NationStates Jolt Archive

What are your thoughts on this? Is the EU a strictly Christian club? Has the Turkish governement done all the necessary democratic reforms to enter? Or is there a risk to big to take in integrating a mostly muslim nation in our fold?

What are your thoughts on this? Is the EU a strictly Christian club? Has the Turkish governement done all the necessary democratic reforms to enter? Or is there a risk to big to take in integrating a mostly muslim nation in our fold?I don't think Turkey should be barred for religious or geographical reasons. I've got reasons why I don't think they're ready yet, but that doesn't rule it out for the future.

no but only because we need more time before we expand anymore plus we have to sort out a few problems.

I dont agree on them being disallowed because theyre muslim, but i dont see what they could add to the union (although this didnt stop a lot of countries gettin in last time)

What are your thoughts on this? Is the EU a strictly Christian club? Has the Turkish governement done all the necessary democratic reforms to enter? Or is there a risk to big to take in integrating a mostly muslim nation in our fold?


I don't think of Europe as being particularly Christian, at least not nowadays. For that matter, I think Turkey is officially a secular state (don't quote me on that, though!), so religion shouldn't play a factor.

We'd have to have a clearer picture of where they stand on use of air bases by US forces operating in the Middle East. It may not be in the EU's geopolitical interests, in future, to permit that. I'd like to see assurances that they would tow any such line.

Lets see things in perspective: The question isnt just if Turkey is ready, but also if Europe is ready to accept Turkey in. Now, Europe is its (very) different people. And the perception that i personally have, is that those people dont want turkey to join. That simple. Though personally i would like to see Turkey in the EU, i dont think the democratic majority wants it, and we, has Europeans, and though it may hurt a bit in the short run, should accept the will of the people. After all, everyone knew right from the beggining of the European construction that such project would take alot of time. We will have to proceed slowly, until our people are ready to accept the Turkish.

I dont agree on them being disallowed because theyre muslim, but i dont see what they could add to the union (although this didnt stop a lot of countries gettin in last time)
I think they have oil, not sure though.

Well, the EU is already a source for many problems in Europe, I do not think the EU should even exist. Up with Europe! Down with the EU!

Well, the EU is already a source for many problems in Europe, I do not think the EU should even exist. Up with Europe! Down with the EU!Hehe. Sucks for you. *hums Ode to Joy*
And where are you from?

Well, the EU is already a source for many problems in Europe, I do not think the EU should even exist. Up with Europe! Down with the EU!
Give an example.

If they start expanding too much we'll be lettin north africa in next :rolleyes:

If they start expanding too much we'll be lettin north africa in next :rolleyes:
Or even worse, Israel. :mad:

If they start expanding too much we'll be lettin north africa in next :rolleyes:
then the world Wuhahahahahahahaha!





Oh wait that's something else.

If they start expanding too much we'll be lettin north africa in next :rolleyes:Morocco's already gotten denied.

Lets see things in perspective: The question isnt just if Turkey is ready, but also if Europe is ready to accept Turkey in. Now, Europe is its (very) different people. And the perception that i personally have, is that those people dont want turkey to join. That simple. Though personally i would like to see Turkey in the EU, i dont think the democratic majority wants it, and we, has Europeans, and though it may hurt a bit in the short run, should accept the will of the people. After all, everyone knew right from the beggining of the European construction that such project would take alot of time. We will have to proceed slowly, until our people are ready to accept the Turkish.
Well, but let´s face it, if that kind of reasoning had been applied-the democratic majority not endorsing Turkey´s membership- in ´86, do you believe that Portugal and Spain would have been granted acess? (although i´m portuguese too, i´m tipying in english so as not to alienate our anglo cousins)

is israel classed as being in europe or asia, cos theyre allowed into the european football tournaments (they just never qualify)

Hehe. Sucks for you. *hums Ode to Joy*
And where are you from?
I'm from Poland, but this is not the place task me that stuff. Also, the Eu is a threat to National Severeignty, so I oppose it. *Burns EU Flag*

is israel classed as being in europe or asia, cos theyre allowed into the european football tournaments (they just never qualify)
I think the european football authorities make an exception in the case of israel because the israelis would never be allowed to compete in arab or middle-eastern-tournaments by their muslim neighbours

I'm from Poland, but this is not the place task me that stuff. Also, the Eu is a threat to National Severeignty, so I oppose it. *Burns EU Flag*Not the place to ask you?
You see, your opinion wouldn't be worth much if you weren't an EU citizen. I was trying to find out if you deserved further attention. Why do you hate the EU (and don't give me some little slogan you could find on election posters. Gimme a REASON).

is israel classed as being in europe or asia, cos theyre allowed into the european football tournaments (they just never qualify)
They have infiltrated the Eurovision Song Contest too, along with Turkey.

