic criteria we agreed on, Finland should be the only one.... If we please, you could join us. :D

LOL Yeah Kybernetia. As long as other countries can't meet the economic criteria we agreed on, Finland should be the only one.... If we please, you could join us. :D
How gracious of you. Though the EU with just one member would be a bit lonely, wouldn´t it?

Though the EU with just one member would be a bit lonely, wouldn´t it?
Nah. We're good. We can play hockey until you manage it. :)

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_24-9-2004_pg4_7
Just thought this was interesting. I know that Europeans tend to be divided on this subject, so it'd be interesting for me to see the debate stemming from this.
Just heared the news on the radio in wich is said that the biggest conservative fraction, the EVP is still against even thinking about talking about it. They + the majority of the politicians of other parties in the EP are still against so the Turks can keep dreaming.

Still not enough done about human rights, minnorities, economy and democracy.

But, they are on the good way anyway. The power of the Army is more controled now, torturing can't be excused anymore (they are allready better then the US regime with Abu Graib in that matter), no more deathpenalty, the constitution is amended so that the freedom of press and opinion is garanteed. The Kurds have now the right to follow education in their own language, training of christians to priestship is not any more illegal.

But we have to see now for a few years, let's say 5 to 10 that they respect it in reallity to, after that we can start considering talking with this non European country.

Economy is still bad with unemployement rate of 10,6% while the average is (with the new easteren EU countries that have also a problem here counted) 9,1% in Western countries like Belgium 8,6%. Inflation is 12% while in the EU 2,4% (Belgium 2%), Debt/BNP is 79% while in the EU 63,3% (Belgium 100,7%). Last year budgetresult was -8,5% while in the EU +0,3% (Belgium 0,1%, Polen -3,9%). Expected growth will be good 6%, EU 2,3%, Belgium 2,5%, Polen 5,45%).

Best thing would be to give them a chance in 5/10 years, but we had to do that with the Polish profitariat to, they don't belong here neither like Turkey because of the economics and politics since they only receive € witouth any political loyalty to the other 24 nations. Poland is the most hated nation in Western EU for this moment, but they had it comming.

Re: Türkei prostituiert sich... [re: Doenermann]
21/09/2004 07:12
Nachricht editieren Ändern Auf diese Nachricht antworten Antworten

Gerhard Schröder und Fischer fordern ständig eine Aufnahme der Türkei... Die
Union zum Glück nicht. Ich habe nix gegen ein Bündnis mit Ankara aber die
Probleme die zwangsläufig aus einer EU-Mitgliedschaft entstehen werden,
würden bei der NPD für deutlich mehr als 10% sorgen.


Die deutsche Wirtschaft unterstützt das Leider aus kurzzeitigen
Profitdenken. Die Türkei ist eben ein weiteres Billiglohnland, aber eines
indem man durchaus Ware loswerden kann.

Für die EU Staatskasse Beitritt der Türkei kommt wegen der riesigen
Landwirtschaft einem Finanzloch gleich, als wenn wir noch einmal die 10
neuen Mitglieder aufnehmen würden. Das wird auf lange Zeit so bleiben, eben
weil die Türkei ein Billiglohnland ist. Deswegen will wie gesagt auch die
Großindustrie unbedingt einen Beitritt. Wenn schon der BDI-Präsident dafür
ist, spätestens dann sollten alle wach werden!

Wie auch immer... Die EU und Deutschland können dichtmachen wenn die Türkei
richtiges Mitglied wird.

1. Hätte aufgrund ihrer Demographie innerhalb der EU die Türkei bald das
größte Stimmrecht wegen der meisten Bevölkerung. (Also klar wo die
Wirtschaftsförderungen hingehen) Die großen Nettoeinzahler Frankreich und
Deutschland die gerade mit eigenen Probleme zu kämpfen haben gucken dabei in
die Röhre.

2. Für Deutschland werden in diesem Fall 20 MILLIONEN Einwohner erwartet.
Das wird eben keine schöne bunte multikulti Welt geben sondern nix anderes
als einen FATALEN KULTURSCHOCK Die Kurden werden dann auf der Straße
zusammengetreten und gegenüber der deutschen Bevölkerung wird es mehr als
befremden geben. Denn die Türken die frisch aus Anatolien oder den
Whahabitschen Ghettos Istanbuls kommen wo die Scharia herrscht haben eine
ganz andere Kragenweite als die sekülären und immerhin teilweise angepassten
Deutschtürken in der 2. und 3. Generation hier.
Schon bald würden Türkische, wenn nicht gar islamistische Parteien mit in
den Bundestag steigen die jede Regierungsbildung beeinflussen.(heute bilden
wie gesagt in manchen Ballungsgebieten die Türken mit deutschem Pass das
Zünglein an der Waage)

Wenn man ähnliche Beispiele aus der Geschichte bedenkt (USA) werden sehr
bald Rassenunruhen wie alle paar Jahre in Los Angeles bald an der
Tagesordnung sein...

Fazit: Die Türkei darf nicht in die EU wenn die EU weiterexistieren will.
Das die EU nicht im Sinne der USA ist, ist auch darau zu schließen das die
USA massiven Druck auf Deutschland zugunsten der Aufnahme der Türkei in die
Union ausüben. Auch in Washington weiß man das das die Aufnahme die
Brüsseler Gemeinschaft einer geographischen und kulturellen Verzerrungs
preis geben würde die jede politische Einigung oder gar militärische
Verselbstständigung Gesamteuropas ausschlüsse, und genau darauf zielt man
ab!

Problematisch ist eben auch Erdogans Behautptung das die EU ein
Christen-Club sei, obwohl die Länder der EU ja schon seit Jahren dem
Religionsverzicht d.h. dem Atheismus zuneigen, die Türkei würde als neuer
Beitrittskandidat dann selbstverständlich immer weiter die koranische
Identität betonen. Erdogan selber war auf den Iman-Hatip Schulen... EInen
Vorwurf kann man daraus nicht machen, für die EU Mitgliedschaft verkaufen
die Türken nicht ihre Identität dafür ist die postkemalistische Türkei viel
zu National-Nationalistisch geprägt.

Eine Partnerschaft mit der Türkei? Warum denn nicht, aber diese ewigen
Versprechungen von EU Vollmitgliedschaft sind doch das letzte. Die
Argumentation der Union dagegen auch. Sicher hat die Türkei ein paar
gravierende Probleme, aber das sollte man in der Form nicht zum ausdruck
bringen wenn man eine Partnerschaft will.

Der Konflikt mit den Kurden (in Verbindung mit dem Bestreben auch jenseits
der irakischen Grenze) würde zu einer Unabhänigkeit der Kurden führen wofür
sie so lange gekämpft und gelitten haben. Allerdings droht dadurch der
zusammenhalt des Einheitsstaates Türkei gesprengt zu werden was aufgrund der
ethnischen Verzahnung der Siedlungszonen zu einem endlosen
Sezzensionskonflikt führen würde gegen den man von Europa nur schwerlich
etwas unternehmen könnte.


