Joint eu military

[Bordoy 0]

Quote[/b] ]They predict the mongrel hoards of Europe stealing our wives, and raping our cattle.

France don't buy British beef, and if they steal our wives then i ain't surprised (look at them over there, hairy armpits and so forth)

AAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH !!!!!!!!

a roastbeef cristicizing OUR women .........

you made my day mate , thank you , really

no problem frog leg.

[EiZei 0]

I wonder, how come every thread that is somehow related to EU always has to have somebody bashing the french?

[SgtBarnes 0]

haha, little Englander. England ain't that small.

wordreference.com

Quote[/b] ]Little Englander

noun

2 (British)  (informal)

a person who perceives most foreign influences on Britain's culture and institutions as damaging or insidious

[Grizzlie 0]

EiZei - it is all Asterix's fault , he was travelling all over Europe and making mess all around ;)

[The Frenchman 0]

I wonder, how come every thread that is somehow related to EU always has to have somebody bashing the french?

Its a mystery to me.

[Apollo 0]

No man who'd ever been to cannes in the summer can call French chicks ugly ,no'r overly dressed.

[Mister 5 0]

Here's hoping that this thread becomes a contest where the English and French posters attempt to prove that their women are sexier by posting numerous pictures of the aforementioned women. Scantly clad, of course.

[Baron von Beer 0]

Here's hoping that this thread becomes a contest where the English and French posters attempt to prove that their women are sexier by posting numerous pictures of the aforementioned women. Scantly clad, of course.

Yes, listen to the man. Defend your nation's pride, and all that.

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]Here's hoping that this thread becomes a contest where the English and French posters attempt to prove that their women are sexier by posting numerous pictures of the aforementioned women. Scantly clad, of course.

I'll start bashing Latina's and Italian's in the meantime.We can name it the joint eu chicks thread

[NurEinMensch 0]

euobserver.com - Countries that reject Constitution may have to leave the EU

Quote[/b] ]European Commission President Romano Prodi has told the Irish Times that when it comes to ratification of the EU Constitution, one member state cannot be allowed to sink the treaty.

In an interview with the Irish daily, Mr Prodi said "maybe you should have a long waiting period to allow us to find a political solution to solve the problem. We won't say, 'You voted No, now get out', but we have to find a solution that will not permit one country to stop all the other 24. It is clear. This is obvious. It's simply common sense".

He went on to add: "I think that it's such an important decision that it cannot be taken immediately or simply, but certainly, you cannot ignore the fact that if a country says 'No, No, No, No', then it is a decision of the country to stay out. You don't even need to expel it", he said.

I think this is just the next step in the debate over the constitution, after the UK recently announced it may veto the adoption of that document.

In the end I think Prodi is right, let the countries who want the constitution for the Union have it, and those who don't want it can stay out of the Union if they chose so.

But don't let any nation block the whole thing for the rest of us.

[EiZei 0]

.. and some people are saying that constitution referendum should be held here as well, I hope that the policy will be clear by then if the referendum is held.

[Bordoy 0]

But don't let any nation block the whole thing for the rest of us.

Bet you didn't say that when the majority in NATO voted for the wat in Iraq but france or Germany, or Russia used a veto so they couldn't go.

Yes, i was against the war.

[ran 0]

But don't let any nation block the whole thing for the rest of us.

Bet you didn't say that when the majority in NATO voted for the wat in Iraq but france or Germany, or Russia used a veto so they couldn't go.

Yes, i was against the war.

we're not talking about war here , we're talking about a peacefull political process

[-33ker 0]

Did you say NATO? Wasn't it the UN?

[Bordoy 0]

Probably was UN

[NurEinMensch 0]

But don't let any nation block the whole thing for the rest of us.

Bet you didn't say that when the majority in NATO voted for the wat in Iraq but france or Germany, or Russia used a veto so they couldn't go.

Yes, i was against the war.

1. NATO didn't vote about the war in Iraq, it voted about sending (air defence) support to turkey in case Iraq may chose to retaliate.

2. NATO is a defensive alliance, the EU is a political union. Apples and Oranges.

[rant]We're talking about the creation of a new Union, and sometimes it appears to me certain countries are part of it for the sole purpose of blocking every attempt to unite europe.[/rant]

[denoir 0]

EU defence row

Quote[/b] ]Mr Powell said Washington would not back down in a row over plans by the European Union to set up an independent military cell.

"The United States cannot accept independent EU structures that duplicate existing Nato capabilities," Mr Powell said.

This is a very odd statementa as 1) USA is not in the position to do anything about it and 2) Powell is at the same time trying to get the EU countries to commit troops to Iraq.

It's like criticizing somebody on how he is using his money and then ask for a loan.

