This was from a old thread of mine, and i thought it relevant to start it up again being as we now have this great new politics board:
if any notices its changed, i've updated the contents a bit


Europe is potentially one of the most powerful collections of nations currently in the world, the important word being 'potentially'. Europe is divided both politically and socially, we can't have a 'one size fits all' plan, it would literally tear countries apart. What we need is an alternative idea, a third way that combines both the separatist and integrationist ideals.
Each country wants certain things in the EU that other countries don't want, some may wish to be part of the common fisheries policy and some won't, it all depends on the country's national interests. I have thought about the problems of the current format of the current European alliance and would like to share how I would solve it.

Firstly the EU would be ended, and several independent alliances would be set up:
EAC - European Aid Council
EFTA - European Free Trading Alliance
ESRU - European Scientific Research Union
EFA - European Fishing Alliance
etc....

Each country would pick which alliances they wish to belong to, the independent alliances would not be linked, but would also not be in competition due to their different purposes and goals.
Each independent alliance would have a ''council'' where each member country would have one representative; this representative would have one vote in each organisation decision. This one vote format would stop larger countries from controlling all the decisions.
This way the huge powers of the current alliance (EU) could not be abused nor the public’s money wasted. Could you imagine if the billions we currently put into the EU were given instead, directly into projects such as alternative energy research. This way money would go straight to where it is needed to most, without needing to filtered down by the current EU hierarchy.
These alliances would aid both Europe and non-European countries as several Europe countries could act on its their own rather than relying on non-European nations for help. If there was a natural disaster such as a earthquake in Italy, then member of the European Aid Council could respond on their own, sending vital help, that would take longer to reach the disaster zone than if the help came from everywhere in the world

NOTE: There is no EDF (European Defence Force) in the examples of the possible independent alliances, a EDF would only conflict with NATO, which would cause tensions between non-European countries and European countries.


[edit on 3-12-2004 by UK Wizard]

You have voted UK Wizard for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

But wouldn't it be better not to end the EU and instead make them seperate departments of the EU itself? Rock on EU!!!!
VOTE FOR ME TOO!!!!!

Originally posted by UK Wizard
Europe is potentially one of the most powerful collections of nations currently in the world, the important word being 'potentially'.

- I think one of the things you are missing here UK Wizard is that Europe is not just potentially anything. It already is.

Whatever our potential for more might be let us at least start off understanding where we are.

The EU is the largest and most prosperous single market in the world. It is also the biggest, most successful and enduring political union the world has ever seen.

Then there is the not so small matter of it's role in helping ensure peace throughout western europe.

We, as the EU, lie either first or second in any league table of any measure of quality of life, peace or stability.

Why on earth do you continually dismiss this and claim there is something wrong with it?

By all means look for improvement but to write it off in the manner you usually do and to always let go unrecognised the achievements of the EEC/EU seems simply nuts to me.

Europe is divided both politically and socially, we can't have a 'one size fits all' plan, it would literally tear countries apart.

- We have different views, yes. So what?
One minute people criticise the institution for, they think, being too uniform and trying to promote a 'one size fits all' and now you say it's too diverse?!

Why should we have political or social uniformity anyway?

The point has always been to enjoy our diversity whilst sharing minimum standards across the community.....what's up with that?

What we need is an alternative idea, a third way that combines both the separatist and integrationist ideals.

- Why? I think you are simply looking to 'reinvent the wheel' here matey.

Each country wants certain things in the EU that other countries don't want, some may wish to be part of the common fisheries policy and some won't, it all depends on the country's national interests.

- Er, no UK Wizard. The point is to stop looking at our narrow and selfish national interests and recognise that some have a trans-national dimension.

Fisheries being an excellent example. Fish are no respecters of borders.

I have thought about the problems of the current format of the current European alliance and would like to share how I would solve it.

Firstly the EU would be ended, and several independent alliances would be set up:
EAC - European Aid Council
EFTA - European Free Trading Alliance
ESRU - European Scientific Research Union
EFA - European Fishing Alliance
etc....

- So we lose one bureaucracy and point of contact and substitute it with a swathe of others all independant to each other?!

You have got to be kidding......who do you imagine going for this?

'Euro-sceptic' people in the UK who dislike/hate the EU but see the sense of some of it.... along with the comparitive handful of like-minded through-out the rest of the EU.?

Could you imagine if the billions we currently put into the EU were given instead, directly into projects such as alternative energy research. This way money would go straight to where it is needed to most, without needing to filtered down by the current EU hierarchy.

- This is pure tory-speak UK Wizard. They're always on about bureaucratic waste and 'red tape' that they imagine sucks up billions. It's a myth which is why the bureaucracy bill never drops when they get a go in charge.