Deutschland hätte die erben des Osmansichen Reiches, einem unserer
historischen Verbündeten gleich respektieren müssen und nicht wie einen
Balkanischen Kleinstaat behandeln. Die EU muß auch der christlichen Ukraine
Nein sagen weil sie es sich nicht leisten kann ihre Grenzen bis zum Kaukasus
auszudehnen. Wenn man mit der Türkei so reden würde, würden sie es wohl
besser verstehen als wenn man Quärelen darüber startet das die Türkei keine
Demokratie ist, das die Türkei die Menschenrechte nicht respektiert etc.
Als Alternative muß eine Partner und Nachbarschaft erfolgen, d.h.
wirtschaftliche Verknüpfung, militärische Partnerschaft und politischer
Konsens...

Aber bitte keine Aufnahme in die EU!

Ich kann nur hoffe das unsere europäischen Nachbarländer die Rot/Grüne
Regierung vor dieser grenzenlosen Torheit abringen werden und uns vor deren
Folgen damit bewahren.

to be fair it does work the otherway round you know.... when little President Bush wanted the Iraqi oil to whom did he come crying.... OH WAIT I remember... BLAIR.... and we alllll love a good little Blair who will spend Billions of British pounds and waste countless lives on an American lead "Coalition" aka You do what your told or we will bomb you.... Though i'm not sure that Even George Bush is insane enough to go all out against Britain... entertaining thought though....

Need I remind you that this is basicly only what... the second or third time the US has EVER asked for help. Need i remind you again that without the US France would be speaking German and so would Britain and possibly parts of Russia. Twice? France being occupied? ring a bell? I will concede one point that with the US and Europe working together a lot can be done. But Europe always goes back into its pacifist views which hurt everyone. And before long all of Europe will be occupied by some other foreign power. And as far as USA and Britain getting into a war... come on right. if the war is just between USA and England then hands down USA wins. This is not arrogance either its judt pure statement of fact.

I would also like to put an interesting thought out there... What would happen if the EU crumbled??? Because to me it is very fagile and a lot of people in Europe dont like it. say like great britain for example lots of people are against the EU.

I would also like to put an interesting thought out there... What would happen if the EU crumbled??? Because to me it is very fagile and a lot of people in Europe dont like it. say like great britain for example lots of people are against the EU.
It would definitely crumble if Turkey were allowed to join.

Porn is illegal in Turkey.Maybe, but Turkish men do love to see "skin"

It would definitely crumble if Turkey were allowed to join.It would not happen, If the Immigration pressure goes too far, the EU would introduce emergency measures,
But it would be better for the EU if they do not become a polarized group, Poland, UK and Turkey should not have a vote...when it comes to US related issues. Or even better, do not invite them in (i know too late for Poland)

I would also like to put an interesting thought out there... What would happen if the EU crumbled??? Because to me it is very fagile and a lot of people in Europe dont like it. say like great britain for example lots of people are against the EU.
As a political union, the EU will last for twenty years, but no longer. The EU's mission, to unite Europe, is not only unprecedented, but it is very hard with so many different cultures, languages, and government systems. I do, however, think it'll always be around as a monetary union. An intergrated economy doesn't need one government, despite what protectionists may say.

It would not happen, If the Immigration pressure goes too far, the EU would introduce emergency measures.
And run the risk of beeing called racist? No. Gigatron is right. The EU would crumble with Turkey in it. And thats why the US wants them so much to be a member. To destroy us from within.

And run the risk of beeing called racist? No. Gigatron is right. The EU would crumble with Turkey in it. And thats why the US wants them so much to be a member. To destroy us from within.
yes and then the us will point out that a united europe will never work and is surprised about the anti-america hatered spreading through europe.

Turkey isn't even in Europe (except for the Istanbul bit).
All their Historical roots are in Minor Asia, not in Mother Europe.

Turkey in the EU!!!
Their history lays for a large part in Europe (remember Byzantium). I think it would be great if a muslim land enters the EU.

I am completely against Turkey joining the EU any time in the next 10-20 years.

1) The EU sharing a border with Iraq? LMAO..."There goes the neighbourhood!"

2) Their civil rights suck.

3) The EU has enough of a problem dealing with such a wide range of economic strengths among member nations as it is, letting in a country that is barely out of the Third World (and in the countryside it pretty much still is) is not going to make things any easier.

4) Turkey is storing up a significant problem for itself, in having a secular authoritarian government being rather unkind to muslims. The somewhat discriminatory aftertaste left in the wake of French moves to ban headscarves is pretty minor in comparison to the Turkish government's quite plain paranoia about anything that might conceivably be a challenge to its authority.

5) The sensitive matter of the Kurds and general unrest in the East of the country, at times amounting to terrorism and state repression, is not something the EU would wish to "endorse" in admitting Turkey, nor if we are absolutely honest, deal with, as it is something of a can of worms.

To sum up, as things stand, Turkey is a political and economic liability.

I would also like to put an interesting thought out there... What would happen if the EU crumbled??? Because to me it is very fagile and a lot of people in Europe dont like it. say like great britain for example lots of people are against the EU.
Britain is a real special case. It is indeed the country with the highest anti-EU sentiment. After all: Britain is not part of the "continent" but an island.
A policy of splendid isolation was traditional for Britain. However Britain once asked for membership - it was not forced to join, nobody was actually.
But lets follow the scenario. If the EU falls apart it is likely to fall apart into two block. On the one side the franco-german alliance, and on the other side the British-Polish alliance.
And they would (diplomatically) fight each other for supremacy in Europe.
The most likely concept would then be a score-Europe, led by France and Germany and a corner-Europe led by Britain and Poland (Britain and East Europe). Economically that would however very bad. Both sides have to many interests to keep that together. So, I don´t think it is going to happen.

.Quote:
Originally Posted by Purly Euclid
.As a political union, the EU will last for twenty years, but no longer. The EU's mission, to unite Europe, is not only unprecedented, but it is very hard with so many different cultures, languages, and government systems. I do, however, think it'll always be around as a monetary union. An intergrated economy doesn't need one government, despite what protectionists may say. .

I think you are wrong with that. First of all, such things like economic and budget policy (deficits) play a key role in keeping a currency union working. Otherwise the economic developments of differents parts may fall apart. Some countries would actually need lower interests rates, others would need higher one. So, more coordination is needed. And that can´t be archieved without a close coordination of the financial and budget policy.
Without that the currency union would collapse one day as well.
There was no currency union which ever worked without a political framework of a coordinated fiscal policy (at least if you have a free convertible currency).

