Europe

[Black Dog]

In 2004 there will be another 10 countries joining the EU, most from the Baltic states such as Latvia and Lithuania. As a result the veto has been further restricted, subisidies will undoubtedly increase and the United Kingdom's voting strength in all the institutions will be weakened.

Yet it's naive to think that leaving the EU would be at all sensible given the huge advantages for trade with the common market or even practical given the entrenchment of EU law in our legal system.

So instead, do you think that the United Kingdom or your own state should slip even further into the back lane of a two-track Europe or should we push for a European Bill of Rights and Constitution which are the next logical step in it's evolution?

Do you think the UK's future is in Europe or should we take a more Eurosceptic approach?

[Vaio]

Originally posted by Black Dog
In 2004 there will be another 10 countries joining the EU, most from the Baltic states such as Latvia and Lithuania. As a result the veto has been further restricted, subisidies will undoubtedly increase and the United Kingdom's voting strength in all the institutions will be weakened.

Yet it's naive to think that leaving the EU would be at all sensible given the huge advantages for trade with the common market or even practical given the entrenchment of EU law in our legal system.

So instead, do you think that the United Kingdom or your own state should slip even further into the back lane of a two-track Europe or should we push for a European Bill of Rights and Constitution which are the next logical step in it's evolution?

Do you think the UK's future is in Europe or should we take a more Eurosceptic approach?

We should join with the US/Canada and Mexican trade pact and bollocks to Europe

Vaio

[LHC]

We should stop barbaric nations joining the bloody EU, that's what we should do.

[ELeeming]

Originally posted by Black Dog
In 2004 there will be another 10 countries joining the EU, most from the Baltic states such as Latvia and Lithuania. As a result the veto has been further restricted, subisidies will undoubtedly increase and the United Kingdom's voting strength in all the institutions will be weakened.

Yet it's naive to think that leaving the EU would be at all sensible given the huge advantages for trade with the common market or even practical given the entrenchment of EU law in our legal system.

So instead, do you think that the United Kingdom or your own state should slip even further into the back lane of a two-track Europe or should we push for a European Bill of Rights and Constitution which are the next logical step in it's evolution?

Do you think the UK's future is in Europe or should we take a more Eurosceptic approach?

I think that in time there will be a united Europe, but atm Europe is ****ing the UK over left right and centre, and we would be better off out of it.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Black Dog
a more Eurosceptic approach?

Is that possible?

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Vaio
We should join with the US/Canada and Mexican trade pact and bollocks to Europe

About 57% of our trade is with EU countries.

About 15% of our trade is with North America.

The economic logic of your proposal is 0%


Unless of course, you want to put political prinicples above economic circumstances, which is a bit of a reality denial trip.

[Bloomers III]

no to europe!

why? i am not against unification, trade and all that shit. but i just hate the French

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Bloomers III
why? i am not against unification, trade and all that shit. but i just hate the French

So does everyone else in Europe! It's their common unifying point! What do you think has kept the Union alive all these years!

Besides, you know you love continental hotbumluvin without movement restrictions.

[LHC]

Originally posted by Bloomers III
why? i am not against unification, trade and all that shit. but i just hate the French

Did you just watch that programme by Clarkson on the French.

It was

[Bloomers III]

no, i only like the spanish and the italians. the french smell of onions and stick baguettes up their arse and the germans don't need cock because they have sausages

[Haer]

The UK should push for a stronger role in Europe.

Tell the french and germans where to stick it, and make the EU into something more than a new way for them to try and screw us over.

This article here, about german economy sums up why we need to tell them where to stick it

He also said he thought it was crucial that Germany put its affairs in order for the sake of Europe.

"Europe needs a dynamic Germany. Who else, if not Germany -- in concert with France -- should take on the leading role?"

Clearly, thats how they see it - Europe is too be run by the Germans and the French. Until that attitude changes we should stay a member of the EU, but limit what powers we give them.

Similarly, while pushing for changes in the EU we need to make sure we keep trade relations with the US strong.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Haer
Clearly, thats how they see it - Europe is too be run by the Germans and the French.

Well pardon me, but we haven't exactly gone out of our way to engage in the whole ****ing process over time, which leaves the two other most influential members with the key roles.

So I ask you again, what other system, in the past up to this point, save Germany and France have been likely contender(s) to take the lead?

Besides, the idea of German-Franco harmony is crucial to a stable Europe. it shouldn't be discouraged, and it's certainly not there to exclude other nations.

Besides, what powers to Germany and France have over all the rest besides good influence?

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Bloomers III
no, i only like the spanish and the italians.

Good choices.

Originally posted by Bloomers III
and stick baguettes up their arse

So do you.

Originally posted by Bloomers III
and the germans don't need cock because they have sausages

Lies.

[LHC]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson

Besides, what powers to Germany and France have over all the rest besides good influence?

It wouldn't be a problem with France having power if they stuck to their own rules.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by LHC
It wouldn't be a problem with France having power if they stuck to their own rules.

How is it 'their' rules?


I suppose Jacques Chirac personally passes all EU legislation, hmm?