When they talk about 'red tape' they mean they want a business environment with little or no regulation......fortunately most of the rest of Europe doesn't go in for that kind of lunacy.
Business is there to serve the people not the other way round.

I suggest a little thought into how expanding your human rights to the best they have ever been for a UK subject/citizen has been dismissed as 'them trying to take over' or 'exporting socialism' or any of the other stupid catch phrases used since they went nuts on all this in the UK following the Euro elections in 1989.

NOTE: There is no EDF (European Defence Force) in the examples of the possible independent alliances, a EDF would only conflict with NATO, which would cause tensions between non-European countries and European countries.

- So in areas where NATO either will not or cannot involve itself you just prefer to pass on those cases even if it is in our interests to step in?!

I'm sorry UK Wizard, I really can't see anything in your proposals that would do anything but great damage to what we already have.

I also think you are missing the point of much of the criticism of the EU in the UK.

The EU has clout at the WTO and in international trade generally. The USA doesn't like this and uses their political and business mates in the UK to maintain a background level of complaint against the EU......which in turn - after 15yrs of it - has become a pain in the a$$ distraction to the EU's business.

.....and many of these guys aren't into reforming a collective like the EU; collectives are against their 'religion' they want to see it destroyed and the US version of capitalism go unchallenged to do what ever the hell they like unhindered by any - or as little - regulation as humanly possible.

(We could go on to the crazies that imagine all sorts of Biblical crud about it too but you get the idea, huh?)

By the way....top forum, huh? No doubt I'll be seeing you here a fair bit, eh? )



[edit on 3-12-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

I think a Union of Europe is needed. A United States Of Europe will prove to be good in the long run, I feel once we sort out all the corruption, we will be able to see its good points. Im still unsure about the EU, i feel that we will join the EU "superstate" no matter what happens. If we dont join at the state, society might feel left out. Our relationship with Europe is more important then any other relationship i.e America. Europe is really what we should be apart of.

@sminkeypinkey

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
It is also the biggest, most successful and enduring political union the world has ever seen.

Funny I always thought it was the UN.

Then there is the not so small matter of it's role in helping ensure peace throughout western europe.

Please don't tell me you think the EU has stopped wars throughout Europe.

We, as the EU, lie either first or second in any league table of any measure of quality of life, peace or stability.

You keep expressing the EU as a single entity, where as it is a collection on separate nations. The reason why it has quality of life, peace or stability is because it is part of the modernised western world

Why on earth do you continually dismiss this and claim there is something wrong with it?

I don't, i just think the EU hasn't brought about the change by itself.

By all means look for improvement but to write it off in the manner you usually do and to always let go unrecognised the achievements of the EEC/EU seems simply nuts to me.

I'm not that crazy , of course the EU has achieve thinks of worth, i simply don't like the way it is changing.

We have different views, yes. So what?
One minute people criticise the institution for, they think, being too uniform and trying to promote a 'one size fits all' and now you say it's too diverse?!

It's trying to be uniformed but the problem is that the EU has members that a too currently different to create policys that suit each country.

The point has always been to enjoy our diversity whilst sharing minimum standards across the community.....what's up with that?

So we can't enjoy our diversity outside the EU then???

- Er, no UK Wizard. The point is to stop looking at our narrow and selfish national interests and recognise that some have a trans-national dimension.

So why must we confine ourself to Europe, maybe its you who are EU selfish, why not have a more Global union???

Fisheries being an excellent example. Fish are no respecters of borders.

What you mean fish leave and enter British waters without the proper papers

- So we lose one bureaucracy and point of contact and substitute it with a swathe of others all independant to each other?!

Yes, one over bloated bueaucracy for a few mini ones

This is pure tory-speak UK Wizard. They're always on about bureaucratic waste and 'red tape' that they imagine sucks up billions. It's a myth which is why the bureaucracy bill never drops when they get a go in charge.

Your idea of the Tories is in the past, even i agree that the Conservative Party was flawed then, but now...they have the ability to make a real difference.

When they talk about 'red tape' they mean they want a business environment with little or no regulation......fortunately most of the rest of Europe doesn't go in for that kind of lunacy.
Business is there to serve the people not the other way round.

even the CBI agrees with me:

the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) warned that Britain was "sleepwalking into decline" partly as a result of the mountain of red tape burying UK business.

The EU has clout at the WTO and in international trade generally. The USA doesn't like this and uses their political and business mates in the UK to maintain a background level of complaint against the EU......which in turn - after 15yrs of it - has become a pain in the a$$ distraction to the EU's business.

Of course the US doesn't like the EU, but then again the EU doesn't like the US. Its all childish games on a international scale.