:mad: Enlargement commissionar Günther Verheugen said a No to Turkey would be bad as it would be a No to the entire Islamic world. I wonder what that ugly m*therf*cker means by that? That we should add other Islamic countries to the EU besides Turkey?

Guenter.Verheugen@cec.eu.int
If anyone of you wants to give Verheugen a piece of your mind.
Heres his Email adress.
From his homepage:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/commissioners/verheugen/index_en.htm

:mad: Enlargement commissionar Günther Verheugen said a No to Turkey would be bad as it would be a No to the entire Islamic world. I wonder what that ugly m*therf*cker means by that? That we should add other Islamic countries to the EU besides Turkey?
means, I think, that we are saying we can never be friends of Muslims, that we will never trust them, that we will never share with them

means, I think, that we are saying we can never be friends of Muslims, that we will never trust them, that we will never share with them
Whether we can depends also on the muslims. But that has nothing to do with EU membership. A Turkish membership has as much influence on the Arab world as a polish democracy on Russia. That is zero. So, this talk of Verheugen is nonsense.
The EU is an union of European states and not a World Union.
Developing aid and the stabilisation of the Middle East is important for our foreign policy. But foreign policy means foreign policy and that means that they are outside Europe and the EU.

Whether we can depends also on the muslims. But that has nothing to do with EU membership. A Turkish membership has as much influence on the Arab world as a polish democracy on Russia. That is zero. So, this talk of Verheugen is nonsense.
The EU is an union of European states and not a World Union.
Developing aid and the stabilisation of the Middle East is important for our foreign policy. But foreign policy means foreign policy and that means that they are outside Europe and the EU.
Verheugen clearly believes that seeing their fellow muslims admitted to the EU would impress people all over the islamic world, including Arabs. It might well undermine the arguments of those muslims who say westerners hate muslims, want to keep them poor, humiliate them etc.

Verheugen clearly believes that seeing their fellow muslims admitted to the EU would impress people all over the islamic world, including Arabs. It might well undermine the arguments of those muslims who say westerners hate muslims, want to keep them poor, humiliate them etc.
Verheugen is an idiot if he thinks anyone believes that. There are plenty of rich muslim countries about. But it's up to Europe to help those muslims that aren't?

Turkey is the only muslim country currently in discussions about entering the EU. If refused, Islam could appear to be the reason. If Yemen applied, the No would be clearly geographical. All poor muslims are no more our problem than all poor buddhists.

In fact, if Turkey is refused, islam will be more than the apparent reason.

In fact, if Turkey is refused, islam will be more than the apparent reason.
Islam and it's geographical location together with the enormouse financial strain should be more then enough reason to say: NO!!!!!! to Turkey.

The whole European Union is shit that came from my ass. Harshly said, but true. We abandon the Markka, that has been our money for over hundred years. We get higher prices in markets and funny directives from Brussels. All the farmers I know curse how EU limits them. I heard they are denying people from taking water from their OWN wells, because it MIGHT be dirty. I'm sure that EU will be a federal state one day, which means that we give up our independence, that we fought for so hard.

Too bad our goverment is full of pussies that are too frightened to pull out of EU.

Islam and it's geographical location together with the enormouse financial strain should be more then enough reason to say: NO!!!!!! to Turkey.
financial strain: no denying that
Geographical: part in, part out
Islam: why?

Verheugen clearly believes that seeing their fellow muslims admitted to the EU would impress <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=people&v=56">people</a> all over the islamic world, including Arabs. It might well undermine the arguments of those muslims who say westerners hate muslims, want to keep them poor, humiliate them etc.
You are wrong. Turkey is the only muslim country with a clear separation between religion state. Have Arab countries followed that principal? No, although that happened more than 80 years ago.
It is a fact that the Turks are in many ways as much hated as Westerners in the Arab world. Reason: the fact that they onced ruled huge parts of the Middle East, that they seperated religion and state (which is seen by many as betrayl of Islam), and because it is the best ally of the US in the region (aside Israel).
So: Has that so far impressed the Arabs: The answer is no. You are following an illusion.
Turkey is neither past of the Arab world nor Europe. It is culturally an isolated country. I don´t feel sorry for them. But they are actually in a shitty situation. Europe doesn´t want them and the Arabs don´t want them either.
So the best thing for them would be to form a Turkmen Union with the countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia.

Geographical: part in, part out
VERY big part out. Like 97% out.
Islam: why?
Islamic culture. Not compatibal with modern days European culture. Just look at areas all across Europe with large muslim populations. Social and political flashpoints. And to add an entire country, whose inhabitants are itching for a passage West, is just suicidal.

turkey joins, with its separation of religion and state. it gets richer and more influential as a result. this comes from following secular policies and respecting human rights, which policies are necessary to open the door. Women get better jobs and education. Patriarchal society is weakened and greater equality develops.

Turkey leads the way in modernising and moderating islam. The people of Iran and the new iraqi theocracy see there is a better way.

Turkey leads the way in modernising and moderating islam. The people of Iran and the new iraqi theocracy see there is a better way.
They can lead Iran and Iraq all they like for all I care. But not from within Europe.

Turkey is refused. Politicians stop pushing a reform agenda that will produce no obvious gains. In fact, years of policy are shown to have been wasted. Where next? radical islamists have an answer. Adultery won't be the last of the new set of crimes.

And in foreign policy, helping islamists in Europe and elsewhere can replace cosying up to Europe.

Turkey is refused. Politicians stop pushing a reform agenda that will produce no obvious gains. In fact, years of policy are shown to have been wasted. Where next? radical islamists have an answer. Adultery won't be the last of the new set of crimes.
And in foreign policy, helping islamists in Europe and elsewhere can replace cosying up to Europe.
You can look at it from the other way around as well. Turkey has today 60 million people. In 2030 it is going to be 100 million. Even with high growth Turkey is and remains a developing country. Being an EU member would mean a free flow of immigration from Turkey into Europe - not like today when it is restricted. The result of Turkish EU membership could therefore not mean the Europeanisation of Turkey but the Islaminsastion of Europe.
Today the Turkish military takes care that the country isn´t re-islamised. It prevented several times (60s, 90s) a role-back of Atatürks reforms. As EU member the Turkish military can´t play this role anymore.
Therefore it is no wonder that the Islamists in Turkey are actually supporting EU membership of the country. So, it is very dangerous. EU membership could therefore actually strengthening the radicals within Turkey and could lead to a development where there is not just a destabilisation of Turkey but of all of Europe.

Probaply a stupid remark, but is it not more plausible that things will go the other way?

Sure there will be a migration wave, a large one no doubt, but wont the Turks be swamped in our culture within a couple of generations not vise versa?After all their kids will grow up watching European TV, playing with European kids in their schools, listening to European music and be indoctrinated by European themes and values.

I don't see how even 150 million Turks (currently only 60 million) can somehow change the mindsets of well over 380 million Europeans?

