Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Albert Schweitzer

Does the uk belong into europe

Recommended Posts

Belgium : a tiny speck on the map, and we would rule over the UK? lol biggrin_o.gif

Quote[/b] ]Becoming a single country, thats what i'm worried about. I don't want to get ruled by the French, Germans or Belgiums.

How things have changed?

Collapse of League of Nations (possibly more then 60 years ago, i'm not and historian)

WW2

War in Balkans

Terroism

anything else?

League of nations was a weak organisation,the eu is a streamlined, more effective evolution of it.

WW2 : inevitable with the pressure put on germany by the WW1 victors

War in Balkans : century old ethnic pressure

Terrorism : so this is all the fault of the eu? rock.gif

ps : Belgians, we don't go off calling you Englanders either biggrin_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I am British and I am disgusted by the British attitude that is vehemently anti European.

I wish we could join the EU, it would be a large benefit in my opinion, however the other 59 million idiots in my country don't think so.

I am curious as to where the myths come from, I am absolutely positive that mass media editors are sleeping with CIA operators on a mission to keep the UK out of the EU, the UK has always been the US's stepping stone to Europe, it does a lot of communication through us and relies on us to act as a buffer to stop it getting too much trouble from the continentals. As to what the Americans said in the beginning of the thread about how this has nothing to do with America's relations with Europe I say this - The UK has been alienated from Europe by the Iraq issue, the Eurovision song contest was the best indicator of this, the UK got nil points. For the Americans not to be involved would show a huge lack of foresight and political incompetence (Not that previous history has shown otherwise that is), if the EU becomes established effectively and a more united Europe is present there is an obvious force to keep the yanks in check, instead of running all over the world securing the last reserves of fossil fuels for their SUVs.

/Anti yank rant over.

Another issue is the Euro, why not!? The Euro system is nice and simple, it would take a few months at max to get used to, however the system is almost identical to British currency, however you wouldn't have dirty coppers anymore, coins are much nicer, they have a European symbol on one side and an individual national symbol on the other. You could easily get on the tunnel, without having to think at all about currency or passports, get off and you are in croissant land. The simplicity is what appeals to me, experiencing better travel and cultures within Europe so much more easily, there is life outside of London you know.

I am wondering if the British really do think they are worth something anymore? We are not an empire, it's been a long time since we had an empire, get over it and realise we are a small island acting as a relief rainfall catcher for France, the UK's role in Europe as I see it is to act as a barrier for the weather systems coming off the Atlantic, the air rises over us, drops all the shit and continues nice and dry on to France where they lounge around enjoying themselves.

The UK should join in my opinion, it would add a bit of culture to the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Becoming a single country, thats what i'm worried about. I don't want to get ruled by the French, Germans or Belgiums.

Nope. You'll be ruling Frnace, Germany and Belgium. Is that so bad? blues.gif

It's typical empty rethorics. Define "ruled by". Who are you ruled by now? Last I checked the European Union was noot the "Franco-German-Beligian Union Conspiracy to Subdue The Poor British". You'll be part of a larger group yes but you will also have power there. I can understand some scepticism coming from smaller countries. But please, Britian is one of the largest countries meaning that you will have very much influence. And this time your influence won't just be restricted to your little island, but to the whole of Europe.

Your ancestors understood that perfectly when they went around occupying France et al. It's just now that we do it in a fair peaceful way.

The president wont be English. More then likely from Belgium. I know its not a conspiracy (would we know its a conspiracy if its a conspiracy, as conspiracies are usually private and classified) but there the main groups. Would the UK have representatives from Labour, Conservative and Liberal-Democrat parties? (and other ones, what other ones?)

Umm, are you going to present any hard evidence instead of just claiming "I have this feeling"?

And id say that you would have much bigger control over internal EU matters unlike with US ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should go for it. Most of the fears that the British population have had fed to them by the Sun, ect, are total.....uneducated snap judgements.

Of course making an USE would not be as easy as forming the USA. We have a longer history,each country doestn want to loose that history, we all speak different languages, ect.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before hitting on the german economy. Please dont forget that we are a tremendous contributor to european subsidies. Dont even dare to compare the industrial growth of spain, greece, portugal and ireland with that of germany. They are given billions we are contributing billions. At the same time we have a home-made problem. Since the 1990ies East germany consumed more than 1000 billion EXTRA funds and it hasnt had any success so far. For a fair comparison that must be taken into consideration. Our paying obligations go so far that 40% of the subsidies of spain come from germany. Just imagine those 40% would remain in germany?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Becoming a single country, thats what i'm worried about. I don't want to get ruled by the French, Germans or Belgiums.