We could go on to the crazies that imagine all sorts of Biblical crud about it too but you get the idea, huh?

I've read some of the 'crazies' idea on the EU, and even i have to laugh at them, the devil has the same number of minions that the EU has in its flag - that type of stuff

By the way....top forum, huh? No doubt I'll be seeing you here a fair bit, eh?

A politics board, at last somewhere for me to sow my propaganda

-------
@Infinite

think a Union of Europe is needed. A United States Of Europe will prove to be good in the long run, I feel once we sort out all the corruption

If we sort out the corruption, and why confine it to Europe???

You have voted UK Wizard for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

Thanks infinite

[edit on 4-12-2004 by UK Wizard]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
Funny I always thought it was the UN.

- The UN is nothing like the EU.
Talk about apples and oranges.

Please don't tell me you think the EU has stopped wars throughout Europe.

- It's the prime reason why it'll never happen again.

You keep expressing the EU as a single entity, where as it is a collection on separate nations. The reason why it has quality of life, peace or stability is because it is part of the modernised western world

- These things do not 'just' happen whether one is a 'developed country' or not.
They take people to decide and act.
The people of the European states came together and acted in a manner in which they forced the agenda in certain areas which they could not have done alone.

I don't, i just think the EU hasn't brought about the change by itself.

- Well if a major change has happened for the 1st and only time down to EU agreed policies who else can you say is responsible?

I'm not that crazy , of course the EU has achieve thinks of worth, i simply don't like the way it is changing.

- In what way? Can you give a few examples?

It's trying to be uniformed but the problem is that the EU has members that a too currently different to create policys that suit each country.

- I see a lot of success and a lot of effort to make things work but what problems are you referring to?

So we can't enjoy our diversity outside the EU then???

- We can, if we gever go insane sufficiently to leave it.

However we would also cease to enjoy the benefits of membership of the EU and revert to being a comparitively small economy squeezed between the comparitively massive economic blocks of the USA and the EU.

If we were lucky we might end up a bit like Norway. Doing our trade as best we can with the EU but merely having to follow every rule and regulation the rest devise with no input or say whatsoever if we wish to continue doing so.
Great.

So why must we confine ourself to Europe, maybe its you who are EU selfish, why not have a more Global union???

- Why not just confine ourselves to the realistic and refrain from silly rhetorical flights of fancy, huh?

Why on earth would you dismiss the concrete reality for a daft debating pose about something that is likely to be completely unattainable for decades if not centuries?

What you mean fish leave and enter British waters without the proper papers

- Sadly there is a lot of it about. Pollution won't respect borders either and as for the way small individual countries get treated in the international markets!?

Yes, one over bloated bueaucracy for a few mini ones

- This "bloated bureaucracy", by how much would you claim it is "bloated"?

Because the independant auditors keep turning up figures of wasteage and fraud that compare very well with the figures for the individual nation states.

....and how would you guarantee your claims?
Would just trust to luck that all your swathe of mini EU's wouldn't duplicate each other or waste more?!

Your idea of the Tories is in the past, even i agree that the Conservative Party was flawed then, but now...they have the ability to make a real difference.

- No.
My attitude about the UK tories is based on their having changed nothing of any real substance.
Their 'program' depends on an economic startegy almost completely unchanged from that which brought disaster the like of which was unseen before in this country.

When a guy spends his almost 20yrs in charge kicking you in the nuts, gets throw out of power and subsequently returns asking to be allowed back in charge because he has changed - and the change turns out to be no more than that next time he'd use a different foot - you are well within your rights to tell him where to get off.....as the UK public will continue to do with that crowd for a fair while yet.

even the CBI agrees with me:

- Of course they do. Their whole reason for being is to protect the interests of those who would pay a cost due to regulation.

So what? If we ran everything along the lines of that 'thinking' we wouldn't bother with any public provision at all, taxes would be zero on those that enjoy the wealth of the nation, we'd see no progress and we'd still be shoving kids up chimneys!

They simply tell a version of the truth as they see it now. That doesn't mean they are either right or sufficiently right to justify not making the changes.

They got it all wrong about the minimum wage, didn't they?

Of course the US doesn't like the EU, but then again the EU doesn't like the US. Its all childish games on a international scale.

- No.
This is most definitely not a game.
It is real people and their families' lives.

It matters that there is a WTO; it matters that there is an EU and individual European nations can't just be dictated to by the individually larger economies; it matter that the EU keeps winning at the WTO in our disputes with the USA.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By the way your signature.......oh dear.

Michael Howard to Tony Blair during the Queen's Speech debate
If it took Winston Churchill five years to win the second world war, and if it took Clement Attlee six years to build the welfare state - surely seven and a half years is more than enough for you to get a grip on the problems that face Britain today

- If you don't mind my saying this is exactly the sort of superficial and desparately dumb stupidity those pillocks are becoming renouned for.