Sure they can't join now, like has been repeated ad infinitum, too little progress in the areas of human rights and such, but I'm all for letting the negotiation talks begin.THEY are already adapting to US, in 20 years time Turkey will be a much more established country, population growth will no doubt be under control, and the EU influence will have straightened their economy out a little.

Someone said earlier Turkey was neither part of the Arab, nor the Christian world, well then lets seize this little gem and make them our own before they go about on their own messing up themselves and the region even further, or worse, before they join up with another power, like those smart as fuck Americans are trying to have them do :p

Finally a word on geography, although located outisde of our borders, the European countries and The Ottoman Empire had been living together since 1453 (fall of Byzantium), put simply we grew up together and are bound to have more values in common than one would think, especially seeing as they occupied the Balkans and Greece for awhile.

Kyber, they'll have to be hella devoted muslims if they are going to stay extremely religious after a life in Europe, and they'll have to be insanely watchfull over their childeren who already after one generation begin to loose interest in strict Islam.

Who and how many are that bothered?

Sure there will be a migration wave, a large one no doubt, but wont the Turks be swamped in our culture within a couple of generations not vise versa?After all their kids will grow up watching European TV, playing with European kids in their schools, listening to European music and be indoctrinated by European themes and values..
I doubt it. There are too many.

I don't see how even 150 million Turks (currently only 60 million) can somehow change the mindsets of well over 380 million Europeans?..
You forget the fact that Europe has a declining population and Turkey a fastly growing one. Therefore the question who would eat whom is not that clear. Also you miss the fact that Turkey is one country and the rest of Europe are currently 25 countries, which aren´t that close together as the Turks are.



Someone said earlier Turkey was neither part of the Arab, nor the Christian world, well then lets seize this little gem and make them our own before they go about on their own messing up themselves and the region even further, or worse, before they join up with another power, like those smart as fuck Americans are trying to have them do :p.
I want them to play an active role in the Middle East. They are better than Iran, Iraq or Saudi-Arabia. But they can better do that outside the EU.

Finally a word on geography, although located outisde of our borders, the European countries and The Ottoman Empire had been living together since 1453 (fall of Byzantium), put simply we grew up together and are bound to have more values in common than one would think, especially seeing as they occupied the Balkans and Greece for awhile.
And the Arabs occupied parts of Europe as well (Spain). Should Arab countries invited to be part of the EU?
My answer is now.
I´m in favour of close cooperation with Turkey (privileged partnership) but against a full membership for Turkey in the foreseable future.

Kyber, they'll have to be hella devoted muslims if they are going to stay extremely religious after a life in Europe, and they'll have to be insanely watchfull over their childeren who already after one generation begin to loose interest in strict Islam.
Who and how many are that bothered?
Studies in Germany show that actually the religiosity among muslims (Turks) is growing while that of the other population is declining.
And we are taking even about the third generation.
So: Integration failed.
And many are insanely watchfull over their children especially about the girls.
But they don´t have a problem with a guy playing around a bit. In that sense they are traditionally very open.
Islam is the fastest growing religion in Europe. I don´t know why are you so blind not to see that. We may see an islamisation of Europe in the future if we allowed unlimmited immigration from muslim countries.

380 million is alot more than 60 million, and we're not declining THAT rapidly.
Also my friend, you miss the fact that the turks will be spread over those 25 countries, and so they will still be in the minority in all of these countries, you misunderstand me when I say that the European culture will indoctrinate them, I'm saying that the in each of these countries they will be swallowed by the culture of their particular hosts.

I see it here and Belgium is small, and migration fairly large.

I don't see Turkey as a country that will throw its weight around in the Middle East too soon anyway, without help they are to afraid to cut loose their ties with the Muslim countries.I wish they'd show some initiative too but us little people wish for alot of things it seems.

I did not say that any country that ever invaded should join, I said that as Turley controlled parts of Europe for a long time the whole cultural difference isn't quite as large as is believed.

Studies in Germany show that actually the religiosity among muslims (Turks) is growing while that of the other population is declining.
And we are taking even about the third generation.
So: Integration failed.
And many are insanely watchfull over their children especially about the girls.
But they don´t have a problem with a guy playing around a bit. In that sense they are traditionally very open.
Islam is the fastest growing religion in Europe. I don´t know why are you so blind not to see that. We may see an islamisation of Europe in the future if we allowed unlimmited immigration from muslim countries.

You can proove anything with "studies and surveys", I judge from what I see, and I see Turks running around here, dressed in Tommy Hilfigger or gangsta styled clothes if they are into the rap music (which most are) chasing after Turkish girl that are showing more than scalp mate.

As to the growing religion bit, ofcourse it is, they are the largest migration group so obviously it will grow.

380 million is alot more than 60 million, and we're not declining THAT rapidly.
Also my friend, you miss the fact that the turks will be spread over those 25 countries, and so they will still be in the minority in all of these countries, you misunderstand me when I say that the European culture will indoctrinate them, I'm saying that the in each of these countries they will be swallowed by the culture of their particular hosts.
I see it here and Belgium is small, and migration fairly large.
I don't see Turkey as a country that will throw its weight around in the Middle East too soon anyway, without help they are to afraid to cut loose their ties with the Muslim countries.I wish they'd show some initiative too but us little people wish for alot of things it seems.
I did not say that any country that ever invaded should join, I said that as Turley controlled parts of Europe for a long time the whole cultural difference isn't quite as large as is believed.
Today 60 million, in 2030 100 million. That is already for shure.
And they would of course not migrate equally to all 25 countries. Arabs have also migrated mainly to France - there former colonial power. And Pakistani to Britain. In the case of the Turks if would be Austria and Germany since that are the countries with the hugest Turkish communities. Sorry: but the East European countries are currently not of a lot of interests for immigrants. So, the wave is going to come to the richer countries especially to those who already have huge Turkish communities.
You should visit Berlin-Kreuzberg once: the biggest Turkish settlement outside Turkey.
In some cities they would be the majority in a few decades if the wave comes.

You can proove anything with "studies and surveys", I judge from what I see, and I see Turks running around here, dressed in Tommy Hilfigger or gangsta styled clothes if they are into the rap music (which most are) chasing after Turkish girl that are showing more than scalp mate.
And I see more and more scarfs and even teachers on public schools who want to wear a scarf. Fortunately that got banned (as the show of other religious symbols which wasn´t usual though) in most states. In that issue I have huges sympathy for France.
Well: after all the result for Le Pen shows the problem this uncontrolled muslim immigration is causing. Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands (inferiority of Muslim culture) or Haider in Austria are the result of the blind policy of many governments. I don´t support any of them and would never vote for them. But that is the result of a blind policy regarding immigration. And the Vlaams bloc in Belgium got 24% recently. I wonder what many would say if such result would happen in Germany. But the thread for that is there and it is real. And therefore we have to restrict immigration.