Nope. You'll be ruling Frnace, Germany and Belgium. Is that so bad?  blues.gif

It's typical empty rethorics. Define "ruled by". Who are you ruled by now? Last I checked the European Union was noot the "Franco-German-Beligian Union Conspiracy to Subdue The Poor British". You'll be part of a larger group yes but you will also have power there. I can understand some scepticism coming from smaller countries. But please, Britian is one of the largest countries meaning that you will have very much influence. And this time your influence won't just be restricted to your little island, but to the whole of Europe.

Your ancestors understood that perfectly when they went around occupying France et al. It's just now that we do it in  a fair peaceful way.

The president wont be English. More then likely from Belgium. I know its not a conspiracy (would we know its a conspiracy if its a conspiracy, as conspiracies are usually private and classified) but there the main groups. Would the UK have representatives from Labour, Conservative and Liberal-Democrat parties? (and other ones, what other ones?)

Umm, are you going to present any hard evidence instead of just claiming "I have this feeling"?

And id say that you would have much bigger control over internal EU matters unlike with US ones.

Feeling? feeling of what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Belgium : a tiny speck on the map, and we would rule over the UK? lol  biggrin_o.gif
Quote[/b] ]Becoming a single country, thats what i'm worried about. I don't want to get ruled by the French, Germans or Belgiums.

How things have changed?

Collapse of League of Nations (possibly more then 60 years ago, i'm not and historian)

WW2

War in Balkans

Terroism

anything else?

League of nations was a weak organisation,the eu is a streamlined, more effective evolution of it.

WW2 : inevitable with the pressure put on germany by the WW1 victors

War in Balkans : century old ethnic pressure

Terrorism : so this is all the fault of the eu?  rock.gif

ps : Belgians, we don't go off calling you Englanders either   biggrin_o.gif

I didn't know what the actual nationnality was, sorry if it caused offence mate, no harm meant. I'm not blaming terroism on the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a European Dutchman I say this to the British people:

"Resistance is futile!"

Some day the EU constitution will be complete and implemented in every EU country. With this we can have a centralized government.

Sadly, only few countries think "integral" about how the EU centralized government should be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several Britons here have mentioned how they do not wish to be ruled by Germany and France and how the EU is dominated by those two.

I'd like to give a counter example where the British will was enforced over the will of most other EU countries.

Cyprus. I'm not sure if you are familiar with the situation but there is one Greek part of the island and one Turkish. The island used to be under British rule and is still quite 'Britified'. Big parts of the island are owned by British citizens. Cyprus wanted to join the EU (Greek part). The EU mostly agreed and said: sure, fix your internal problems, re-unify with the Turkish part and you're most welcome. Britain said no and insisted that a unification was not necessary for an EU entry. And Britain managed to enforce its will. Cyprus is now joining the EU on May 1st, without having solved their territorial problems.

And this is a victory for Britain because of its national interest in Cyprus. It's not a victory for France and Germany, who wanted the territorial problems solved first.

I can easily give you a number of other examples that show that it is not at all clear which side is the dominant one within the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is what I meant! happened on Friday!

BBC UK (daily telegrap owner: "all germans are nazis"

Nazi jibes, goose-steps and foul abuse: Desmond addresses 'Telegraph' chiefs

or try this one The independant

DER SPIEGEL (for the german readers)

There is 2 points I get out of this:

1. This guy is an influential manager. Still, when it comes to germany he looses his objectivity and judges with ugly ´prejudice.