This bears no examination whatsoever........and it's a straight copy of something Thatcher once said in the early 1980's (although she to her credit was referring to 'just' the reform of the social security system).

In fact a little though makes the whole idiocy of this pronouncement crystal clear.

If we trouble ourselves to look at the specifics we can see it takes over 10yrs to train completely a doctor, a dentist or a surgeon for a start so any idea that this 7.5yr gov could have completely turned that suituation alone around by now is flawed.....although there are definite improvements to be seen now (so watch for the attacks in future shifting to more and more of this specious and vague 'fat state', 'waste' and 'red-tape' nonsense).

WW2 was the use of the entire resources of the nation in persuit of a single objective.

"Sorting out Britains problems" is hardly comparible with that......and anyway......what is Michael Howard's excuse having been a senior minister and part of a 19yr 'go' at it, then, hmmm?

Maybe it's not quite a simple as he simplistically (taking the pi*s out of the UK public, again) makes out, right?



[edit on 4-12-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
The UN is nothing like the EU.

It could be better though

It's the prime reason why it'll never happen again..

How is it???

Why not just confine ourselves to the realistic and refrain from silly rhetorical flights of fancy, huh?

Why is it silly????? A global union could achieve far more than a European one

Because the independant auditors keep turning up figures of wasteage and fraud that compare very well with the figures for the individual nation states.

So we must have the wasteage and fraud of both our own country and that of the EU...interesting....

- No.
This is most definitely not a game.
It is real people and their families' lives

There childish because there is not point to them.

By the way your signature.......oh dear.

I'm not even going to bother answering as it has nothing to do with this thread. start another thread if you want to 'Tory Bash'.

note: return to original thread topic - alternative european alliance format



[edit on 4-12-2004 by UK Wizard]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
It could be better though

- ....and how would that work?
We can already see there is a section of the US just itching to destroy it as it is and it has nothing like the legal status or 'place' of the EU with any member country within those countries.
I think this is a theory likely to remain just that.

On the other hand we have a functioning EU with a long track record of success.

How is it???

- Because the interconnectivity between countries and the collectivity of the decision making means there is nothing for one single country to dominate or to 'take over' of the other(s).

That is change on such a fundamental level, unknown before.

Why is it silly????? A global union could achieve far more than a European one

- Let's confine ourselves to what actually exists and is operating now, not daydreams of what might be way off in the future.

Whatever you think of the EU the world is coalescing around 3 or so major trading and political blocks. Maybe in the next century those blocks will start to come together.

Whatever, it will not be rushed and in any event we have an operative EU to deal with and work today.

So we must have the wasteage and fraud of both our own country and that of the EU...interesting....

- No not really.
Not all waste is avoidable and not all fraud is malicious.
It will always be a factor of human endevour simply because we are imperfect human beings, sadly there is a 'school of politics' that refuses to recognise this reality and takes the pi*s out of people by simplistically pretending things can be otherwise.....or that there is always malice in the losses.

There childish because there is not point to them.

- This is simply not true.
People's jobs and livlehoods depend on such things; that is not childish and that most definitely is not a game.

I'm not even going to bother answering as it has nothing to do with this thread. start another thread if you want to 'Tory Bash'.

- Yeah but it's true though isn't it?

Michael Howard and his tory party, bitching that Labour has not achieved in 7.5yrs what they failed to do in 19yrs



(You know it! )

[edit on 4-12-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
and how would that work?
We can already see there is a section of the US just itching to destroy it as it is and it has nothing like the legal status or 'place' of the EU with any member country within those countries.

Theres also a section in each country of the EU that wants to bring the EU down.

I think this is a theory likely to remain just that.

The EU was once a theory.

On the other hand we have a functioning EU with a long track record of success.

and failure...

Let's confine ourselves to what actually exists and is operating now, not daydreams of what might be way off in the future.

Yets not, this is the point of this thread, Alternative European Alliance, which could a alliance in which Europe is but a faction of

Whatever you think of the EU the world is coalescing around 3 or so major trading and political blocks. Maybe in the next century those blocks will start to come together.

I'm guessing you mean China, US and the EU?

Yeah but it's true though isn't it?

I don't care if they messed up in the past, i'm looking to the present and the future. People still voted them in for those 19 year didn't they. If they were so terrible then whey in Gods name were they voted for!!!!

Start another thread if you want to Tory Bash, return to orginal thread purpose.



[edit on 5-12-2004 by UK Wizard]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
Theres also a section in each country of the EU that wants to bring the EU down.