Who knows where that will lead? :mad:

Well, but let´s face it, if that kind of reasoning had been applied-the democratic majority not endorsing Turkey´s membership- in ´86, do you believe that Portugal and Spain would have been granted acess? (although i´m portuguese too, i´m tipying in english so as not to alienate our anglo cousins)

hey olá :D Eles que se lixem :P

Sim, de facto tens razão :/
Mas acho que depois da "grande expansão" a leste, e da onda de Eurocepticismo que invadiu a Europa, pedir a entrada da Turquia aos Europeus é pedir demais. Se calhar, sou eu que estou a ser excessivamente cauteloso e mal agradecido, mas enfim, é o que penso :/

I think the european football authorities make an exception in the case of israel because the israelis would never be allowed to compete in arab or middle-eastern-tournaments by their muslim neighbours

yeah good point

Give an example.
Oh well, if he wont I will...
1. Loss of national sovereignty
2. It isn't a democratically elected organisation and therefore undermines all notions of democracy in Europe, with laws passed by bureaucrats.
3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.
4. They implemented the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various fishing policies, which led to gross inequality amongst European farmers.
5. They enforced the European Human Rights Convention, which can and has been used to defend the rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.
6. The EU budget is a mess. Full stop.
7. They tend to advocate political correctness in the extreme.
8. They pass 80% of laws in some EU countries, virtually replacing the legislative bodies of those countries.
9. Oh, and they keep third world farmers in poverty too.

Just a few points to keep things going...

3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.

Most of those silly laws are urban legends or biased distortions of the truth:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/press_communication/facts/fact_039_en.htm

The straight cucumbers are also an urban legend.
(Some of the rest you said is true I'll get to them in another post just had to say this first)

Oh well, if he wont I will...
1. Loss of national sovereigntyAnd? Not like our governments managed to get things right anyway. More of a transfer than a loss, anyway.
2. It isn't a democratically elected organisation and therefore undermines all notions of democracy in Europe, with laws passed by bureaucrats.A common misconception. You said before that you studied it closely for a former job. You should know better.
3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.Yup. Things like regulating particulate matter and such are "silly".
4. They implemented the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various fishing policies, which led to gross inequality amongst European farmers. Granted. Good point.
5. They enforced the European Human Rights Convention, which can and has been used to defend the rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.Examples. It's a hollow statement otherwise.
6. The EU budget is a mess. Full stop.Blair's fault, actually
7. They tend to advocate political correctness in the extreme.Exactly! If Berlusconi wants to compare Germans to concentration camp guards he should damn well be allowed to! [/sarcasm]
8. They pass 80% of laws in some EU countries, virtually replacing the legislative bodies of those countries.Tell me what 80% of British law actually has been replaced. As far as I know, European laws require the national governments to create legislation to implement it, so it's still different in each country. That means the laws the Parliament passes don't "replace" national law.

9. Oh, and they keep third world farmers in poverty too.Good point. US isn't much different though. Should we abolish them too?

i think turkey shouldnt be in the EU. for several reasons

1-its not in europe (only the istanbul part)

2-its not of Europes interest to include a counrty with a different religion
im not against islam, coz im a muslim, but its like gettim a different race. like what if europe decides in the future to ban the headscarf... what will turkey's possition then...and different examples.

3-they dont want to recognize the right of the existence of cyprus...(how can they join a union without recognizing a member in it... lets say it's france and not cyprus..

and about the israeli and north african thing... i dont think that morocco or any other country would ever be accepted in the EU. simply because they are not in Europe at all....

hey olá :D Eles que se lixem :P

Sim, de facto tens razão :/
Mas acho que depois da "grande expansão" a leste, e da onda de Eurocepticismo que invadiu a Europa, pedir a entrada da Turquia aos Europeus é pedir demais. Se calhar, sou eu que estou a ser excessivamente cauteloso e mal agradecido, mas enfim, é o que penso :/
Mas n achas q a adesão á União serviu, no nosso caso, para finalmente estabilizar a nossa frágil democracia? Ao fim e ao cabo, mesmos os europeus cepticos c a nossa adesão tambem ficaram a ganhar, porq ninguem queria uma Cuba no sul da Europa...No caso da Turquia, a adesão tambem n poderia servir para estabilizar a democracia em moldes seculares?

What are your thoughts on this? Is the EU a strictly Christian club? Has the Turkish governement done all the necessary democratic reforms to enter? Or is there a risk to big to take in integrating a mostly muslim nation in our fold?


No. They aren't in Europe. It's that simple. Why should a country that isn't even in Europe be granted membership of the EU?