FACT: Europeans are humans
FACT: Turks are humans

FACT: Europeans were once just as, probaply even more, religiously strict as Turks are today.

FACT: Europeans are not anymore


CONCLUSION: it's very likely that with the rise of prosperity the Turks will also loose their religious fixation.

Also I absolutely believe you that Turks and other nationities can be annoying as fuck to hang around with, they can be rude, ignorant, hostile and prone to violence.If they are in the majority in an area of a city you live in then I feel sorry for you, cause for the next twenty years or so they'll be a bitch.

Yeah, the right wing is on the rise, no arguement there, but no matter how irritating they are now, I'm sure they will adapt in time.

Though it's true that the whole process could be sped up if only the government issued some sort of spread plan, so they don't concentrate themselves all together in a few major cities but cross country in fewer numbers.

They did that in The Netherlands 50 years ago, when the Italian and Polish wave was at a high and I hear it worked like a charm.

Last comment, how many non-practicing Christians wear little crosses around their necks?Also if someone were to ban baggy pants from public schools, I bet the number of skaters would skyrocket.

Last comment, how many non-practicing Christians wear little crosses around their necks?
I used to. I say used because the strap broke and I lost it before I got a replacement.

Shame really, it was a gift from a friend who I lost contact with a while ago.

Fact: The EU is an Union of European States not a World Union. So the fact that we are all humans is irrelevant. With that argument you could justify the membership of Papua-New Guinea in the EU. Of course they are humans, but that is not the point.

"FACT: Europeans were once just as, probaply even more, religiously strict as Turks are today.
FACT: Europeans are not anymore
CONCLUSION: it's very likely that with the rise of prosperity the Turks will also loose their religious fixation."
WRONG: The US is getting more and more prosperous and more and more religious. Europe is an exception in its development, not the rule. As a matter of fact I see an economic stagnation of Europe for the future. And that makes us vulnerable for a take-over by the vastly growing Islamic world.
And it is also a fact that in all muslim countries islamism in growing. That is even the case for Turkey. The current prime minister is an islamists. And its foreign minister Gül is educated in Saudi-Arabia.
I don´t trust Turkey too the slightest degree.
They have betrayed (parliament) the US and Britain regarding the stationing of troops for the invasion of Iraq and are playing both camps in Europe in the Iraq policy to get their admission into the EU. They will betrayl both. I don´t trust and I don´t see a reason to that. And therefore I don´t see a place for Turkey in Europe.
Especially since Europe itself is incompetent and unable to develop a consistent strategy towards the Middle East it would be irresponsible to enlarge it in a way that it borders Iran, Iraq and Syria.

"Last comment, how many non-practicing Christians wear little crosses around their necks?Also if someone were to ban baggy pants from public schools, I bet the number of skaters would skyrocket."
that has nothing to do with that. The laws came after that happened.
So, you switch around the reality. That is like saying 9/11 was the result of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. The opposite is true of course.
And a small cross is not the same as a scarf. A scarf is more like a crucifix.
They used to be in Bavarian schools. After a supreme court ruling they have to be taken out: (and they are taken out if one rejects it).
I think they should alway be taken out.
And I don´t think a teacher at a public school should wear religious symbols either. It is inapropiate for a teacher to promote directly or indirectly any religion. So, I´m for a ban of religious symbols (which of course include scarfs) for teachers of public schools. Most states have now fortunately passed such a ban.

I didn't mean to make a plee for a brotherhood of humanity (although it would be a worthy cause), I ment that as we're both human cultures, we'll most likely evolve the same way, when facing the same circumstances.

That's why I'm not worried that Islam is rising in those countries, lets face it, they are poor and we're rich, hardly the same circumstances.

Do you really believe that a) The states are getting more and more prosperous and b) They are more and more religious?

Last I heared the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan ruined their economy and to argue that America is evolving back to old-fashioned "sow a cross to your vest and go kill Muslims" is highly doubtful.I suspect there are other motivations for the war on terrorism, then to launch the eight crusade.

(by the way that future economical stagnation happened years ago;)

Now don't get me wrong, I don't like Turkey either, but if we do take them they could be and will be an asset.The thing is we don't really have much of a choice anyway, as I dont think they're dumb enough to tie themselves to us in a mere "priviledged alliance" and we can't risk having a loose cannon behind our backs.

In my opinion we should take Turkey in a few decades and then go isolated on the world till we fix our internal issues (much like the states did back in the day).

Fact: The EU is an Union of European States not a World Union. So the fact that we are all humans is irrelevant. With that argument you could justify the membership of Papua-New Guinea in the EU. Of course they are humans, but that is not the point.

Finally somebody pointed this out. Of course the massive political, economic, and cultural discrepancy is interesting, but it is not significant.

TURKEY IN NOT IN EUROPE!

That is all that matters. Even if they were similar to European nations, it wouldn't matter. One thing that is certain is that the US and Australia are far more European in every sense than Turkey; perhaps they can join the EU next.

For those of you who are understandably nervous about their entry, take some comfort in the fact that Greek Cyprus is an EU member. For a country to join the EU, there must be unanimous consent, and it will be a cold day in hell when Cypriots, who for hundreds of years have tried to fight off brutal Turkish invasions, will allow Turkey in the EU.

And a small cross is not the same as a scarf. A scarf is more like a crucifix.


They are both clear symbols of religion are they not?

I'm all for banning every religious item from schools and public life aswell, but that's not the point of this conversation:)

I just heared on the news last week that the number of muslim girls wanting to wear a scraf to school rose AFTER the French ban was put into place, if those numbers were rising even before the ban aswell, I have no idea, so won't be arguing with you there.

For those of you who are understandably nervous about their entry, take some comfort in the fact that Greek Cyprus is an EU member. For a country to join the EU, there must be unanimous consent, and it will be a cold day in hell when Cypriots, who for hundreds of years have tried to fight off brutal Turkish invasions, will allow Turkey in the EU.
I´m concerned though. Turkey could use Northern Cyprus as an tool of pressure: Reunification of Cyrus and agreeing to Greek Cypriots demands in exchange for EU membership. Impossible? I don´t know. What do you think?

Byzantium, Turkey is indeed, partly not in Europe.

However they have been playing a large role in European history for a long time and that's why I believe the EU is considering their membership.

The doomvisions of this opening the doors for all neighbouring countries to join is probaply inaccurate, I can't be sure here but I believe the politicians are only making an exception for Turkey because it has a part, if ever so small, of Europe's soil.

I'm all for banning every religious item from schools and public life aswell, but that's not the point of this conversation:)
.
It is part of the question because it is about the consequences of such a decision. And that would be a huge wave towards islamisation.
So, pushing such a policy - like France does (I wouldn´t get that far though)- would mean a cultural fight! And who is going to win that?
I´m not so shure especially if the balance of power is changing with the increase of Europes muslim population (which would get a further push with the Turkish membership.