- Yeah ok, that's true.
But before any UK euro-sceptics get too carried away with the fantasy let's tune into the reality of the situation; no-one else has an anti-EU 'movement' anything like the size of the UK's....

....and even in the UK the anti-EU crowd are unwilling to stand on an honest 'let's leave the EU' platform because they know they would lose; they do not have a majority here (despite their claims).

Just because Denmark or Sweden, for instance, wouldn't join the Euro is no grounds for imagining they have a sizable anti-EU 'vote'.
It is not the same thing at all, they are pretty pro-EU countries but they did not want to go for all of what was on offer.
That is a very very different position to that of the UK anti-EU mob.

and failure...

- Would you care to elaborate on this "failure" you see?

Yets not, this is the point of this thread, Alternative European Alliance, which could a alliance in which Europe is but a faction of

- OK UK Wizard; it's fair enough to imagine something else.

My problem with this is that when one understands just how much time and effort it took to do the EU why do you prefer to dismiss this and want to start again on some even more difficult objective?

We have a 25 country EU, and EU with alliances all over the world with just about everyone now.....what other alliances do you imagine?

I'm guessing you mean China, US and the EU?

- Most likely. Maybe a couple of sub-blocks will emerge too; Africa may eventually pull something cohesive together and asia (outside of the Chinese/Japanese block) would undoubtedly be a significant 'power' if not quite on a par with the 3 super-blocks.

I don't care if they messed up in the past, i'm looking to the present and the future. People still voted them in for those 19 year didn't they. If they were so terrible then whey in Gods name were they voted for!!!!

Start another thread if you want to Tory Bash, return to orginal thread purpose.

- If you want to know why they succeeded for those 19yrs you have to do a little study into the matter. I'm sure I've said plenty about it (Falklands war, SDP, Lawsons boom, Majors 'I'm not Thatcher' see how we've changed' routine).

Anyhoo come on UK Wizard.
Chill your panties matey!
Your entire signature is a Labour bash you repeat everytime you post!

Michael Howard and today's tory party; weepin and a-wailing that Labour have not cured all Britains ill in their 7.5yrs in office even though they failed miserably in their 19yr attempt at the job



[edit on 5-12-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
That's not a list of the failures you see UK Wizard, that's a web site of anti-EU propaganda where a slanted and selective view of any and all things the EU does is trumpeted as the worst thing ever to happen in the history of man.

The problem is web sites on the EU are mostly either pro-EU or anti-EU there are very few neutral web sites.

Don't change anything on my account, I was just pulling your leg.

I was being hypocritical.

All governments are corrupt and if it were to work how long for? I doubt long.

If an alternative to the EU was set up how long before people like ourselves begin to make more alternitives?

Originally posted by shorty
If an alternative to the EU was set up how long before people like ourselves begin to make more alternitives?

The good thing is there are always alternatives, whether they be good or bad depends on the people.

Hey Wizard,

First of all, as I told you, I respect the anti-europeist choice, since the people have right to choose what they think is the best for them and their country.

Apart from this, I am absolutely pro-europeist, and therefore I know that I can not be impartial at 100%.

But I would like to make some comments about your statements.

“important word being 'potentially'” I am agree with you. Europe is something “potential” in many aspects. And this is the reason because it is now necessary to trust in the European Union and also to do sacrifices for the benefice of the European Union. In order to develop this “potential” as soon as possible and as much as possible.

In some other aspects, the EU is a reality. As sminkeypinkey said “The EU is the largest and most prosperous single market in the world”

I am agree with sminkeypinkey in many points, and I would like to stress that the current quality of life and stability in the western Europe has not precedents. The EU teach us to solve our problems talking and voting, instead of solving our problems by destroying and wasting our loved Europe.

The USA was a century ago a country with “potential” enough to be the main world superpower. I wonder what would happen if California didn’t use dollars and Louisiana had not accepted the Wahington government or Nebraska had only joined the AFA (american farms alliance ).

“Each country wants certain things in the EU that other countries don't want” If you switch in your statement the word ‘country’ to the word ‘person’ you will have one of the main characteristics of the Democracy. And the Democracy is possible.

“EAC - European Aid Council
EFTA - European Free Trading Alliance
ESRU - European Scientific Research Union
EFA - European Fishing Alliance”

I don’t think that is a good idea. You are thinking about the dissection of the EU. The union makes the force. With the USA (almost 400 millions) in the far west and China (1200 millions) in the far east, Europe could not achieve the supremacy by such a division. The main obstacle for the European Union now, is that sometimes even having potential enough to be a giant, the European Union behaves like a bunch of liliputiensis. Your are purposing here an union of liliputiensis instead of the united giant that the EU should be, in my opinion.