Yay my work was done for me.


For more on "Silly laws" that don't exist: http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/press_communication/facts/index_en.htm

Oh well, if he wont I will...
1. Loss of national sovereignty
2. It isn't a democratically elected organisation and therefore undermines all notions of democracy in Europe, with laws passed by bureaucrats.
3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.
4. They implemented the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various fishing policies, which led to gross inequality amongst European farmers.
5. They enforced the European Human Rights Convention, which can and has been used to defend the rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.
6. The EU budget is a mess. Full stop.
7. They tend to advocate political correctness in the extreme.
8. They pass 80% of laws in some EU countries, virtually replacing the legislative bodies of those countries.
9. Oh, and they keep third world farmers in poverty too.

Just a few points to keep things going...

1- In a globalized world, each European country, alone, is absolutly irrelevant, even the larger ones, compared to the US, India, China, Brazil, Japan. Only togheter we will have the strenght to push our ideals forward, whatever those may be. Divided, we will either be mindless pawns, and support troops (like the British), or irrelevant, like we Portuguese.

2- By your principle, the UN, NATO, EFTA, etc. should not exist. I agree that if more powers are to be given to Europe, than the institutions must become more democratic, but i don't think that is an excuse to hinder the project of European construction.

3- Yes yes, and there was the Myth that they were not just renaming Yogurt, but also downright banning it!

4- Absolutly true. CAP served its pourpose once, now it should be revamped, and the resources used in it polled for something more.. productive. Go blair :P

5- That is wrong, or at least a cynical view :p

6- Confuse? How come?

7- That is your point of view.

8- Really? In what countries?

9- Don't blame the EU for the sins of all of us. Any country has the choice of refusing to receive EU subsidies for agriculture, and not one (to my knowledge) has made any real attempts to make more fair trade with poorer nations. Actually, the EU has made much to trade with poorer nations. Feel free to research on the Cotunu accords.

i think turkey shouldnt be in the EU. for several reasons

1-its not in europe (only the istanbul part)

2-its not of Europes interest to include a counrty with a different religion
im not against islam, coz im a muslim, but its like gettim a different race. like what if europe decides in the future to ban the headscarf... what will turkey's possition then...and different examples.

3-they dont want to recognize the right of the existence of cyprus...(how can they join a union without recognizing a member in it... lets say it's france and not cyprus..

and about the israeli and north african thing... i dont think that morocco or any other country would ever be accepted in the EU. simply because they are not in Europe at all....
All good points...even so, don´t you think that after so much hope building up on the Turkish side, a final refusal by the EU will undermine the secular turks and bestow a lot of influence upon that part of turkish society already calling for a return to a more" pure" version of Islam?

i think turkey shouldnt be in the EU. for several reasons

1-its not in europe (only the istanbul part)

2-its not of Europes interest to include a counrty with a different religion
im not against islam, coz im a muslim, but its like gettim a different race. like what if europe decides in the future to ban the headscarf... what will turkey's possition then...and different examples.

3-they dont want to recognize the right of the existence of cyprus...(how can they join a union without recognizing a member in it... lets say it's france and not cyprus..

and about the israeli and north african thing... i dont think that morocco or any other country would ever be accepted in the EU. simply because they are not in Europe at all....Well, Turkey has been all the way to Vienna and used to be a very important factor in Europe. As for the Muslim thing, there's plenty of muslim EU citizens. Likewise, the arguement could be used to keep Albania out, which is clearly within Europe. As for Turkey's position on the headscarf, they've got stricter laws on prohibiting it than any EU country I know.
Your third point is a good one, but its not something that should rule out their inclusion. I think recognizing Cyprus is a condition for Turkey's entry.

Don't blame the EU for the sins of all of us. Any country has the choice of refusing to receive EU subsidies for agriculture, and not one (to my knowledge) has made any real attempts to make more fair trade with poorer nations. Actually, the EU has made much to trade with poorer nations. Feel free to research on the Cotunu accords.

true
the EU is the biggest aid and grants donator in the world even bigger the USA and japan.

10. The massive financial costs that some countries incur in being members (eg Holland).
11. The establishment of "independent regions" really just increases dependence of regions on Brussels for funding.
12. It is a puppet of multinationals, the proposed licensing on vitamins, minerals, and other such things, is just caused from lobbying by pharaceutical companies to have some of their competition removed, because most small companies cannot afford the expensive tests.
13. It is the enemy of individual freedom, it is none of the governments business if yogurt is mild, what units carrots are sold in or how many hours a week I work.

No. They aren't in Europe. It's that simple. Why should a country that isn't even in Europe be granted membership of the EU?
Ever looked on a map? Part of Turkey is in Europe.

