It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Yossarian
Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by Yossarian
The first time around, the result was a resounding NO.
If I recall the Irsh are the only EU nation where the PEOPLE have a direct vote. Thanl goodness for that.
And yes the US citizens need to pay more attention to the EU especially since Bush signed an agreement to "harmonize" (make the same as ) US laws with the EU. Also the FDA sent out a memo about how it was necessary to "harmonize" US laws.
I really hate these quiet agreements to setup a world government behind the backs of the citizens of each country
Of course, but what do you think of a repeat referendum (without any change in the content of the treaty) as the first result was not what the EU or the Irish government wanted?
Originally posted by Dermo
reply to post by A52FWY
Yes, persons from any member state that has joined the EU to date can move freely, live, work, avail of social schemes etc in any other state, Spain has brought in some new laws to curb immigration. Any future member states towards the East will not be able to avail of the freedom of employment laws in other member states until they are of sufficient economic development.
Thank you for your input. Change of this magnitude is both difficult to understand and to undergo. As I recall from my college classes (poli-sci major), the EU was formed with the ultimate goal of regional harmony through the upgrading of Union members' infrastructures and to gain a competitive trading edge against the US and China. The benevolence of the more established countries - France, Germany, UK, etc. - in funding a disproportionate amount to create/improve the infrastructures of the newer members (Eastern Block countries, for example) is exemplary. I do not mean to say that the changes and the investment gambles aren't without risk - the US is well aware of the effects of mass immigration (legal and illegal) and the cost of "nation building" (see America's investment in the South after the Civil War, post WWII Japan, Vietnam, Iraq...). Nevertheless, the long term payoff should justify the financial gamble and the changes required.
If you look at it this way, the US is helping the EU and the West with security issues and by waging resource wars until the EU army is strong enough to be able to take over at least half of the load. Then roles will be reversed while the EU military helps the US while the US recoups the money it has spent on war.
The EU and US will always be a partnership, simple as.
I completely agree with you here regarding the partnership between the US and the EU, though we will continue to be competing against each other for markets (nature of capitalism). Despite the multitude of issues raised by the US acting as the world police (undeniably with mixed results) - the freedom from tyranny and oppression for all peoples in this world stands a better chance with another super power in play. The US needs to be challenged when we are off track (Iraq); and the US will need help in facing potential future challenges from rouge countries/alliances. In a perfect world, North Korea undergoes a regime change with the passing of Kim Jong Il; Syria and Iran come to the peace table; and China's resurgence culminates in a nation founded upon democratic principles. However, we do not live in a perfect world.
Imperialism and oppression are the enemies, freedom and democracy are the solutions. However, majority rule is not without problems for those in the minority... Does the EU ultimately enhance the freedoms and liberties of it's members? Will it lead to an improved quality of life for it's members? I believe it will. Despite all of our shortcomings, our United States have demonstrated what can be accomplished though a few hundred million people working to maintain the principles of democracy.
[edit on 22/8/09 by Dermo]
Originally posted by Cythraul
...Depends on your perspective. We didn't want to be bullied into accepting the Euro, and so we have suffered as a result. Some might call that stubborn, others would see it as a righteous resistance of tyrannical bullying. Is the Pound's relation to the Euro deliberately manipulated by those who would benefit from a European Union? I and others believe so.
And the primary argument I've heard from most EU sceptics concerns sovereignty rather than economic weakening. I'd rather live in a poor Britain that controls itself than a wealthy one that has lost its sovereignty and identity*. That's the true measure of patriotism. I won't sell my country out and neither will millions of other Euro-sceptics.
Originally posted by A52FWY
I have some general questions. Can you move to any member state you want to live in?
If you can move at will, then you have to start looking at health care uniformity, education uniformity etc.
If you don't like other nationalities, it's not going to work very well. If the Irish hate British rule, why would they embrace the EU?
Originally posted by jimmyx
from a california, USA view, it appears you people in europe have to worry more about the growing muslim populations in your countries. when a particular orthodoxy tends to worship at the "MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY" alter of social living, which is completely different from the way most europeans live now, the "threat of a unified europe" seems to take a back seat...
Originally posted by Lonestar24
The UK was never "bullied" into anything.
Originally posted by Lonestar24
There is simply no reason, precedent or historical parallel whatsoever to claim that national identity is at risk by growing EU integration. National identity, culture and tradition is in no meaningful way affected by policy.
Originally posted by sharps
There is no problem of growing muslim populations.
Originally posted by Vanitas
BTW, the Irish went from one of the poorest countries in Europe to one of the richest after joining the EU. I think that should override any abiding animosity towards any other nation they might have harboured.
Originally posted by ArMaP
The borders remain borders, people that are not EU citizens still have to show their passports when moving through the Portugal-Spain border, for example.