“This way the huge powers of the current alliance (EU) could not be abused nor the public’s money wasted. “

I totally disagree with you at this point. First of all, I think the huge powers of the EU are not abused because, lets say, “nobody sells 1 euro for 90 cents”. In the European Union everybody gets beneficed. But it is true that the more poor countries are the main beneficiaries (and Spain until a few years ago was the main beneficiary). But it is logic. The correct moment to help one country is when it is down, not when it is in its best moment. Norway didn’t want the EU when all the issue was a fuzzy and crazy idea (“what?? With our high level of life, we joining this backward European countries??”). Now they are thinking “oops” and in a few years they will be loosing their Norwegian a*s to join the EU. But I wish the conditions to join the EU for Norway will be quite crushing at that time. They could had joined the EU in a moment in which they could lead the negotiation. Now, they are going to join the EU in a moment in which the EU will rule the negotiation.

We use to say “be kind with the people you meet when you are going up, because they use to be the very same people you meet when you are going down”

This is the reason because I respect so much Germany and France and I like to see Zapatero discussing issues with Chirac and Schröder rather than seeing Aznar kissing the ass of George Bush.

Talking about the new eastern members, you can be sure that in 10-15 years they will be a perfect market of 80 millions of people ready to buy Brit products, and the EU will have a head of beach to the Black sea and the eastern market. But the UK has to help them, as I wish Spain will help them.

“Could you imagine if the billions we currently put into the EU were given instead, directly into projects such as alternative energy research.” Your are not being realistic at this point.

First of all, the petrol companies would never let the UK government inverting all this billions in alternative energy research.

The second point, is that the UK would not have such amount of billions to invert, if the EU does not exist.

The third point is that Germany and Spain are the two main world powers in wind energy. Being member of the EU is not incompatible with the investigation of alternative energies. It is a question of preferences.

I agree with you about some of the problems of the EU, but is the Brit (or the Spanish) government different?. There are not wasting of public money and corrupt politics in the UK government? That problems are inherent to the human being, not just to the European Union.

I don’t care about the frictions with the NATO, since the NATO is the main symbol of the European dependency from the USA in the military aspect. The Euromilitary should be the priority for the European countries.

I think that in your thoughts there are a huge component of “Brit temperament”. I will explain…Is quite significant that Germany is the main contributor to the EU economy, but the German people is far more euro-enthusiastic than the Brit people. When I talk about “Brit temperament” I mean that GB is an island, you are there…you are in Europe but…you are not SO Europeans. This independence, this “keeping the distances” with the continental Europe has helped and saved the UK many times along its History, and I think that this idea is deeply incrusted inside the mind of many Brits.

But in my opinion the UK is making a huge strategic mistake now. Nowdays, the UK will not survive (from the economic point of view) alone. When the USA, China or India start tightening the Brit economy you will understand what I mean. The European countries alone are insignificant from the world policy point of view, with the USA on the scene. In the next war that the UK is going to fight, the guns and the warships are useless. This time the UK will not be saved by a bunch of RAF pilots. The quasi-federal union with Portugal, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Italy, Netherlands, France, etc. is the only way to rise again as a superpower. Nowdays, in my humble opinion, the more separated from Europe the UK keeps, the more quick its power falling will be, and many Brit people is missing this important point. Keep in mind that the EU is a baby and there are a lot of sacrifices to do.

In my opinion, the UK is “loosing the train” in some important issues. Lets see what happens in the next decades.





[edit on 27-12-2004 by Pelayo]

Originally posted by Pelayo
“important word being 'potentially'” I am agree with you. Europe is something “potential” in many aspects. And this is the reason because it is now necessary to trust in the European Union and also to do sacrifices for the benefice of the European Union. In order to develop this “potential” as soon as possible and as much as possible.

In its current state the EU is flawed and has no potential, why you ask? Because we haven't had a vote on membership in the UK for many years.

instead of solving our problems by destroying and wasting our loved Europe.

The EU thinks the only part of the world that truely matters is Europe, is doesn't care about the big picture.

The USA was a century ago a country with “potential” enough to be the main world superpower. I wonder what would happen if California didn’t use dollars and Louisiana had not accepted the Wahington government or Nebraska had only joined the AFA (american farms alliance ).

Completely different, those were states with limited history, Europe is made up of countries with hundreds of years of pride and history.

I don’t think that is a good idea. You are thinking about the dissection of the EU. The union makes the force. With the USA (almost 400 millions) in the far west and China (1200 millions) in the far east, Europe could not achieve the supremacy by such a division.

But we don't have to be divided, the EU is not the rope that binds us, it is common sense and trust...not paper and politicians.

