France, Italy, Germany 'firmly believe' Paris climate deal can't be renegotiated

originally posted by: Pitou
a reply to: Arnie123

So why then do you expect everyone to bow to your whims? You give the rest of the world the finger- why would we care about anything you want or do, then?

Also, don't you think it's terribly selfish?

The American ego's truly out of control.

Turn the statement around. WHy should the US bow to the EU's whims?
OH i know because the US money was going to finance a majority of it all.
Putting America first is selfish,but We have to be because we cannot afford to bail out the EU anymore.
Eu ego is out of control for thinking we Owe them anything.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looks like 3 big countries are very despondent over U.S. President trump's rejection of the Paris Climate deal.

France, Italy, Germany all say Trump's offer to re-negotiate are no good.

Why would they have to re-negotiate a deal that took so many years to finalize and that works well for most of the world?

Almost 200 countries are happy with the agreement and are fulfilling their commitment to it. One country only has decided to withdraw and not honour its commitment: the US. The rest of the world does not want to change an agreement that's working well on the whim of one country only. The US was only a part of it, not the most important, all countries involved are as equal as each other.

originally posted by: missed_gear
Let us see exactly what they accomplish without the US, disappointment is one thing, going forwards is another.

Despite the fact that the US is the second biggest polluter in the world (first is China), its withdrawl from its commitment will not kill the agreement, as most countries in the world are charging ahead with it.

The only thing that is affected by it is America's foreign policy, as leaders from over the world realize they cannot trust a president/country that does not honour his word. But that's Trump, he was an untrustworthy businessman and he is the same as a leader.

With the Paris agreement countries commited themselves to start working on freeing themselves from fossil fuels (and other environmental harmful activities, such as deforestation etc). Trump could still do that without being part of the agreement but, judging him on his past and his 'big oil' friends, I doubt he will.

originally posted by: yuppa
Turn the statement around. WHy should the US bow to the EU's whims?

Not the EU, 200 other countries agreed to it, the US did agree to it too. It was signed in Europe but it is a United Nations agreement, not EU.

The Paris Agreement.

OH i know because the US money was going to finance a majority of it all.

Evidence please because nobody pays money to the agreement. Perhaps you are talking about the Green Climate Fund? Trump said he will stop funding it even though the US ranks 11th among the 45 contributing countries.

a reply to: xuenchen

I am sure that is going to be repercussions when the Country that contribute the most to the UN clima change and green fund is be pushed to much.

US doesn't have anything to lose from withdrawing from this none binding treating, the rest of the nations do.

I wonder what will happen if US withdraw all the monetary support to the UN.

originally posted by: Pitou
And what a fool he is. And really, people have an attitude problem if they truly believe that they can just pull back out of international agreements at the detriment of the world and their own reliability as a country and also can afford to have the gall to renegotiate on your own terms. Come on now!

Obama committed to that agreement without approval from Congress. Educate yourself on our system of government.

a reply to: Agartha

EU,UN..same difference. they want the US to bow to their demands. Screw them.

a reply to: Agartha

The other countries are happy as long as the US foot most of the bill as usual.

I will be happy, getting free money too.

a reply to: Pitou

Definition of none binding agreetment.

Quick Answer
According to the United States Department of State, a non-binding contract lays out the terms of an agreement without obligating either party to fulfill the terms. It is used to create an understanding of an agreement before a formal agreement is written out or finalized. It can also be used to create a moral or political obligation without creating a formal agreement.

US constitution on treaties.

This Constitution , and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof ; and all treaties made , or which shall be made , under the authority of the United States , shall be the supreme law of the land ; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby , anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary ...

You know the constitution of the US is taught starting in 4th grade with the preamble and thereof as you go in grade school.

Occurs unless you do not attended schools in the US, this part of the curriculum.

So the great negotiator failed to negotiate again.

a reply to: Pitou

If you don't like it, push ahead without America and you make up the $100 billion loss and then in 80 years when this costs untold trillions and does NOTHING and you are bankrupt over it don't come crawling to us.

It's estimated that the $100 billion plus a year (which increases every year) will reduce temperatures by .2 degrees C iirc.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
So the great negotiator failed to negotiate again.

We're out. That's the best outcome there is.

originally posted by: Agartha

Why would they have to re-negotiate a deal that took so many years to finalize and that works well for most of the world?