10. The massive financial costs that some countries incur in being members (eg Holland).
11. The establishment of "independent regions" really just increases dependence of regions on Brussels for funding.
12. It is a puppet of multinationals, the proposed licensing on vitamins, minerals, and other such things, is just caused from lobbying by pharaceutical companies to have some of their competition removed, because most small companies cannot afford the expensive tests.
13. It is the enemy of individual freedom, it is none of the governments business if yogurt is mild, what units carrots are sold in or how many hours a week I work.Those sound pretty bitter. Care to elaborate on your conspiracy theories of the vitamin cartels and such? Oh, and the youghurt thing is what we call an "opinion". I think it is the governments business to regulate whether yoghurt is "mild", given the circumstances.

[QUOTE=Laerod]Well, Turkey has been all the way to Vienna and used to be a very important factor in Europe. QUOTE]

-so just beacuse turkey controlled this reghion then they are considered europeans
man.... i guess we have the right to join the eu too
our empire once ruled iberia and reached to central france... but it wouldnt give the arab states access to the EU...

bottom line i think turkey is just lost.... between the oriental side and the EU side...
and isnt accepted by both sides.

[QUOTE]And? Not like our governments managed to get things right anyway. More of a transfer than a loss, anyway.
(Hello Again btw) Irrelevant point. The fact that nations do not always act in they way you would like has no bearing on the loss of national sovereignty.

A common misconception. You said before that you studied it closely for a former job. You should know better.
Oh i do enjoy being lectured. How is this a common misconception? Perhaps you would care to actually find out how Europe is run. I think you'll find its actually common knowledge.

Yup. Things like regulating particulate matter and such are "silly". Yes...


Granted. Good point.


Thankyou....
Examples. It's a hollow statement otherwise.


Fair enough, I'll go and find some

Blair's fault, actually

Chirac's fault, actually.


Exactly! If Berlusconi wants to compare Germans to concentration camp guards he should damn well be allowed to! [/sarcasm]

That is irrelevant. The actions of one especially stupid Italian premier is nothing to do with this really...

Tell me what 80% of British law actually has been replaced. As far as I know, European laws require the national governments to create legislation to implement it, so it's still different in each country. That means the laws the Parliament passes don't "replace" national law.
Not replacing laws, replacing legislative bodies (as I put), such as national parliaments. When an outside force institutes 80% of a country's laws, it means that the national legislative body of that country is virtually obsolete. Ithink you misunderstand

Good point. US isn't much different though. Should we abolish them too?
No but they are a country, and yes I do believe that they should change their trading practises too.

the EU has a specific agenda when granting aid, for every £100 that goes to Egypt £1 goes to Bangladesh, have a look at a map and think about it.

Of course no single EU nation is not going to reject subsidies because that would put them at a MASSIVE disadvantage comared to the other subsidised countries. Every time that stupid argument is made countless people in third world die because they have no means to make a living and their country to lift itself out of poverty.

Oh well, if he wont I will...
1. Loss of national sovereignty
2. It isn't a democratically elected organisation and therefore undermines all notions of democracy in Europe, with laws passed by bureaucrats.
3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.
4. They implemented the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various fishing policies, which led to gross inequality amongst European farmers.
5. They enforced the European Human Rights Convention, which can and has been used to defend the rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.
6. The EU budget is a mess. Full stop.
7. They tend to advocate political correctness in the extreme.
8. They pass 80% of laws in some EU countries, virtually replacing the legislative bodies of those countries.
9. Oh, and they keep third world farmers in poverty too.

Just a few points to keep things going...
2. It has several democratic institutions...the European Parlament is elected by the people of the union states...the decision process is made between several organs (the Comission and the European counsil) but the Parlament has a crucial role, either in proposing new legislation, vetoing legislative proposals, approving of a new President of the European Commission or even ousting the Comission...
5. That is not correct. It simply expressed basic pronciples of any state wich is subject to the Rule of Law.

-so just beacuse turkey controlled this reghion then they are considered europeans
man.... i guess we have the right to join the eu too
our empire once ruled iberia and reached to central france... but it wouldnt give the arab states access to the EU...

bottom line i think turkey is just lost.... between the oriental side and the EU side...
and isnt accepted by both sides.I mean in recent history. As for the Arabs being part of the EU, they already are. Just look at how many immigrants are in France.
You see, Turkey has been part of the European concert of power this entire century and longer. That's why they qualify as part of Europe (besides, the Byzantines were Europeans and they covered most of what is now Turkey)

Oh, and the youghurt thing is what we call an "opinion". I think it is the governments business to regulate whether yoghurt is "mild", given the circumstances.
It's not even regulating whether yoghurt is mild it's regulating putting a few words so you actually know what you are getting.

the EU has a specific agenda when granting aid, for every £100 that goes to Egypt £1 goes to Bangladesh, have a look at a map and think about it.