2. It doesnt need the EURO for german companies to buy up british companies. This is a misconception of "without the euro we are safe from foreign attacks". Britain isn't safe and without the Euro they will not too soon see more takeovers. But I dont see takeovers as negative (the british do) or national war. The british however do. But fact is a hostile takeover works in accord with the shareholders to increase shareholder value. In other words a british owner of a share must say "yes" in order to let a german company buy the british. National Pride should Play NO rule here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rock.gif Obviously the guy lost his marbles or was stoned or something. That is not sane behaviour even for a person suffering from germanophobia. Anyway, really not funny...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2. It doesnt need the EURO for german companies to buy up british companies. This is a misconception of "without the euro we are safe from foreign attacks". Britain isn't safe and without the Euro they will not too soon see more takeovers. But I dont see takeovers as negative (the british do) or national war. The british however do. But fact is a hostile takeover works in accord with the shareholders to increase shareholder value. In other words a british owner of a share must say "yes" in order to let a german company buy the british. National Pride should Play NO rule here.

vodafone bought mannesmann, a british company bought a german one. not the other way around. and we're still alive... blues.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which was the only right step to take by Esser (former CEO). Of course in germany we had the same bullshit about "Mr Esser, you started the battle against vodafone and they won it, you destroyed a german company". Lots of people declared Esser as a irresponsible manager and incompetent as well. FACT is he heavily increased shareholder value and sorry to say this, he respected nd succeeded in the first and utmost priority of a company: "consistent capital gains". He got himself a golden parachute of 60 million, happy man with happy shareholders, and anoyed patriots.

On the other hand the celebration of vodafone to have "beaten" a german company! Nonesense, now vodafone (having inhaled mannesmann shares) is partly german (if the shareholders are actually german ?!   wink_o.gif ) Well you see, this industrial pride is nonesense for public companies! It would just be too confusing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@ April 20 2004,21:00)]Voted no. They should tow their land beside US and live with them happily ever after.

Aren't they still a part of the US? wink_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem lies within other countries not quite getting the humour we british use.

However, i do not stand for racist comments of any sort, even if it is accidental. Mainly because alot of my old mates are dual heritage. plus most dual heritage persons are better at maths than the rest of us.

Also, i find it quite interesting to note that most of the people for this idea of Britain inheritaing the Euro, etc, are actually from other countries. Whereas most against are UK Residents are former UK-Residents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me is UK something like USA mad_o.gif

those comments arent fair... we arent all in favour of these actions regarding Bush, and yet we all get roped into it... I personally dont want anything to do with Bush, but our oh-so wise primeminister Blaire is taking us for a ride, but i digress from the original topic

im not too fussed about europe, but I would rather keep out Pounds instead of Euros... most likely down to national pride (dont tell me any of you who currently use the Euro wanted to keep their original currency, at first atleast)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me is UK something like USA mad_o.gif

those comments arent fair... we arent all in favour of these actions regarding Bush, and yet we all get roped into it... I personally dont want anything to do with Bush, but our oh-so wise primeminister Blaire is taking us for a ride, but i digress from the original topic

im not too fussed about europe, but I would rather keep out Pounds instead of Euros... most likely down to national pride (dont tell me any of you who currently use the Euro wanted to keep their original currency, at first atleast)

I agree with you. this comment wasnt an argument it was meant to make a clear and unfair statement! sad_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, i find it quite interesting to note that most of the people for this idea of Britain inheritaing the Euro, etc, are actually from other countries.

Well, it's not so strange. This is not because of any interest in British economics, but because of the belief in that the EU should represent all European countries. Furthermore, Britain is currently, with its hesitation and objections, sabotaging for other EU countries. Many European states want to work closer together but can't because the entire EU has to move at the pace of its slowest member. So it's not about what benefits the Euro etc would have for Britain, but how British reluctance creates problems for other member states.

The constitution is a typical such example. It is one of the core problems with the EU - that everybody has a veto right. For a historical reference of how badly that works, you should check out the old polish parliament that paralyzed the country for several centuries. The basic principle there was that every nobleman that was sitting in the parliament had a veto right. If there was less than 100% agreement then a law would not pass. This created huge problems as it was more or less imposible to pass new laws.

And that's what the EU is facing now. What is proposed in the constitution is a double majority (at least half of the countries AND half of the EU citizens (through representation) must agree. Hopefully it will be more efficient. The question now if the UK will block the constitution or not. Things aren't looking that bright right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

denoir is right.

Veto is the worest thing - vide UN. Nothing can be done becasue one doesn't like it, no matter if it is right or not.

We really should learn from history, and Poland is sad but very good example.

PS.

But for "librum veto", he today prolly be polish citizen ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is so strange about it?"