First of all, the petrol companies would never let the UK government inverting all this billions in alternative energy research.

Thats corruption, which exists just as strongly in the EU as it does anywhere else,

The second point, is that the UK would not have such amount of billions to invert, if the EU does not exist.

Not as a individual country, but all the countries who are members of that certain alliance do.

I don’t care about the frictions with the NATO, since the NATO is the main symbol of the European dependency from the USA in the military aspect. The Euromilitary should be the priority for the European countries.

Not true, NATO has safe guarded western europe against the war machine of the USSR. NATO is not run by the US...its is run by all members.

I think that in your thoughts there are a huge component of “Brit temperament”. I will explain…Is quite significant that Germany is the main contributor to the EU economy, but the German people is far more euro-enthusiastic than the Brit people. When I talk about “Brit temperament” I mean that GB is an island, you are there…you are in Europe but…you are not SO Europeans. This independence, this “keeping the distances” with the continental Europe has helped and saved the UK many times along its History, and I think that this idea is deeply incrusted inside the mind of many Brits.

yes Britain is distrustful of those who aren't proven allies, the British people are unique, for better or for worse. But it has kept us safe.

the next war that the UK is going to fight, the guns and the warships are useless. This time the UK will not be saved by a bunch of RAF pilots.

and what war is this?

The quasi-federal union with Portugal, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Italy, Netherlands, France, etc. is the only way to rise again as a superpower.

Rise again.....correct me if i'm wrong but Europe hasn't ever been a singular Super power.

In my opinion, the UK is “loosing the train” in some important issues. Lets see what happens in the next decades.

and interesting next few decades they shall be...

-Europe only thinks of itself as one entity, it forgets that Europe is not a country but a collection of nations.


[edit on 27-12-2004 by UK Wizard]

“In its current state the EU is flawed and has no potential, why you ask? Because we haven't had a vote on membership in the UK for many years.”

Look, I know that UK is one of the more powerful liliputiensis in the World. And it would be good for the EU having the UK at 100% in the EU machine.

But the EU will keep running with or without the UK.

If the Brit people don’t feel themselves satisfied by the EU, they should look for a solution instead of keeping stuck saying “I want to go out”.

“The EU thinks the only part of the world that truely matters is Europe” Is Europe different to the USA at this point???? And, sincerely I think that the EU is far more worried about the rest of the World than USA is.

“Not true, NATO has safe guarded western europe against the war machine of the USSR.” Err….Not true Wizard. Look at the quantities, qualities and deployments of armament during the cold war. Look for who took the decisions. USA has safe guarded western Europe against the URSS.

“NATO is not run by the US...its is run by all members.” Wizard, just open your eyes and be realistic. Do you think that UK or Spain or Greece have something to say in the high hierarchy of the NATO?? I have rode a manifest wrote by several Spanish officers of high rank in which they said that the NATO is the best instrument that the Americans have for keeping Europe under their military boot during the next decades.

“the British people are unique” as unique as the French or the Spanish or the Portuguese or the Dutch people is. The point is that the Brit people are more distrustful than the other Europeans.

“and what war is this?” The economic global war, the war of the alliances, the war of the international influences towards countries that you can not just attack by military force, i.e. China, USA, India, Japan…

In my opinion, for instance, Blair prefer being the tail of the American empire instead of being the head of the European Union. He is looking the benefices at short time, not for a long time. Huge mistake. And bad for the UK and for the whole EU. And extremely good for the USA.

“correct me if i'm wrong but Europe hasn't ever been a singular Super power” You are wrong. The Roman empire was a global Euro-Mediterranean super power.

had UK, or Spain, or France ever been a singular Super Power before they finally were?

Oh, the different languages. In Spain there do exist 4 different languages. How many different languages were talked all across the Roman or the Spanish or the Brit empire?

The reasons of the style “Europe will not because it never had…” or “We will be because we always have been” and “France is not an ally because Napoleon attacked us” are just a ballast.

Nobody had stepped on the moon until Neil Armstrong did it. Nobody had sailed all the World around until Elcano did it. Nobody had transmitted instantly information to long distances without wires until Marconi did it. No one colony had became stronger than its metropolis until the USA did it. I had never born until I was born (I am not Buddist ). My grandmother had never die until she died. For everything around the World, there is always a first time. And some things happen just once in the History.

The EU is the “first time ever” for a lot of things.


“the EU is not the rope that binds us” this is a matter of perception. The EU is not a rope that bind me, but I want to be part of the rope that keeps united the EU.

One of the American arguments when they neglect that the EU is rising as a new superpower is:

“The European countries have always fought and destroyed the ones to the others, so the EU is a Babel Tower and will fall”.

