Jump to content

Will the EU survive.


spasor

Recommended Posts

Rather than wade through pages of war chat, I thought I`d pose this question.

As France, Jermany and Belgium are opposed to war with Sadaam. Most of the other Euro states are in favour. A few are as yet undecided? I think that`s a fair statement of the status quo?

What will happen if the USA, Britain, Spain, Italy, Holland, Portugal decide that France and Jermany should no longer be the heart of Europe?

Would the French decide to keep their mouths shut in future? (After all. They`ve ignored every EU decision that`s gone against them) Or would they cite the UK as being war mongers whilst sucking up to Jermany?

It would appear that France is ready in commercial terms to `Step In`!! Whilst still in default of payments to Afghanistan!!

Whether you`re pro or against bombing Iraq.

The `Anti Euro Nations` or not thinking of collateral damage. More about future commercial interests? And yes. The USA has got them all beat! The US will be in Iraq long after the French have called foul over rebuilding contracts!!

Maybe the European Union will have a different shape?

Paul.

We don`t use J`s anymore!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 21
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The U.S.A. are doing themselves no favours by coming across as playground bullies. The fact that they have already decided how they are going to run Iraq after an invasion shows either a complete lack of diplomatic skills, or unbelievable arrogance. It is as if they are almost provoking free thinking countries such as France and Germany to oppose them. The manner in which they have approached the whole situation has been guaranteed to provoke hostility among most Europeans, forcing their governments to react to the will of the people. The British government seems to have taken the stance that there are very good reasons for going to war, but the British public are either too stupid or unsophisticated to be trusted with the knowledge that only they are allowed to know. The whole episode has been handled with incredible ineptitude by the Americans, and the British government should be ashamed of themselves for going along with President Bush's re-election campaign. There may be perfectly valid reasons for going to war with Saddam, but I certainly do not trust either Bush or Blair to tell me what they are. I certainly can't blame the French or Germans for refusing to be steamrollered by the western warmongers. They are almost duty bound to take an opposite viewpoint when faced by the arrogant bullying of the U.S. It is about time they realised that they will not be accepted as the World Police that they seem to have set themselves up as.

English as tuppence, changing yet changeless as canal water, nestling in green nowhere, armoured and effete, bold flag-bearer, lotus-fed Miss Havishambling, opsimath and eremite, feudal, still reactionary, Rawlinson End.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter - let me pose you a couple of questions then. First a little preface.

 

I have no idea if the US was ever generally liked by other nations. Nor do I think it matters since in the end, a nation has to look after it's own self-interest so "liking" or "not liking" another nation has about the same value as a bucket of warm spit.

 

But I do know that for a long period, we were neither respected nor feared. And quite frankly, the combination of not liked, not respected, not feared strikes me as a bad threesome.

 

Now the questions:

 

. Using your fairly simple classification scheme and allowing for the sake of discussion that we are "bullies", I can only see three options. Bully, neutral, bullied. Since I doubt any nation that doesn't rely heavily on others for most of it's essential goods will behave so as to be considered neutral, better bully or bullied?

 

. You say we are doing ourselves no favors as "playground bullies". Maybe. But I don't see we are doing ourselves any serious harm either. After all, the main downside to being a playground bully is if the teachers punish you for it. And the "teachers" in this case would be who? But my assessment of the situation is that SH is doing more of the playground bully role and even if he wouldn't benefit by being brought up short, the others on the playground probably would.

 

. "I certainly can't blame the French or Germans for refusing to be steamrollered by the western warmongers." When has France ever resisted being steamrollered by anyone they thought was dangerous? Seems they are only willing to resist their allies or nations they trust to show some restraint.

 

Maybe you don't care about the fate and direction of the European Union. I had no idea before you posted and even less now. But don't you think a serious topic and one that will certainly affect the UK might be better served by reasoned discussion than by just throwing in catchy names like Bully, Warmonger, etc.? There was some meaning in parts of your post but it may well have gotten lost in all the rhetoric.

 

.

" My choices in life were either to be a piano player in a whore house or a politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference!" - Harry Truman, 33rd US President

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that our respective governments do not tell us all that they know of any threats to us (and I'm sure they won't). I wouldn't want to be standing in the way of all the people who demanded to know everything, and when told everything developed the headless chicken syndrome rushing down to their nearest army surplus stores to stock up on Atropin tablets......I didn't vote for Tony Blair, I don't like his politics but I do trust the man to do what is best for me and my family.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Geoff Carlin

To get my tuppence worth in .... I think America has taken her off the ball in this drive to revenge the 911 atrocities by attacking Iraq. When the gloss of justified war is removed from pro-war arguments the patina of vengeance is revealed.

 

There is the very worrying scenario of a North Korean attack, possibly nuclear, while America is diverted in turning Iraq into a "parking lot", with Japan, South Korea and the West Coast of America being probable targets, with the main restraining influence on the North Koreans, China, being paralysed by internal strife. Bush did refer to North Korea as being part of "the axis of evil" and thus put the country on the hit list. I do not think the North Koreans will wait to be attacked. China changes her leadership this fortnight against a background of social turmoil and revolution and chaos could easily occur if Hu Jintao cannot wield his authority and keep control. The timing is unfortunate given the timetable of a likely American attack on Iraq.