So does everyone except like 3 nations.

the EU has a specific agenda when granting aid, for every £100 that goes to Egypt £1 goes to Bangladesh, have a look at a map and think about it.

Of course no single EU nation is not going to reject subsidies because that would put them at a MASSIVE disadvantage comared to the other subsidised countries. Every time that stupid argument is made countless people in third world die because they have no means to make a living and their country to lift itself out of poverty.

where are you from????

anyway its in the Eu's advantage to make the nearer countries to it rich, so it can practice more trade, therefore south mediteraneans have this advantage, so why should they give bangladesh big money if it wont take it back in a wayt or two, like the US
it give egypt ove 4Billion$ a year, but takes them back when egypt buys the Weapons ,Machines and Crops from USA, so if it gives egypt 100$ it takes back 150$...etc...

3- Yes yes, and there was the Myth that they were not just renaming Yogurt, but also downright banning it!

Some more myths here (and the facts).
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/press_communication/facts/index_en.htm

(seems to have been ignored because it was on the last post of a page)

I mean in recent history. As for the Arabs being part of the EU, they already are. Just look at how many immigrants are in France.
You see, Turkey has been part of the European concert of power this entire century and longer. That's why they qualify as part of Europe (besides, the Byzantines were Europeans and they covered most of what is now Turkey)
I think Arab League has some point in claiming that Turkey isn´t part of Europe but neither it is part of the muslim/arab world. European nations made the separation between state and church much earlier than turkey...the former needed a military coup leaded by Atatturk and the Young Turks to forcefully separate State and Mosque...even today, one has the distinct feeling that the european-secularist side in Turkey is merely a fringe of a society dominated by a socially-conservative version of islam

It is a fact that The European court of Justice approved the Food Supplements Driective, overruling its own Advocate General.

It is a fact that this subjects all products used in the preparation of food supplements to an expensive licensing procedure.

It is very likely that companies which make non-traditional medicines will not be able to afford this, being fairly small, and the actual benefits of say tea tree oil quite hard to prove. whether deliberate or not the EU will become an area where massive pharmaceutical companies will be dominant.

(Hello Again btw) Irrelevant point. The fact that nations do not always act in they way you would like has no bearing on the loss of national sovereigntyThat didn't really refute my point. You have yet to prove that "losing" national sovereignity is a bad thing, especially considering the benefits of the EU.
Oh i do enjoy being lectured. How is this a common misconception? Perhaps you would care to actually find out how Europe is run. I think you'll find its actually common knowledge.Well, considering that any decisions are made by officials that have either been directly elected by European Citizens or appointed and approved by those that have, saying that the EU is not democratically run is a misconception.
Yes...No...
Fair enough, I'll go and find someI'll be waiting
Chirac's fault, actually.Can't remember Chirac completely blocking any form of compromise, but hey, I watch news.
That is irrelevant. The actions of one especially stupid Italian premier is nothing to do with this really...No? It's the only case of political correctness I can recall
Not replacing laws, replacing legislative bodies (as I put), such as national parliaments. When an outside force institutes 80% of a country's laws, it means that the national legislative body of that country is virtually obsolete. Ithink you misunderstandI think you don't. The EU doesn't implement these laws in EU countries. It's still the national parliaments that have to draft the legislation. The EU makes a decision and the states follow it, but the EU isn't the one that does it. The Parliaments still have a lot of say in how the laws are written.
No but they are a country, and yes I do believe that they should change their trading practises too.Of course. But trading practices aren't a valid arguement against the EU in this case then.

I think Arab League has some point in claiming that Turkey isn´t part of Europe but neither it is part of the muslim/arab world. European nations made the separation between state and church much earlier than turkey...the former needed a military coup leaded by Atatturk and the Young Turks to forcefully separate State and Mosque...even today, one has the distinct feeling that the european-secularist side in Turkey is merely a fringe of a society dominated by a socially-conservative version of islamWell, yes, but I'm not saying that Turkey should join the EU today. I'm saying they shouldn't be barred from it.

It is a fact that The European court of Justice approved the Food Supplements Driective, overruling its own Advocate General.And this is bad? Why are checks and balances bad? Pray, do tell...
It is a fact that this subjects all products used in the preparation of food supplements to an expensive licensing procedure.And..?
It is very likely that companies which make non-traditional medicines will not be able to afford this, being fairly small, and the actual benefits of say tea tree oil quite hard to prove. whether deliberate or not the EU will become an area where massive pharmaceutical companies will be dominant.Massive pharmaceutical companies always have been dominant. You may notice that the US could even be worse in that respect, so this has less to do with the EU than with industrial countries.