May I assume you consider our PRO-UK-EURO attitude as a hostile trap rather than a friendly invitation! In that case you would proof my first statement as valid! wink_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Albert Schweizer-

Quote[/b] ]That is what I meant! happened on Friday!

I see how this relates to your previous assertions but i can scarcely see how it is particularly relevant. His views are not exactly supported by the whole country ,apart from the fact that much of what he said was very likely some superficial bravado aimed at causing offense for his own reasons rather than a true deeply held belief (usually the case in my experience when brits say such things 'all germans are nazis etc). And yet in fact there seem to be a fair number of continental europeans who do have deeply held beliefs that 'the British are this, the British are that' .

Denoir

Quote[/b] ]The question now if the UK will block the constitution or not.

Analysis: Referendums On EU Constitution Could Prove Tricky

Quote[/b] ]Of the current EU members, Britain, Denmark, Ireland, and Luxembourg have already decided to hold referendums.

There are three countries in which a decision on a referendum has not yet been made, but which appear set to give the people a say on the constitutional charter: the Netherlands, where a referendum would be purely consultative and not binding for the government, and, among the new EU members, Poland and Latvia.

Although Estonia has not adopted any official position thus far, it may possibly join the countries holding referendums -- but only if a parliamentary majority decides to do so.

The group of countries that have not yet decided whether to put the EU's new basic law to popular vote or not include Austria, France, Portugal, and Spain among the old members, and the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, and Slovenia among the new.

Many Western European newspaper commentators agree that Blair's decision in favor of the referendum has drastically increased the pressure on French President Jacques Chirac to do the same. Other leaders, like Austria's Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel, have said they prefer "the right moment" to decide on the EU constitution.

In the Czech Republic, a public debate on a possible referendum on the EU constitution ended without result. Hungary, Slovakia, and Slovenia are also still undecided on how to ratify the union's future constitution. In 10 countries -- Belgium, Germany, Greece, Italy, Finland, and Sweden of the current members, and Cyprus, Estonia, Lithuania, and Malta of the new -- it will be up to the parliament to ratify the constitution. Despite traditional reservations about plebiscites, some smaller German parties have already signaled that they would prefer the people to ratify the constitution rather than the parliament. However, the alliance of such divergent parties as the governing Green Party and Bavaria's ruling Christian Social Union is unlikely to succeed in convincing the vast majority of German politicians to let the people have a say.

Rather, the question is whether all of a number of european countries will ratify the constitution or not. Britain is one among many. In each country with concerns the debate is likely to focus on a different issue. The Netherlands i understand to be concerned with EU deficit regulations and France and Germanys recent willful scuppering of them when they no longer felt like obeying them. In Britain the debate will likely focus on the extent of sovereignty to be maintained by nation states which may indeed make it the most 'Euro-cautious' of national debates but practically will nonetheless be only one of other such debates throughout europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to say:Uk politic is more with USA,not so much with EU,so I think UK is not belong into EU smile_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rather, the question is whether all of a number of european countries will ratify the constitution or not. Britain is one among many. In each country with concerns the debate is likely to focus on a different issue. The Netherlands i understand to be concerned with EU deficit regulations and France and Germanys recent willful scuppering of them when they no longer felt like obeying them. In Britain the debate will likely focus on the extent of sovereignty to be maintained by nation states which may indeed make it the most 'Euro-cautious' of national debates but practically will nonetheless be only one of other such debates throughout europe.

Sure, but the UK, and possibly Denmark are the only ones that are in the danger zone of saying no. In Denmark support is about 50% and in the UK 25% (for the constitution). So it is very reasonable to single out the UK as the most probably cause for a potential failure.

But, as I posted before, a no to the constitution is shooting yourself in the foot. In practice it will mean that they will have to go to plan B as the current Nice treaty is not capable of handling the expanded EU and would paralyze the entire union. So the effect will be that the EU will be divieded into two leagues, one for more willing nations and one for more sceptic ones. Two constitutions will be written, each of them acceptable to their target league. The more willing countries will as an effect be defining the future of the EU, which is actually a dream come true for the federalists. Everybody knows that if nothing else economic factors dictate that the UK and other more sceptical countries will have to take the full step one day. And by then the terms will be as defined as those that first took the steps. In practice, saying no to this constitution that you have been a part of writing is in the future saying yes to a constitution written by others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×