"Last I heared the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan ruined their economy and to argue that America is evolving back to old-fashioned "sow a cross to your vest and go kill Muslims" is highly doubtful.I suspect there are other motivations for the war on terrorism, then to launch the eight crusade."
No, America isn´t developing into that what you describe. But it is getting more religious. And as far as I see it the American economy today grows much faster than any European economy. So, I have to disagree with you in that point.
We have indeed to take care about this region. The use of force can not be excluded and I see many missions - especially of small anti-terror units - in the Middle East, Asia and North (Algeria, e.g.) and East Africa. Europe can´t run away from that as well. The threat is real.
Although of there differences Britain and France realize that. And more and more also the others - that includes the political class in the Federal Repbublic especially the defense politicians and the defense minister.

Byzantium, Turkey is indeed, partly not in Europe.
However they have been playing a large role in European history for a long time and that's why I believe the EU is considering their membership.
The doomvisions of this opening the doors for all neighbouring countries to join is probaply inaccurate, I can't be sure here but I believe the politicians are only making an exception for Turkey because it has a part, if ever so small, of Europe's soil.
What is with Israel? What is with Georgia? What is with Armenia? What is with Azerbaidshan?
That would be the next questions after Turkey.

Too true my friend,

but as you've said yourself, we are not competent or organised enough to formulate a coherent strategy towards the Middle Eastern conflict, let alone take in Isreal.

The other countries you mentionned, I have no idea what will happen to them, what about placing them under a commonwealth/protectorate system?

I agree that we can't keep adding countries and that we're not a World Union, so Turkey is as far as they will/should stretch it.

Too true my friend,
but as you've said yourself, we are not competent or organised enough to formulate a coherent strategy towards the Middle Eastern conflict, let alone take in Isreal.
The other countries you mentionned, I have no idea what will happen to them, what about placing them under a commonwealth/protectorate system?
I agree that we can't keep adding countries and that we're not a World Union, so Turkey is as far as they will/should stretch it.
Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaidshan are all in the Caucasus which is geographically the border between Europe and Asia: So, it can be argued that they are part of Europe as well.
And Israel is after all part of the west. What should Israel do? Becoming part of an Arab Union? I think we all know that this is impossible.
So, that would be the next logical thing.

They should have never allocated that land to the Jewish people, to rob it from the Palestinians and plant an artificially formed nation in its place, surrounded by Islamic neighbours is plain suicide.

Had they wanted to spark a fire in that region, it couldn't have been done in a better way.

I hear you when you say it's the next logical question, but I have trouble believing the EU can make a real case for Isreali membership, and why would we want that trouble hotbed anyway.

If only the UN had greater authority it could do miracles for Isreal and its neighbours, but that's going off topic.

CONCLUSION: it's very likely that with the rise of prosperity the Turks will also loose their religious fixation.
FACT: Radical Imams in Europe recruit mostly 2nd or 3rd generation muslims. Those who, if you ask one of them armchair socialists pro immigration nut jobs, are completely integratet into western society.
FACT: There already is an radical Islamic poltical party active in Europe whos goal it is to include parts of the Sharia into the law. They are called the AEL. And once a new tidal wave of Turks storms across Europe they will most likely lose their Pan Arab fixation and go on Pan Muslim assault.

Sure, but I refuse to believe they are living here, in better conditions than their retardedly staunch ancestors without putting two and two together.

Granted, as they live hurdled together in tight little communities the integration process will take a while longer, but can't be unacheivable.

I don't see why people keep countering my arguements with evidence of muslim fundamentalism in Europe, I never said we were living a picture perfect , I said we were on the right track.:)

They should have never allocated that land to the Jewish people, to rob it from the Palestinians and plant an artificially formed nation in its place, surrounded by Islamic neighbours is plain suicide.
Had they wanted to spark a fire in that region, it couldn't have been done in a better way.
I hear you when you say it's the next logical question, but I have trouble believing the EU can make a real case for Isreali membership, and why would we want that trouble hotbed anyway.
If only the UN had greater authority it could do miracles for Isreal and its neighbours, but that's going off topic.
I disagree with you regarding Israel. The existence of a jewish state is an historic necessity.
And there are geopolitical considerations which play a role for that.
I mean: I don´t deny that we could use Turkey (Caucasus, Central Asia, Engergy security). But it would then be the logical step to include also the Caucasian countries. Allowing Turkey in and rejecting that to the christian countries Armenia and Georgia is not possible.
And a solution for Israel needs to be found. After all: it is also part of the Eurovision contest if we would use that as an argument for deciding what an European country is.

I don't see why people keep countering my arguements with evidence of muslim fundamentalism in Europe, I never said we were living a picture perfect , I said we were on the right track.:)
But that is exactly the question. Are we on the right track?
And given the global developments: Can we be on the right track?
I don´t see us on the right track. I see us without even having a strategy.

Sure, but I refuse to believe they are living here, in better conditions than their retardedly staunch ancestors without putting two and two together.
They do put 2 and 2 together. Everytime someone criticises them they yell: Racism!!! Discrimination!!!
Which never fails.


I don't see why people keep countering my arguements with evidence of muslim fundamentalism in Europe, I never said we were living a picture perfect , I said we were on the right track.:)
It's to illustrate that Turkey is not an enrichment. Despite what Günter Verheuchler and Gerhard Shithead and others tell us.

They do put 2 and 2 together. Everytime someone criticises them they yell: Racism!!! Discrimination!!!
Which never fails. .
True, with that interpretation of "political correctness" every criticism is discredited. No wonder that fighter against those dictatorship of the political correctness even from the extrem right are successful: Le Pen in France, Haider in Austria, Pim Fortuyn in the Netherlands or the Vlaams bloc in Belgium.


It's to illustrate that Turkey is not an enrichment. Despite what Günter Verheuchler and Gerhard Shithead and others tell us.
I welcome your position. But then you have to draw the consequence for that. And that is to support the CDU/CSU opposition and Angela Merkel in 2006 for a government change in Germany.

Pim Fortuyn
He was not extreme right. Although the smear campaign, by the established factions, against him tried to give that impression.


I welcome your position. But then you have to draw the consequence for that. And that is to support the CDU/CSU opposition and Angela Merkel in 2006 for a government change in Germany.
I would if I could be absolutley sure that they won't deviate from their position. Even if it would mean getting a US butt monkey chancelor. Which I'm not so sure of.

"Allowing Turkey in and rejecting that to the christian countries Armenia and Georgia is not possible."