Arab League: I am from Britain. I agree the EU gains ecomonically from giving to Egypt, because of that it cannot, in my own eyes, be regarded as what genuine aid should be. You may differ though.

I was merely establishing facts from which to make my point. Of course I am not a supporter of corporate America, I am like even less corporate EU because I actually live in it, and suffer from it. I thought one of ideas behind the whole EU project was to act a as a counter-weight to USA, not a mirror.

Well, yes, but I'm not saying that Turkey should join the EU today. I'm saying they shouldn't be barred from it.
But do you think its fair to keep delaying the decision on thier admission this way? Turkey has made the bid for admission thirty years ago...shouldn´t the EU have already settled the issue?

Ever looked on a map? Part of Turkey is in Europe.

Unless the entire country mystically shifts a bit to the left, what I said stands.

I was merely establishing facts from which to make my point. Of course I am not a supporter of corporate America, I am like even less corporate EU because I actually live in it, and suffer from it. I thought one of ideas behind the whole EU project was to act a as a counter-weight to USA, not a mirror.
Not a counter-weight, for God-sake...when push came to shove, the EU couldn´t even present a united front...some countries sided with the US on the iraqu matter (even my own) and others acted like we were still in De Gaule´s times...and Chirac clearly freatened the east-european new members for their support to the US. Is this the way a "counter-weight" should act?

Oh well, if he wont I will...
1. Loss of national sovereignty
2. It isn't a democratically elected organisation and therefore undermines all notions of democracy in Europe, with laws passed by bureaucrats.
3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.
4. They implemented the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various fishing policies, which led to gross inequality amongst European farmers.
5. They enforced the European Human Rights Convention, which can and has been used to defend the rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.
6. The EU budget is a mess. Full stop.
7. They tend to advocate political correctness in the extreme.
8. They pass 80% of laws in some EU countries, virtually replacing the legislative bodies of those countries.
9. Oh, and they keep third world farmers in poverty too.

Just a few points to keep things going...
Yes, that is exactly why I oppose the EU *Burns another EU flag*

Not a counter-weight, for God-sake...when push came to shove, the EU couldn´t even present a united front...some countries sided with the US on the iraqu matter (even my own) and others acted like we were still in De Gaule´s times...and Chirac clearly freatened the east-european new members for their support to the US. Is this the way a "counter-weight" should act?
he meant we where a mirror but the post still stands just about.

Not a counter-weight, for God-sake...when push came to shove, the EU couldn´t even present a united front...some countries sided with the US on the iraqu matter (even my own) and others acted like we were still in De Gaule´s times...and Chirac clearly freatened the east-european new members for their support to the US. Is this the way a "counter-weight" should act?

Yes I agree the EU is pathetic. ;)

Yes, that is exactly why I oppose the EU *Burns another EU flag*
well aren't you just precious

Yes I agree the EU is pathetic. ;)
It isnt pathetic...most third world hellhole´s countries would give arm and leg to hop on it.

I think they have oil, not sure though.

Turkey? No, no oil to speak of, although the pipeline from the Iraqi oilfields ends in Turkey.

It isnt pathetic...most third world hellhole´s countries would give arm and leg to hop on it.

What? Of course they would want to get the farm subsidies and regional development funds, they would like to be part of the USA or a region in any developed nation, what is your point?

Turkey? No, no oil to speak of, although the pipeline from the Iraqi oilfields ends in Turkey.
ok right wasn't sure.

They have belly dancers! :D And they could come and work in any EU nation easily if we let them join. :D

the EU should stretch from the atlantic to russian borders in the north and turkish borders in the south.

ok right wasn't sure.

They have belly dancers! :D And they could come and work in any EU nation easily if we let them join. :D

hehehe

(btw belly dancers some from the arab world)