They don't. If they like it they can keep it. It doesn't work for America. So why should America stay in a deal that is great for every nation except America?

So they can renegotiate and make it work for America, or push ahead without America. They have choices.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
Obama committed to that agreement without approval from Congress. Educate yourself on our system of government.

Obama was able to sign the agreement as an executive order because it implements a prior agreement with the UNFCC that was approved by the US Senate. Because the agreement does not include binding emission targets, or binding financial commitments beyond those contained in the UNFCC and can be implemented on the basis of existing law, Obama was able to approve it by executive action.

originally posted by: yuppa
EU,UN..same difference. they want the US to bow to their demands. Screw them.

Nobody is asking the US to bow to their demands, the agreement was negotiated by representatives of 195 countries in unison and then adopted in consensus. Nobody forced the US to do anything. - UNFCC -

originally posted by: marg6043
The other countries are happy as long as the US foot most of the bill as usual.

And that's not true, but please provide evidence, I already asked another member but they never did. I know for a fact that nobody is paying the Paris agreement and the US is definitely not footing most of whatever bill you are referring to.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
They don't. If they like it they can keep it. It doesn't work for America. So why should America stay in a deal that is great for every nation except America?

How is it great for every nation but not America? If you are also going to say 'the US foots most of the bill' then that's incorrect, but please show me the evidence you have.

So they can renegotiate and make it work for America, or push ahead without America. They have choices.

And that's exactly what they are doing, moving on without the US.

originally posted by: Agartha

How is it great for every nation but not America? If you are also going to say 'the US foots most of the bill' then that's incorrect, but please show me the evidence you have.

We get almost nothing out of it, yet it costs us money. Maybe you can show how it's good.

Like I said, no one needs to renegotiate, and we don't need to be involved.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

We get almost nothing out of it, yet it costs us money.

How is it costing you money? You are not paying anybody it was just an agreement to start adopting clean energy and start dropping slowly fossil fuels.

Each country submitted their own plan, including the US: America's plan was to reduce greenhouse emissions by 28% by 2025.
Here is the plan America submitted.

How is that costing you money and not getting anything in return?

And where is the bill everybody keeps talking about?

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

We get almost nothing out of it, yet it costs us money.

How is it costing you money? You are not paying anybody it was just an agreement to start adopting clean energy and start dropping slowly fossil fuels.

Each country submitted their own plan, including the US: America's plan was to reduce greenhouse emissions by 28% by 2025.
Here is the plan America submitted.

How is that costing you money and not getting anything in return?

And where is the bill everybody keeps talking about?

So it doesn't cost any money to do that? Maybe Europe can do it for us, since it won't cost them a penny.

a reply to: Agartha

another consensus huh? my those sure are great when you want to silence a minority of people who know its a huge international scam.

Planets climate always changes. we just need to adapt.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looks like 3 big countries are very despondent over U.S. President trump's rejection of the Paris Climate deal.

France, Italy, Germany all say Trump's offer to re-negotiate are no good.

They not only believe re-negotiation isn't possible, they *FIRMLY* believe it !!

Well Well.

The New World Order has a set back.

What will they do now ?

I predict a wild "Sanctions War" !!

France, Italy, Germany 'firmly believe' Paris climate deal can't be renegotiated

Italy, France and Germany said on Thursday they regretted U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord and dismissed his suggestion that the global pact could be revised.

"We deem the momentum generated in Paris in December 2015 irreversible and we firmly believe that the Paris Agreement cannot be renegotiated, since it is a vital instrument for our planet, societies and economies," the leaders of the three countries said in a joint statement.

Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron urged all their allies to speed up efforts to combat climate change and said they would do more to help developing countries adapt.

Where's the guy that invented the internet when we need him????

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
So it doesn't cost any money to do that? Maybe Europe can do it for us, since it won't cost them a penny.

Each country is following its plan. Europe is not a country, but each European country is doing so, following their own plans.

Are you saying that adopting cleaner habits to help the environment is not worth it? Are you saying that to stop deforestation and to use green energy is not worth it?

Solar and wind power can actually save money, they are cheaper.

And I'm still waiting for the elusive bill you all keep on talking about.

a reply to: Agartha

And give the bankers trusts 28% of your savings.

Such a deal !!

a reply to: Agartha

It costs money. You have yet to tell me the benefits and explain why it's worth it.