 

If I were Bush I would would leave Saddam to suffer wearing down and extinction by slow paralysis through years of interminable UN weapons inspections and UN sanctions, and immediately turn to North Korea offering them recognition (by direct talks), immediate food and energy aid and reassurance that the US respects their existence in the comity of nations. Give them face if you like.

 

Two fronts are secured, the hydra of International Terrorism can be addressed, over the next 15 to 100 years (estimates vary over how long bin Laden's attempted jihad can be sustained) and a likely exchange of nuclear weapons avoided.

 

I am very pessimistic, however, and think we are heading for serious regional conflicts in the Middle East and the Far East which could largely be avoided by patient sustained diplomacy over years. There will eventually be major political casualties as a result of all this but one cannot vote away the ashes of nations or undo the atrocity which has occurred in a city near you.

My hero at the moment is Chirac, for his calls for restraint and his ground breaking visit to Algeria. Elements of the UK media have portrayed Chirac as a worm, they forget his military career in the French Forces in Algeria. I think what he witnessed then, as a loyal French officer, has shaped a very mature view and opinion of when a war is actually essential. I wish the other Western leaders would listen to him.

Geoff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What will happen if the USA, Britain, Spain, Italy, Holland, Portugal decide that France and Jermany should no longer be the heart of Europe?

 

It seems as if this has already started. The US is looking at a concept of housing troops in W. Europe, to countries in E. Europe like the Czech Republic, Bulgaria and Poland. The reason? To make troop movement faster and easier. Now I don’t know what the actual motive is here as with just about anything else having to do with Iraq, Germany, France, and the U.S.

 

What I think it has to do with is funding, maybe a way to save money, maybe a way to punish countries that oppose the war on Iraq, or maybe a way to make troop movement faster and easier. I don’t know. One thing for certain is that the government in the US takes it’s time unless it is has to do with something that interferes with it’s own agenda. I think that this war will be over by the time that this comes about. I also think that France and Germany will “suddenly” change their minds about opposing and reluctantly submit to war in Iraq because they don’t want to be left out when the spoils are divided. (if you want to call it that).

 

The British government seems to have taken the stance that there are very good reasons for going to war, but the British public are either too stupid or unsophisticated to be trusted with the knowledge that only they are allowed to know.

 

It’s not just the UK it’s the US as well. I think it is all about money. Not WMD, not illegal missiles, and not terrorism. These reasons could be and are very good reasons for war. If it’s not about these reasons why not tell us? If you oppose SH in Iraq then you are dead. War crimes? Very likely. The world would be a better place without him. Nickinthenorth said in a post that Iraq has had 14 years to disarm and what 17 different resolutions? It’s time to do something. Talking has obviously gotten us nowhere.

 

The fact that they have already decided how they are going to run Iraq after an invasion shows either a complete lack of diplomatic skills, or unbelievable arrogance.

 

 

Call it arrogance then. The spoils? I believe that once it starts Germany, France, China (well maybe not China) and Russia will step up. Will they offer assistance after? Doubt it. It will be left to the US, UK and OZ to oversee. There was a proposal on the news last night on how to handle Iraq after the war. From what I have seen, when the US interferes for whatever reason, they usually try to pave the way for democracy. Then stand back and watch offering assistance when needed.

Jeff

 

Piscator non solum piscatur.

 

Yellow Prowler13

2274389822_1033c38a0e_s.jpg

Ask me at 75...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people predicted that America would be dragged into extreme, right-wing militarism as sonn as Bush was elected. (Sorry, elected probably isn't the most accurate word to use).

The most sorry consequence is that Tony Blair, in his quest to barge onto the international stage, is supporting policies direct opposite to those he personally advocates as being the correct way to proceed in Northern Ireland.

It is difficult to imagine Bill Clinton being hoodwinked by the power crazed military in the same way as Bush.

English as tuppence, changing yet changeless as canal water, nestling in green nowhere, armoured and effete, bold flag-bearer, lotus-fed Miss Havishambling, opsimath and eremite, feudal, still reactionary, Rawlinson End.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Geoff the Cod

 

If I were Bush I would would leave Saddam to suffer wearing down and extinction by slow paralysis through years of interminable UN weapons inspections and UN sanctions, and immediately turn to North Korea offering them recognition (by direct talks), immediate food and energy aid and reassurance that the US respects their existence in the comity of nations. Give them face if you like.


If I were Bush I would nuke them off the face of the earth at the first opportunity. They are much more dangerous than Iraq IMHO.

 

Corydoras

The problem isn't what people don't know, it's what they know that just ain't so.
Vaut mieux ne rien dire et passer pour un con que de parler et prouver que t'en est un!
Mi, ch’fais toudis à m’mote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.