posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 06:49 PM
I don't want to seem off topic but some of the history being mentioned in this thread is a bit skewed, or light.
Germany didn't start WWI anymore than England did. They were allied with an empire that wanted a war and was given an excuse to have one. A system
of entangling alliances kicked in and Germany ended up on a side. Very little difference in their actions in starting that one and the actions of any
of the other still existing European Nations. Russia may have had slightly better reasons than just the paper trail of alliances given that they felt
their ethnic brothers the Serbs were being abused.
At the end of WWI it was the French who insisted that Germany BOTH be stripped of their manufacturing capacity (for fear it could be turned to war
again in the future) AND pay huge war reparations. The German economy could not handle both and it was the Treaty of Versailles ending WWI which
effectively caused WWII. For real, if you had to use sacks of money to pay for bread wouldn't you go to war too? Not excusing the atrocities of war
or saying that it is in any way good, just being realistic.
It matters to get the history right because the EU was really created to make the nations of Europe so interdependant that they couldn't war anymore.
The thought was that having a single currency could prevent war. It worked great until somebody risked messing up the currency. Now, it just may
cause the kind of wars it was intended to prevent. But, if that is the case then those wars would have occurred anyway, so nothing lost by trying.
It's just starting to get interesting.
But it doesn't look happy.
edit on 2-11-2011 by watcher3339 because: (no reason given)