Originally posted by Soulforge
Yes...and Hitler made the trains run on time.
- Oh Gawwwd, here it is. The 'can't do an EU thread without giving Adolf & Co a mention' moment.
What has that got to do with now and the EU, never mind post-war Germany?
I don't have a problem with another superpower. But call a spade a spade. The EU will be its own country.
- I realise you have problems understanding the concepts behind the EU, they are pretty unique afterall but the EU will not
"be it's own
Think about it. How could anyone in a totally agreed democratic structure get the French to stop being French or the Germans to stop being
German.....Jayzuss, some of you Americans really have no clue, have you?
And it will be a superpower militarily and economically. Everything is flowing in that direction.
- Well OK. This is
I'd say we already are a 'super-power' economically. Wow.
But, as I said before, compared to the USA or Russia we are not a military superpower and have no intention of wasting billions upon billions in the
pointless persuit of becoming one.
You guys can ruin yourselves at that dumb game all on your lonesome.....hey, maybe you can get a few politicians to stand up and scare yous all rigid
over China or something, maybe they'll play that one with you but I doubt it.
And I know world history, I'm not an idiot. France has been France for almost a thousand years. And it's easier to say Germany than to say
the elevenish countries since the Holy Roman Empire.
- OK, fair enough but let's not make idiotic comparisons then.
This period in history is like this period in history. Full stop.
We have never been here before and the situation is completely unique.
Originally posted by TheRepublic
i never said the superpowers wernt involved in wars.
they would have never been superpowers to begin with had that been the case. what im trying to say is the wars that took place under superpowers were
smaller and less deadly.
- Well taking account of the smaller population sizes I think you must be mistaken.
there was "relativly" more peace- thus the "high points of civilization"
wars under one superpower, example: romans wiping out barbarian tribes
americans bombing taliban
- I think you'll find the recent 100 000 dead in Iraq and the God knows how many tens of thousands in Afghanistan is relatively a lot of dead
people. Even if our media can't bring itself to even bother attempting to report the truth of it.
wars under balence of power are vastly more deadly and as a whole there is less peace throughout the world, example: WWI, WWII
Napoleons stuff, ect.
- WW1 & 2 fitted the trend of mankind devising ever more effective ways of wiping each other out in ever larger numbers but I think you'll find that
applies beyond the 'balance of power' situation you describe.....the US civil war for a start springs to mind. A horrific death rate,
there will always be war and death, just more of it under the 2 power system.
- I think the 'system' is in many way irrelevant. Many would argue that the post WW2 'balance of power system' contained the worst potentials we
had at the time regardless of what 'small wars' went on.
and it seems as if the people in europe make a bigger deal of the US than deserves to be made. do you wake up everyday thinking "my how the
U.S. has made my life misreable..."i think alot of people have their pantys in a bundle over nothing. the U.S. is not that bad. hitler anyone?
oh wait people in europe compare bush to hitler, so...
The point is Europe is not so naive as to imagine the USA is our cuddly benefactor always looking out for us - so, cor imagine that, we don't have to
- because that's really just an extension of him looking out for himself. Pull the other one.
We aren't over-doing anything. We're just not stupid either.
You guys have your interests, they are not ours, we have our own.
i just think people take the U.s. too seriously. I dont think were that oppressive and i imagine a two superpower world to be much more
harmfull to everyone,everywhere.
- Imagine away.
We'll stick to our systems of cooperative self-sufficiency and self-reliance as our best way in this world.
Like I said, if you want genuine co-operation, engagement or honest competition, fine, we can do that and we'll all benefit I'm sure.
The trouble is the USA has a history of being far more interested in domination and selfish self interest and we aren't going to tolerate that any
longer. We don't have to. Sorry and all but, tough, there it is.
it seems like people have just traded in their nationalsim in europe, in exchange for a european nationalism. is that much better?
- Er, what?
How can you have such a thing as the individual - let's not forget existing nation states
'trading in' their 'nationalism' for a
Wow. Do you really believe that?! How does that work?
It is no such thing.
It is a clear and obvious realisation that we all benefit when we work together, being so close to each other we can and do productively work
together, that truely we share common interests and that we really can maintain the peace in an area notorious for repeated frequent ruinous wars.
is it worth starting an army for?
- What? What do you mean 'starting an army'?
There will be no 'new armies' just existing units allocated as available to the new structure should they be deemed required and necessary.
We already got a load of armies, and airforces and in some cases navies too.
so the big bad US cant boss people around?
- Er, no. Don't be silly.
That is not why the EU force is being proposed, actually. I suggest you investigate why it has been proposed and why the USA (even Bush & Co)
originally supported the idea.
But no doubt your right-wing commentators and politicians will soon enough be working on your public to inflate the 'European threat' if China is
too obviously absurd a 'threat' or they won't even play the game with you guys.
Don't hold your breathe though cos we won't be playing either.
i dont know