And don't make out the argument that The UK is pissed upon, because it adheers to EU law whilst everyone else does whatever they want, because it's balls. The UK government is just as selective as anyone else in it's application of the rules.

[Haer]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Well pardon me, but we haven't exactly gone out of our way to engage in the whole ****ing process over time, which leaves the two other most influential members with the key roles.

So I ask you again, what other system, in the past up to this point, save Germany and France have been likely contender(s) to take the lead?

Besides, the idea of German-Franco harmony is crucial to a stable Europe. it shouldn't be discouraged, and it's certainly not there to exclude other nations.

Besides, what powers to Germany and France have over all the rest besides good influence?

The past is irrelevant. The key is that they see it as France and Germany leading Europe now and in the future. No mention of the UK, for the UK to integrate further with Europe the Franco-German alliance has to end(And demonstratebly so)

Look at the agriculture thing - The French and Germans basically told the EU "We've decided, this is how its going to work". Would you give powers to people, who are openly allied to further there interests at the expense of yours?

[Jammers]

Europe as a trading pact is a good idea, since it lets every one get richer. However, one must question the motives of the new countries when they opt to buy American goods rather than buy from their new partners.
They also seem to want to contribute less than everyone else, and get more.
Personally I think they're just freeloaders out to get what they can and then run off to con some other gullible organisation.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Haer
The past is irrelevant. The key is that they see it as France and Germany leading Europe now and in the future. No mention of the UK, for the UK to integrate further with Europe the Franco-German alliance has to end(And demonstratebly so)

Did you actually read what I posted, or did you simply chose to ignore it?

Originally posted by Haer
Look at the agriculture thing - The French and Germans basically told the EU "We've decided, this is how its going to work".

No they didn't. They thrashed it out with each other, then they told others that that was going to be their mutual position, which is obviously an influential one.

In any case, sort of actual intimidation and thuggery, they aren't going to get the measure passed without convincing other nations. You seem to have this curious beleif that Farnce and Germany jsut make EU laws. the don't. they go through The Council of Ministers, where each nation votes on the proposal, and the decision has to be passed by a good majority.

Originally posted by Haer
Would you give powers to people, who are openly allied to further there interests at the expense of yours?

They have the same 'powers' as us. they are not above us in The EU, except in terms of infleuce, which is natural - for the reasons that I've explained. The UK has not engaged in The EU. It is immensly presumptuous then, that it would be a leader nation in terms of influecence in the organisation - or looks likely to be so any time in the immedaite future. You haven't actually responded to that point.

Congratualations. You have apparently completely ignored everything I said in my previous psot and have essentially re-posted your original statement.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Jammers
However, one must question the motives of the new countries when they opt to buy

They opted for the American contract because America, is, I'd imagine, the leading nation in jet technology.

It's called 'logical reasoning though free-market principles'.

Unless you're advocating some sort of protectionism? Oh, yes, we have that, and it's called CAP, and it's completely useless.

[Texan]

My girlfriend moved her business from Germany to Belgium because I accepted a job here. Her customers seemed to think she had moved to Alpha Centauri. Until the people of Europe realize that Frankfurt is closer to Brussels than it is to Berlin, Europeans will never make this European Union work.

[Haer]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Did you actually read what I posted, or did you simply chose to ignore it?


Erm whats your point? Why should we make the sacrifices without the gains(And Immediate gains).


No they didn't. They thrashed it out with each other, then they told others that that was going to be their mutual position, which is obviously an influential one.

In any case, sort of actual intimidation and thuggery, they aren't going to get the measure passed without convincing other nations. You seem to have this curious beleif that Farnce and Germany jsut make EU laws. the don't. they go through The Council of Ministers, where each nation votes on the proposal, and the decision has to be passed by a good majority.


Thats bull**** and you know it. Without French or German support, no other motion would get a good majority - The deal is nt even a particuarly good one, but it gives them both half of what they want.



They have the same 'powers' as us. they are not above us in The EU, except in terms of infleuce, which is natural - for the reasons that I've explained. The UK has not engaged in The EU. It is immensly presumptuous then, that it would be a leader nation in terms of influecence in the organisation - or looks likely to be so any time in the immedaite future. You haven't actually responded to that point.


No its not presumptious at all. For the UK to join the EU fully we would have to make immediate sacrifices. We are perfectly entitled to expect the gains also to be immediate. Are you really suggesting the EU should consider the UK similar, to say Latvia?


Congratualations. You have apparently completely ignored everything I said in my previous psot and have essentially re-posted your original statement.

Congratulations, you've managed to slip in a poor attempt at pretentious rhetoric.

[W]

Originally posted by ELeeming
I think that in time there will be a united Europe

A united Europe? Like, every nation in Europe, united? Not bloody likely!

[JonnyBGood]

I think the EU could be a very good idea if handled properly. However currently it's a mixture of moronic bureaucracy and short-sighted arrogance on nearly all sides and positions. Free-trade is a definite, armed forces definite, common economic policy a possible and common law (i'm talking criminal law here mostly) a very good idea. All would need to be examined for practicability of course before any changes are permanently effected.