If Turkey joins I believe many people would very much like to see the Christian Caucasus countries join aswell, should they meet EU requirements ofcourse.I believe the only concern with Turkey is its religion and geography is just a "stick to hit the dog". (Belgian proverb)

I can't get heads nor tails of the songfestival line up, but yes a solution for Isreal has to be found, if only to save human life.However not too many nations in the middle east are willing to compromise, and I do not see an agreement being made without that.It's truly a complex issue.

Theres just one solution in the case of Israel. And that is a staunch NO!!!!!!

sorry don't speak german.
do you know where i can find the article in english/spanish/french?

Also to the americans that feel that turkey should join the EU.
What do you think of mexico becoming part of the US or of the US devolving some of its powers to NAFTA in the future?
curious...

Actually, this may seem strange, but it may benefit the US citizens to annex Mexico. Because many of our jobs are bein outsourced there (as well as India and China, which we can't as easily take over). If we took over Mexico, companies would be forced to pay them minimum wage at least, and would give other US citizens a very meek fighting chance.

We could really use a tariff on goods imported from companies who have outsourced jobs from America. But if thee was ever a chance of that happening, they wouldn't have moved in the first place!

To actually fix our outsourcing problem, we need a different president who won't push for this to happen!

They do put 2 and 2 together. Everytime someone criticises them they yell: Racism!!! Discrimination!!!
Which never fails.


It's to illustrate that Turkey is not an enrichment. Despite what Günter Verheuchler and Gerhard Shithead and others tell us.

True but that bird won't keep flying, it's like a child whining, at first the parents listen to its excuses of being tired when it is in fact lazy, but after awhile they see through it and get anrgy and uncompassionate.

In fact I think they've overplayed their hand already, recently noone seems to give a F**K when rascism is claimed, and quite possibly they will not care whether or not it is actually the case.Boy cried wolf.

Just out of curiosity, are there any non-Germans with an opinion on Turkey?

True but that bird won't keep flying, it's like a child whining, at first the parents listen to its excuses of being tired when it is in fact lazy, but after awhile they see through it and get anrgy and uncompassionate.

In fact I think they've overplayed their hand already, recently noone seems to give a F**K when rascism is claimed, and quite possibly they will not care whether or not it is actually the case.Boy cried wolf.
It's still working for Israel. And it has been for nearly 50 years.

"Just out of curiosity, are there any non-Germans with an opinion on Turkey? "

You are looking at one.

"Just out of curiosity, are there any non-Germans with an opinion on Turkey? "

You are looking at one.
Oh, good. I had a feeling that they had a monopoly on this thread. Now since I'm too lazy to find it, what's your take? Yay or Ney?

It's complicated, I feel that if we manage it well, it could turn out to be a great addition to the union.

Anyway here's the page with my original message:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=359858&page=13&pp=15

It's complicated, I feel that if we manage it well, it could turn out to be a great addition to the union.

Anyway here's the page with my original message:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=359858&page=13&pp=15
Thanks for showing that. And I do agree with you on geography. They are really more European than one would think. They are a blending of the Middle East and the Balkans. In fact, 23% of Turkey is located in Europe's borders.

In fact, 23% of Turkey is located in Europe's borders.
Are you using 17th century maps? Cause the maps I have show only some 3% in Europe.

Are you using 17th century maps? Cause the maps I have show only some 3% in Europe.
Whatever.

Just out of curiosity, are there any non-Germans with an opinion on Turkey?

Not German, British but living on the european mainland.

Turkey needs to sort out its human rights. More than anything else. At the moment some of the stuff that goes on their isn't acceptable to the majority of people in europe. Just last week they were talking about making adultery a crime again. The last turkish law on adultery made it punishable after just one offence for a woman, but for a man he had to have a sustained period of being unfaithful for it to count. Geographically more than 90% of Turkey isn't in europe, but Hey, thats okay atleast some of it is there. Where do we draw the line for membership? I'd be happy to have Russia in the EU, but wouldn't want any country that didn't have atleast a chunk of it this side of the Caucasus'. Getting Russia to join, assuming it could meet the requirements would be a great tool for reducing pollution in the Baltic Sea

Whatever.
Snappy comeback. :rolleyes: Your the man.

quite possibly 23% of Turks is in Europe. But Turkey's land mass is clearly almost 97% outside Europe.

However I do not think this really matters.
Summarising the reality: What matters is if Europeans want Turkey in. I really hate it when Americans (the government I mean) want to have an opinion in the matter.
After all we will be paying for the Turks not the US. We will have them voting with 20% of the voting weight in our councils, not you.

I think it is truly crazy to admit a very poor country and give them so much voting power. On the other hand the EU is democratic so every full member must have votes that are in close realtion to its population. Turkey will have 100 million people in 2025 making it easily the biggest country. Thus Turkey can not be a full member, because no sane European politician would give them so much power in European politics...
This is just realism.

Now the idealist question: does Turkey deserve to be admitted?

-Many Americans say it will serve as an ideal to the Muslim world of a functioning Muslim democracy.
Well I do not think many Arabs or Persians like the Turks or see them as a model.

-Others say it would show that the West is not racist and that Muslims can work with us if they keep some standards.
Again I am not sure of the real power such a signal would have in convincing them. Even then, I do not see again why Europe should shoulder the burden of fixing America's relations with Islam.

-The last opinion can say that Turkey belongs in the EU because the Turks are a part of European history.
This is partly true. The Turks have even reached the walls of Vienna (that is very Central Europe for you) in the 17th century, before retreating in the Balkans (Southeast Europe). But I think they have always been considered invaders and were not particularly polite or hlepful to the local populations.

And I do have the feeling that people who see Turkey as a great addition to the EU see Europe as just an economic club. Well no, for this we have EFTA. The EU is more. It is a union of values, a signal of the need of Europeans to come closer and work together. Turkey in this club would only make us weaker and more difficult to find a common voice...

So in general I think, Turkey is not Europe. If they ever get admitted it will be due to geostrategic considerations and american pressure, not due to the will of European public opinion.

quite possibly 23% of Turks is in Europe. But Turkey's land mass is clearly almost 97% outside Europe.

However I do not think this really matters.
Summarizing the rality: What matters is if Europeans want Turkey in. I really hate it when Americans (the government I mean) want to have an opinion in the matter.
After all we will be paying for the Turks not the US. We will have them voting with 20% of the voting weight in our councils, not you.

I think it is truly crazy to admit a very poor country and give them so much voting power. On the other hand the EU is democratic so every full member must have votes that are in close realtion to its population. Turkey will have 100 million people in 2025 making it easily the biggest country. Thus Turkey can not be a full member, because no sane European politician would give them so much power in European politics...
This is just realism.

Now the idealist question: does Turkey deserve to be admitted?

-Many Americans say it will serve as an ideal to the Muslim world of a functioning Muslim democracy.
Well I do not think many Arabs or Persians like the Turks or see them as a model.