Anyhow, for the EU-sceptics around, there is a perfect example of why the European cooperation is good:

Bush lifts steel tariffs

For you that don't know the story, 16 months ago Bush introduced tariffs on imported steel. EU went to the WTO that concluded that the tariffs were illegal and a violation of various free trade agreements and gave the EU a hunting license. The EU then made plans for retalitatory sanctions against the US and Bush finally backed off. This would have never happened without the European cooperation. It made it possible to say: lift the tariffs or we will bankrupt Florida (key state in the upcoming elections). Having no choice, Bush folded and now the tariffs are being removed.

[Tamme 0]

Denoirs right. That's a good example of what EU can do now (I was actually surprised to see that Bush took EU seriously). Imagine what it could do in the future (if we keep working on this thing of course).

[bn880 5]

EU defence row

Quote[/b] ]Mr Powell said Washington would not back down in a row over plans by the European Union to set up an independent military cell.

"The United States cannot accept independent EU structures that duplicate existing Nato capabilities," Mr Powell said.

This is a very odd statementa as 1) USA is not in the position to do anything about it and 2) Powell is at the same time trying to get the EU countries to commit troops to Iraq.

It's like criticizing somebody on how he is using his money and then ask for a loan.

Anyhow, for the EU-sceptics around, there is a perfect example of why the European cooperation is good:

Bush lifts steel tariffs

For you that don't know the story, 16 months ago Bush introduced tariffs on imported steel. EU went to the WTO that concluded that the tariffs were illegal and a violation of various free trade agreements and gave the EU a hunting license. The EU then made plans for retalitatory sanctions against the US and Bush finally backed off. This would have never happened without the European cooperation. It made it possible to say: lift the tariffs or we will bankrupt Florida (key state in the upcoming elections). Having no choice, Bush folded and now the tariffs are being removed.

That's great, because Canadians are supposidly united and have never really seriously threatened retaliatory sanctions for all the ones the US imposes. It is a one way road with tariffs here... that is, money flows from Canada to the US.

[MLF 0]

what i dont like is that if a country wants to leave the EU (not at the moment i think) but you have to allow other countries to vote on you being able to leave.

[denoir 0]

That strikes me as pretty normal of any union. Could Scotland leave the UK without consulting England & Co?

Besides the rigth to leave at will is no guarantee. Look at the former Yugoslav federation. The republics had the constitutional right to leave the federation but that didn't stop the military from intervening when Slovenia and Croatia decided to split.

Which brings me to another point, relevant for the military part of this discussion. How do you prevent what happened in Yugoslavia from happening in the EU? Yugoslavia was a federation with six republics that had their own parliaments and laws. The military was federal and the economies of the republics were very co-dependant. Plus the people had a long history of conflict. All that very similar to what the EU is and wants to become.

[Harnu 0]

1) USA is not in the position to do anything about it

Of course we do, we're America

[NurEinMensch 0]

Good point but I think the peace between the nations of the EU is far less superficial than the peace in Yuguslavia was. Conflicts there broke out as soon as the one uniting figure, Tito, died.

The EU is not united by one popular person but a very complex network of economical and other factors and ideas.

And the idea of a united Europe is anything but new. It probably arose from the sherds of the West-Roman empire. That's a pretty powerfull dream and we're closer than ever to making it come true.

[Baron von Beer 0]

The Steel tarrif removal was good, IMO. (Don't forget though, Japan had a big hand in that as well, along with many other smaller trading partners). I think that it was trying to serve a good goal, by poor means. (Save jobs, but to alienate so many trading partners? I think that would have cost a LOT more jobs in the end.)

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]Good point but I think the peace between the nations of the EU is far less superficial than the peace in Yuguslavia was. Conflicts there broke out as soon as the one uniting figure, Tito, died.

The EU is not united by one popular person but a very complex network of economical and other factors and ideas.

And the idea of a united Europe is anything but new. It probably arose from the sherds of the West-Roman empire. That's a pretty powerfull dream and we're closer than ever to making it come true.

The Yougoslavian conflict was most of all a matter of Nationalism.A true "yougoslavian" hasn't really existed anyway ,unless maybe Tito and some followers.It's was most of all a throw-toghether of little country's that had hughe difference's with eachother ,be it ethnicly or religiously.So yougoslavia broke op due to to many people that didn't want it and to few that did want it.

Europe is the other way around.Here European nationalism is continually rising ,more and more people begin to feel European.Europe is expanding.It has much to do with globalism and our history and the way we fit in international politics.For ex. people in the U.S will easily say rather an European to a person from Holland than a dutchman ,it's easier for people outside Europe to mark people from here as European's rather than their seperate nationality ,however this sort of thing's prommote European nationalism.The same goes for international politics ,the More that we work toghether the more we strenthen the E.U .I dare to believe that ,if everything evolve's like planned/wanted ,seperate nationalism in Europe will have as good as died out after 3 to 4 generation's.