but nice one
lmao

Oh well, if he wont I will...
1. Loss of national sovereignty
Agreed. Although I don't see it as much in the UK because so many people are anti-EU, I come to France and it seems fairly clear.
2. It isn't a democratically elected organisation and therefore undermines all notions of democracy in Europe, with laws passed by bureaucrats.
You might want to double check that one...ever heard of an MEP? Works like MPs but with larger constituancies (500,000-600,000)
3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.
Would re-naming yogurt be a bad thing? But yes, I can think of better thing to be discussing.
4. They implemented the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various fishing policies, which led to gross inequality amongst European farmers.
One word: subsidies. Anti-free trade.
5. They enforced the European Human Rights Convention, which can and has been used to defend the rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.
Never heard that one before, possibly for a reason.
6. The EU budget is a mess. Full stop.
If indeed it was the EU, then they need to get a grip. I think someone suggested it was Blair's fault? (Sorry if I'm wrong.) Well he's the one who opted into the EU in the first place. Doesn't say much for its member states really does it?
7. They tend to advocate political correctness in the extreme.
Thought that one was Tony Blair actually. See above.
8. They pass 80% of laws in some EU countries, virtually replacing the legislative bodies of those countries.
Yes, this I have read and been taught. However, if a country wishes to join the EU then they should realise this will happen. Usually the laws are not very different to those of the country before the joined. It's more just an extention of your first point.
9. Oh, and they keep third world farmers in poverty too.
I can think of more important things, but yes this really is something that bugs me too. Again, it's largely subsidies.

I don't like the EU. It's good for places like Spain, and Greece, has helped a couple of countries become wealthier and develop more democratic systems, and that's obviously good. But for the UK, I can't think of anything the EU has done which has had a positive impact. More immigrants....not good. Free trade with Europe...we had pretty much exactly the same thing before. Great.
I see why Turkey are trying to join but hope they don't while the UK are part of it.

More immigrants....not good.
WRONG! (EDIT whoops wrong link, I'll get the story have to find it)

I don't like the EU. It's good for places like Spain, and Greece, has helped a couple of countries become wealthier and develop more democratic systems, and that's obviously good. But for the UK, I can't think of anything the EU has done which has had a positive impact. More immigrants....not good. Free trade with Europe...we had pretty much exactly the same thing before. Great.
I see why Turkey are trying to join but hope they don't while the UK are part of it.

the EU. is very important to the 3rd world countries, and the arab states, it is like the defender against the US policies, eventhough they are not as effective as use to be... but it keeps the balance of power stable.
we need new powers...like china, EU. its very hard being in a unipower world... especialy for us, its hard to stop the resolutions infavor of israel, when the only superpower is strongly supporting them....

Does anyone believe that if Turkey does join the EU there will be a wave of low-wage´s turkish workers overflooding the EU-members´s labour markets, with all its consequences?

Oh well, if he wont I will...
1. Loss of national sovereignty
2. It isn't a democratically elected organisation and therefore undermines all notions of democracy in Europe, with laws passed by bureaucrats.
3. They tend to be in favour of so-called "silly laws," including the recent one which called for the re-naming of yogurt.
4. They implemented the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various fishing policies, which led to gross inequality amongst European farmers.
5. They enforced the European Human Rights Convention, which can and has been used to defend the rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.
6. The EU budget is a mess. Full stop.
7. They tend to advocate political correctness in the extreme.
8. They pass 80% of laws in some EU countries, virtually replacing the legislative bodies of those countries.
9. Oh, and they keep third world farmers in poverty too.

Just a few points to keep things going...

Not that I completely disagree with you but there are a few points of your arguement I would like to address:

1. Whether nations have surrendered their sovreignty to the EU is arguable and is often a debate among legal theorists. The European Court of Justice believes sovreignty has been surrendered but the courts of many member states disagree (e.g. the UK's House of Lords in Factortame No II)

2. While the Council and Commission are not elected bodies the European Parliament is an elected body. The Parliament has the power to vote down roughly 80% of the legislation that comes from the Council (had the Constitution been ratified it would have been able to do that in 100% of cases) and so to say there is no democracy is false. In addition the Council and Commission are selected from the governments of the various member states. If you don't like your commissioner take it up with your government.
There isn't a country in the western world where laws are not passed by bureaucrats. It's called delegated legislation. The problem is that within the EU the delegated legislation has the same authority as the other laws.

3. Most of the 'silly laws' are urban myths (from what I recal yogurts are still called yogurts) but there are some.

5. It is a common misconception that the European Convention on Human Rights has anything to do with the European Union, it doesn't. That is why the Convention has to be incorporated into national law in a different manner than EU legislation.

8. Where did you get the figure of 80%?

WRONG! (EDIT whoops wrong link, I'll get the story have to find it)
Right
The authors said yesterday that the economic impact here was similar to that in Britain where 175,000 migrant workers, who registered in the year following EU enlargement, generated £500 million in extra economic output.

This economic performance was achieved without boosting unemployment or straining the welfare system, it concluded.

extract from: http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2005/0811/3605056822HM1EUWORKERS.html

Does anyone believe that if Turkey does join the EU there will be a wave of low-wage´s turkish workers overflooding the EU-members´s labour markets, with all its consequences?
No because iff countries don't want that they can stop free movement (and have done with some of the new states.