Well, do you really think that a war between France and Germany, or Spain and UK is a realistic possibility nowdays? Is there another similar situation in Europe since the Roman Empire fell? We had spent our History fighting, but the European History has turned the way. For me it is so clear…

You are denying the possibility of the change.

Ok the things had been this way during centuries, but this doesn’t mean that the things will keep this way during the next centuries. This is what many Americans would like, but now the things are changing.

I am pretty sure that we are living the most important moment in the European History that the children will study in the school during the next centuries.

And in my opinion you neglect such a reality.

Originally posted by UK Wizard
In its current state the EU is flawed and has no potential, why you ask? Because we haven't had a vote on membership in the UK for many years.

- Oh come on Wizard, how self-obsessed is this?

First of all the EU has vast potential. That is simply not open to debate, it is a fact.
It has just expanded to 25 countries and is set to expand further to 27 soon with scope to grow from the current 470- 475 millions to 550 million people.

That is what you call potential.....particularly given our track record post WW2.

By the way the current US population is approx 295 million.

Secondly whatever the EU is or is not, that is not reliant on what the UK has or has not done recently. Nor are the EU's potentials reliant on the UK alone.

The EU and the UK's political relationship with it has been a central feature of every political parties' general election manifesto since our membership. The subject has particularly been elevated in importance in every election since the tories decided they preferred to chase the anti-EU vote from 1989 on.

I'm sorry that this isn't the answer the anti-EU crowd in the UK want but just because we have not had a specific referendum on the matter is not to say the issue has not been a large part of UK politics at major votes.
Actually, UK politics are not 'done' on the basis of referendum.

What was the 2001 general election (with the tory party clearly standing on an anti-EU platform and Labour on a 'pro' platform) but a chance for this imagined 'well' of anti-EU feeling to come out for?

It did not. As it will not in a straight 'yes' or 'no' vote. Wake up man.

The EU thinks the only part of the world that truely matters is Europe, is doesn't care about the big picture.

- This is nonsense.
The EU is specifically about Europe because it was set up to be so and not an 'alternative UN'.

But in any case given the EU's engagement with the WTO and the various 'world' economic and political bodies such a claim is just plain wrong.

Completely different, those were states with limited history, Europe is made up of countries with hundreds of years of pride and history.

- Yes, exactly. The EU is a collective of long established free democratic countries....... which make the anti-EU mobs notions of an expansionist, controlling, monolithic, inflexible mono-cultural entity laughable.

But we don't have to be divided, the EU is not the rope that binds us, it is common sense and trust...not paper and politicians.

- Er, well the fact is that it actually is the existant 'rope' (or institution) that does indeed bind us and through which Europe's individual nations co-operate and act together.

The EU is what there is. It is the here and now, not an idea or a theory but a working institution, now.

......and why is your answer invariable to ignore this fact and then to discredit and distain the incredible - unique, no less - progress made by and with the EU and just glibly start again as if future success is easy, likely to be quick and guaranteed in some way anyway?

Thats corruption, which exists just as strongly in the EU as it does anywhere else,

- Actually auditors have repeatedly shown 'fraud' and inefficiency' within the EU to be at levels which compares very well with that within the nation states governments.

Not as a individual country, but all the countries who are members of that certain alliance do.

- Once again you refer to one of the benefits of the allaince as if that would just carry on and be sustained even though you would go out of your way to destroy that alliance.

Why?

Not true, NATO has safe guarded western europe against the war machine of the USSR. NATO is not run by the US...its is run by all members.

- If you really think the USA hasn't dominated NATO strategy and planning Wizard you are fooling yourself.

yes Britain is distrustful of those who aren't proven allies, the British people are unique, for better or for worse.

- What like any member of the EU today is suspect as an ally!?

But it has kept us safe.

- Trying to apply the past - particularly any of our past when EU member countries were any kind of 'threat' to the UK is ludicrous.
Sorry but it just is.

If I may say so it is exactly that kind of reasoning (which the UK anti-EU mob can't help themselves from coming out with from time to time) that is part of why they are set to lose any 'in' or 'out' vote in the UK.

The EU has nothing to do with any previous 'threats from continental Europe'.

-Europe only thinks of itself as one entity, it forgets that Europe is not a country but a collection of nations.

- Says who? The UK anti-EU press (when they are letting their mouths run away and leaving their brains far behind)?

I've yet to meet the person from any country in Europe who doesn't see themselves as their nationality 'X' first and as a 'European' second.

Naturally the 'EU' considers itself as a single entity - because that is what it is.
But it is a single entity consisting of many individual parts......how could it possibly forget the reality of what it is?

That kind of comment is just crass propaganda for those unused, unwilling or unable to think about this subject rationally.