[pablissimo]

Common economic policy will be the one thing that causes any difficulty: all the economies are in different 'parts' of their trade cycles, so trying to say 'This is what interest rates are' will almost certainly conflict with one or another member state, this would extend to taxation, target inflation, etc, etc.

But at least economically I'm all for the EU, the potential gains far outweigh the short-term costs to those joining/deepening their relationship with the EU.

[Scoot951]

Every time I see a thread of this sort I'm reminded of my high school history classes where they told about how in the ole days, states used to have their own currencies, quite different laws, and for all practical purposes were different countries. If an American was visiting europe and they were asked where they came from, they would name their state, not America. Over many decades, the re-writing of the Consititution, and a civil war, it became the truly United States it is today.


Being of the opinion that it was ultimatly a good thing for us, I'm encouraged by every step I see Europe taking towards unity.


But do I think it'll happen quickly or easily?

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Haer

Clearly, thats how they see it - Europe is too be run by the Germans and the French. Until that attitude changes we should stay a member of the EU, but limit what powers we give them.

its not only how we see it, it is how it is.
you didnt want to take an active part within the eu in the past and you dont want it now, so what do you expect we do?

[acropolis]

i have a more important issue to address.

when athread created by black dog is right below a thread created by mong, my brain reads it as 'black dong.' this is not acceptable to me, so i've taken the liberty of moving this thread to safer ground.

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by Haer
The past is irrelevant. The key is that they see it as France and Germany leading Europe now and in the future. No mention of the UK, for the UK to integrate further with Europe the Franco-German alliance has to end(And demonstratebly so)

sorry, but what integration are you talking about ??? what part did uk try to play on any european issue?
if we dont come up with something noone does. thats it.

Look at the agriculture thing - The French and Germans basically told the EU "We've decided, this is how its going to work". Would you give powers to people, who are openly allied to further there interests at the expense of yours?

at your expense?? sorry, but others pay far more per capita than uk does, and dont complain.

and yes, i would like to see uk having a more active part within the eu, but i simply dont see it happening.
join the euro? no, ze evil germans want to steal out gold
iraq? oh, well, we have a special relationship with the us, so we dont give a damn about the rest of europe (and about the opion of our own people, but thats another thing)
thats not exactly how i understand cooperation

[Thiebold Axeslammer]

Originally posted by Bloomers III
no to europe!

why? i am not against unification, trade and all that ****. but i just hate the French

I say we attack Germany and France !
After that we will have a truly unified Europe.


Oh and btw, why do you lousy Brits always act like you're the only ones who get shafted by the "ancient axis of evil" ?!

[inf]

The EU is antiquated and need radical reform. It is not capable of having so many countries involved without major changes, it was ony designed for 6 countries.

Oh yeah, in 2007 there will be even more entrants (Romania, Bulgaria).

[menth0l]

I hear the poor people in latvia are delighted that i'll be paying for the renovations on their appartments , and that the workers here are going to make way for them when they arrive here to work for quarter the amount of money.

[Golin]

i'm norwegian.

EU is for fartknockers.

<- if i may

[menth0l]

I like my shiny new euros.

[Golin]

Originally posted by menth0l
I like my shiny new euros.

they (blair and that homosexual french president) want to make an european usa. a big country with common valuta...

i say **** them!

usa is the least leet country in teh world.

[Monkeypimp]

If they're letting anyone into the EU then can my country join? We hate the french too!! they blew up one of our boats in the late 80s and then put euro trade sanctions on us when we complained.

so we hate the french

any other joining requirements?

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by inf
The EU is antiquated and need radical reform. It is not capable of having so many countries involved without major changes, it was ony designed for 6 countries.

Oh yeah, in 2007 there will be even more entrants (Romania, Bulgaria).

we will have reforms, simply because we need them and cant go on like we do at the moment

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Haer
Thats bull**** and you know it. Without French or German support, no other motion would get a good majority - The deal is nt even a particuarly good one, but it gives them both half of what they want.

Okay, now you're just flauting your ignorance. You do know how much QMV weight each country has? And thus, to get even a tinniest measure of success, germany and France also have to win over the large states also; i.e, Spain, Italy and The UK, or quite a number of the smalelr ones?

Originally posted by Haer
We are perfectly entitled to expect the gains also to be immediate.

In politics, nothing is immediate. If you knew anything about politics, you would probably realise that.

What 'gains' are we talking about exactly?

Originally posted by Haer
Are you really suggesting the EU should consider the UK similar, to say Latvia?

No, and it doesn't. This is why QMV weighting is based on population size.

Look, I'm not going to explain how the ****ing EU works to you. Go and read up on it. Seems like you're doing what a large number of people do - talk about it without knowing how it works.

Originally posted by Haer
Congratulations, you've managed to slip in a poor attempt at pretentious rhetoric.

You just keep on spouting off a load of ignorant crap. That's it.

Originally posted by Inf
it was ony designed for 6 countries.

The EU itself was built when there were at least 11 members already...