More on Free movement after the enlargement: (in pdf format)
http://www.ecas.org/file_uploads/782.pdf

OK, seriously now, here is a reason people always overlook:

Turkey's border with the EU will basically be open, as it will be part of a free trade area.

Turkey will also have a porous border with Iraq, and we all know how the Americans have fucked up the situation there.

We really could use not having the trouble.

The other issue is heroin - Turkey is an export hub for all of Europe. Trying to police downgraded national borders...it will be a real setback, a total disaster in the struggle against the drugs trade.

I say no to Turkey on the basis of their drugs distribution problem, and the newly terroristic nature of one of their neighbours. Until that's sorted, and I don't see how it is the EU's job, then the answer has to be NO.

OK, seriously now, here is a reason people always overlook:

Turkey's border with the EU will basically be open, as it will be part of a free trade area.

Turkey will also have a porous border with Iraq, and we all know how the Americans have fucked up the situation there.
They would be forced to tighten borders to non-EU countries in the same way the new countries where, also 12 countries out of 15 restriced free movement with the accession states, they could and would do that with Turkey.

I don't see what difference one more crappy country is going to make. The EU is doomed either way :D

They would be forced to tighten borders to non-EU countries in the same way the new countries where, also 12 countries out of 15 restriced free movement with the accession states, they could and would do that with Turkey.
Turkey is not competent to control its borders. Heroin is being sold all over Europe, which originates in Afghanistan and is shipped via Turkey. It is failing in its duties to the European community right now.

Turkey is not competent to control its borders. Heroin is being sold all over Europe, which originates in Afghanistan and is shipped via Turkey. It is failing in its duties to the European community right now.
Still, couldn´t Turkey´s admission into the EU help solve many of those problems?

Still, couldn´t Turkey´s admission into the EU help solve many of those problems?
No, I strongly believe they should sort it out first, before we run that experiment with all our countries. If they can cut it, if they can hold their own, then they deserve to join.

No, I strongly believe they should sort it out first, before we run that experiment will all our countries. If they can cut it, if they can hold their own, then they deserve to join.
they would have an obligation to do so before they join once they are accepted

No, I strongly believe they should sort it out first, before we run that experiment with all our countries. If they can cut it, if they can hold their own, then they deserve to join.
But using that kind of measuring stick, than a all bunch of countries would never be admitied...my own country joined in 86 and had several issues that remained unresolved, like some frailty of the democratic sistem...doesn´t it all come down, in the end. to a leap of faith?

But using that kind of measuring stick, than a all bunch of countries would never be admitied...my own country joined in 86 and had several issues that remained unresolved, like some frailty of the democratic sistem...doesn´t it all come down, in the end. to a leap of faith?
Yeah, but now that the EU has been around a while, and is so well established, we have far more to lose. We may be risking too much, taking chances with unknown quantities.

Yeah, but now that the EU has been around a while, and is so well established, we have far more to lose. We may be risking too much, taking chances with unknown quantities.
Dont you think that if the EU lets down the westernized part of Turkey, that could give solace to the part of the population that endorses a socially conservative view of Islam?

I'd let Turkey in. They always desired to be European, and they are certainly willing this time. Besides, the defence and economic benefits will be enormous.

Dont you think that if the EU lets down the westernized part of Turkey, that could give solace to the part of the population that endorses a socially conservative view of Islam?
No offense, but I really don't see what we owe them. They're progressive? Good for them! So someone gets democracy, what do they want, a cookie?

I don't see what difference one more crappy country is going to make. The EU is doomed either way :DI thought you claimed to be a lawyer. How do win cases with these kinds of arguements?

No offense, but I really don't see what we owe them. They're progressive? Good for them! So someone gets democracy, what do they want, a cookie?Are you against it period or against it now?

Are you against it period or against it now?
Well, certainly for the 10-20 years it will take them to get a grip on their borders and drug trafficing problem. If that's your idea of indefinite, then yeah. I'd consider it if I had some guarantees the American mess in Iraq and Afghanistan wouldn't spill over.

Well, certainly for the 10-20 years it will take them to get a grip on their borders and drug trafficing problem. If that's your idea of indefinite, then yeah. I'd consider it if I had some guarantees the American mess in Iraq and Afghanistan wouldn't spill over.No, I perfectly agree that if it takes them that long to solve certain problems, then that's how long it should take them to get in.

Turkey is not competent to control its borders. Heroin is being sold all over Europe, which originates in Afghanistan and is shipped via Turkey. It is failing in its duties to the European community right now.

Unless you like drugs. In which case, they're helping to keep the price low. :)

And let's not pretend that if the drugs didn't come through Turkey that they wouldn't come. They come anyway. They'd just have to take a more difficult and expensive route. *nod*