-Others say it would show that the West is not racist and that Muslims can work with us if they keep some standards.
Again I am not sure of the real power such a signal would have in convincing them. Even then, I do not see again why Europe should shoulder the burden of fixing America's relations with Islam.
Excellent post.
The last opinion can say that Turkey belongs in the EU because the Turks are a part of European history.
This is partly true. The Turks have even reached the walls of Vienna (that is very Central Europe for you) in the 17th century, before retreating in the Balkans (Southeast Europe). But I think they have always been considered invaders and were not particularly polite or hlepful to the local populations.
By that logic we could also take in Saudi Arabia and pretty much all of the middle east and North Africa. As they have also invaded Europe at one point or another.

I personally don't think Turkey should be admitted into EU (and I'm not German :-) !).
They still have a long-way to go to improve their human rights record, and their society is completely different to the rest of Europe's. Even with those reasons, most of the country isn't even in Europe, so I don't see any grounds for admitting them.
If we need any more members for EU, we should concentrate on bring those countries in the east that are still not members up to the standards necessary for membership. Ha ha, any maybe we could try and get those pesky Norwegian neighbours of mine to vote yes eventually!

They still have a long-way to go to improve their human rights record,

Surely making them part of the EU could help that a lot. The carrot [becoming a member if HRs are improved] has proved fairly successful, why should membership be different.
and their society is completely different to the rest of Europe's.

Yeah? And? So what?

Why is this a bad thing?

Even with those reasons, most of the country isn't even in Europe,

How do you define Europes 'borders'? And why?

Surely making them part of the EU could help that a lot. The carrot [becoming a member if HRs are improved] has proved fairly successful, why should membership be different.
And why should they be rewarded with an EU membership for improving their human rights record? Why should the responsibility be put on Europe?


Yeah? And? So what?

Why is this a bad thing?
Because they aren't Europeans. They have more in common with the Mongols. And it's the European Union. Not the European Union plus everyone else America wants us to take in.



How do you define Europes 'borders'? And why?
From Ireland to Scandinavia. From Scandinavia to the Ural. From the Ural to Greece and the Iberain peninsula. Because it just is.

I'm too tired to read all of the posts in this thread so I'll just add my bit.

Turkey has problems, obviously, but the solution to their problems isn't going to be found in keeping them out of the loop.

If Turkey is to be reformed it needs to be strengthened economically and be given strick guidelines to follow to make it a better country. The EU will do just this. Since being in the EU will strengthen its economy it will never consider leaving, which will give EU members a lot of influence over Turkey. EU members could get it to finally recognize the Armenian genocide for example among other things. (anyone see the Egoyan movie 'Ararat'?)

It may cost now to get Turkey in the EU and help it with its problems but with terrorism (all roads lead back to Rome...) a growing threat they would be as asset if we could strengthen their country, increase education, etc., etc.

Letting Turkey in the EU will benefit everyone in the long term. As long as they aren't given a free ride.

And why should they be rewarded with an EU membership for improving their human rights record? Why should the responsibility be put on Europe?

Well, it does make a nice incentive.

Because they aren't Europeans. They have more in common with the Mongols. And it's the European Union. Not the European Union plus everyone else America wants us to take in.

Whats wrong with the mongols?


From Ireland to Scandinavia. From Scandinavia to the Ural. From the Ural to Greece and the Iberain peninsula. Because it just is.
Nice logic, "because it just is."

My viewpoint is that the idea of Europe is ficticious, and trying to not allow people into a club on the basis that they are not within said fictitious area is bordering on predjudice.

Personally, I think any country should be allowed to join the Union if the want.

Do you think that Russia should be allowed in the EU (providing it passes all the tests of course)?

Well, it does make a nice incentive.
It's not Europes responsibility to make Turkey improve them.



Whats wrong with the mongols?
Nothing. But they like the Turks are not Europeans. And therefor have no business in the EU.


My viewpoint is that the idea of Europe is ficticious, and trying to not allow people into a club on the basis that they are not within said fictitious area is bordering on predjudice.
Talk about "nice logic". :rolleyes: It's fictiouse...pah.
Personally, I think any country should be allowed to join the Union if the want.
In that case it's a good thing you don't decide about those things.

Do you think that Russia should be allowed in the EU (providing it passes all the tests of course)?
No. Not that they would want to join. Millions of square kilometers in Asia. (or is Asia also "fictiouse"?)

As I've been skimming through this thread, I've noticed a general theme. Most, but not all, of those opposed to Turkey entering do so on cultural grounds. The rest are just side arguements created in deductive brain storms. Those for the joining of Turkey say that it is because it doesn't matter who the EU admits. So, to liven up the debate, let's take another applicant country, like Romania. Are those for or against Romania entering have their positions made based on the grounds so far developed in this thread?

As I've been skimming through this thread, I've noticed a general theme. Most, but not all, of those opposed to Turkey entering do so on cultural grounds. The rest are just side arguements created in deductive brain storms. Those for the joining of Turkey say that it is because it doesn't matter who the EU admits. So, to liven up the debate, let's take another applicant country, like Romania. Are those for or against Romania entering have their positions made based on the grounds so far developed in this thread?
If you mean economic reasons then yes. Romania shouldn't be allowed to become a member for at least 10 more years to come. Our funds will be slorped up enough as it is with the 10 countries that were admitted this year.

Turkey isn't a European country is it? Doesn't Europe already have their quota of Muslims?! :rolleyes:

If you mean economic reasons then yes. Romania shouldn't be allowed to become a member for at least 10 more years to come. Our funds will be slorped up enough as it is with the 10 countries that were admitted this year.
But doesn't the EU just fund the CAP program and its administration?

I woud be willing to wager that in about 200 years Europe is going to be more like Islameurope because so many of them are continuously immigrating West. Good luck maintaining any symblance of national identity because it is fading fast.

I woud be willing to wager that in about 200 years Europe is going to be more like Islameurope because so many of them are continuously immigrating West. Good luck maintaining any symblance of national identity because it is fading fast.
That's exactly what the isolationists and the Know nothing party said in America in the 1800s, that we'd be overrun. Look at the US today. It took a bit from every incoming culture to enrichen that which was already there. That will happen with these Arab and Turkic immigrants comming into Europe. I wouldn't be afraid of immigration, but embrace it. Besides, the European population is aging. Someone needs to be around so that the retirement age will be kept down.

And a solution for Israel needs to be found. After all: it is also part of the Eurovision contest if we would use that as an argument for deciding what an European country is.

HAHAHA, knew i'd get you to use this argument sooner or later!!!
lol

Turkey isn't a European country is it? Doesn't Europe already have their quota of Muslims?! :rolleyes:

EU already has millions of muslims mainly in Germany and France, but the UK and spain have growing amounts as well. A few of the countries in the Balklands have very large muslim populations and they will probably join one day.

I turkey is a bit of a pariah in world terms, so its easier seeing croatia and bosnia joing than turkey