Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Professor T

The EU is on the blitz against Eurosceptics.

166 posts in this topic

No, france & Germany wouldn't want to pull out, would they, (or their governments wouldn't, and their Business leaders, which is not necessarily the same as how the general population feel), since the EU is designed to serve the interests of the Big Powerful countries that are at the heart of the European Project. One way in which it does that is by extorting the less wealthy countries. I don't know what Publick opinion in France & Germany may feel about the European Superstate Project, but according to what was said above not even everyone there seems overwhelmingly enthusiastic.

Extorting the less wealthy countries?? I'm sure I read somewhere in previous posts that the British were unhappy about having to tag along the poorer EU members. Now you're saying they're being extorted. :unsure2: Maybe all the euroskeptics should get together and decide what their real beef with the EU is before they start bagging it. Just for consistency.

Edited by BlackRedLittleDevil
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There real beef is that its Johnny Foreigner telling us what to do :lol:

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extorting the less wealthy countries?? I'm sure I read somewhere in previous posts that the British were unhappy about having to tag along the poorer EU members. Now you're saying they're being extorted. :unsure2: Maybe all the euroskeptics should get together and decide what their real beef with the EU is before they start bagging it. Just for consistency.

The poorer states are in it for one reason only Bruce,and thats to see how much Money they can grab out of it.END OF STORY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The poorer states are in it for one reason only Bruce,and thats to see how much Money they can grab out of it.END OF STORY.

I thought it was to access a large trading block without tariffs.

The structural aid is there to ensure that all members are on a level playing field and achieve the best economic productivity such that they become net contributors. That's what happens to all periphery states - they improve their economy and become net contributors.

The EU is not a charity - it is a very hard headed business arrangement and all members understand the deal (though it seems some of our members here don't).

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after Brs history lesson, he fails to mention that the UK joined the EEC for trade and then benefits of that trade, from Britain joining the EEC to modern day the world has changed, the EU is so far removed from the what the EEC was. we went from trade and co-operation to the current situation where we are hamstrung by EU legislation, which is implemented even if its not in our interest. when you have the modern day EU forbidding the UK the worlds fifth largest economy in the world from striking its own trade deals, then we are limiting ourselves. The EU effects our everyday lives, from how our mail is delivered, to bin/rubbish collections. and that shows you just how intrusive it is.

To say the EU has kept peace in europe is laughable, and not even the mention of thousands of American troops stationed in europe. and the fact both the UK and France both gaining Nuclear weapons. - helped keep a lid on things'

the europhiles fail to mention their epic error of judgement which they gloss over, just remember this, the europhiles on here wanted to the UK to ditch the pound sterling and join the euro currency, - its now a known fact that if the UK had ditched the pound we'd have been in a depression for the last six years and on par with the Greek economy. so just bear that in mind when they spout their pro EU rubbish - just think of the massive error of judgment and the situation we'd find ourselves in to day if we'd have gone along with them. their argument was Britain needed to join the Euro, just like their argument is today we need to remain EU members.

Truth is the UK can and should go it alone, lets prove once again, they were wrong about us joining the Euro. and they will once again be proven wrong if we leave the EU. the only thing to fear is fear alone.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extorting the less wealthy countries?? I'm sure I read somewhere in previous posts that the British were unhappy about having to tag along the poorer EU members. Now you're saying they're being extorted. :unsure2: Maybe all the euroskeptics should get together and decide what their real beef with the EU is before they start bagging it. Just for consistency.

What the heck would you call the EU telling Greece (for instance) that they'll have to make enormous cuts in public services or they won't get the bailout from the EU that they need to stop their economy collapsing? Doesn't that sound like extortion to you? And yes, that's what the Whinging is about; the amount that's poured into the EU parliament and the EU Central Bank in order for them to be able to extort others. You don't really think that the European parliament and the European Central Bank exist purely out of an altruistic desire to help those in countries that are less fortunate, do you? Like all Banks, they exist to make themselves even richer through extortion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was to access a large trading block without tariffs.

The structural aid is there to ensure that all members are on a level playing field and achieve the best economic productivity such that they become net contributors. That's what happens to all periphery states - they improve their economy and become net contributors.

They joined because they thought that they could milk the European Central Bank for enormous handouts, which is why there's still a queue of Eastern European countries that are still gullible enough to think the same thing.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To say the EU has kept peace in europe is laughable, and not even the mention of thousands of American troops stationed in europe. and the fact both the UK and France both gaining Nuclear weapons. - helped keep a lid on things'

the EU could surely only possibly argue that for the 20 years since 1990, since before that it was the US & NATO on one side and the Warsaw Pact on the other, and the EU was frankly pretty irrelevant in the middle, certainly from a military point of view. Of course, after 1990, true, peace reigned everywhere in Europe.

... er, don't mention Yugoslavia, anyone .... :unsure2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the heck would you call the EU telling Greece (for instance) that they'll have to make enormous cuts in public services or they won't get the bailout from the EU that they need to stop their economy collapsing? Doesn't that sound like extortion to you? And yes, that's what the Whinging is about; the amount that's poured into the EU parliament and the EU Central Bank in order for them to be able to extort others. You don't really think that the European parliament and the European Central Bank exist purely out of an altruistic desire to help those in countries that are less fortunate, do you? Like all Banks, they exist to make themselves even richer through extortion.

So you think that Greece and Portugal and the other PIIG countries would be better off outside of the EU. The evidence of history is that they would have collapsed their economies long ago and would have entered another period of military dictatorship. They would only have been able to access World Bank finance (which has always come with more stringent structural adjustment criteria). The thing you overlook is that the current crisis was precipitated by an external factor over which the EU had almost no control. It would have destroyed the basket case economies whether they were in or out of the EU, but it would have inevitably ended in a far worse political outcome in those countries.

The fact is that Greece is a country which has never had a viable economy because they accept endemic corruption, the EU has told them to grow up and act like a real European country.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They joined because they thought that they could milk the European Central Bank for enormous handouts, which is why there's still a queue of Eastern European countries that are still gullible enough to think the same thing.

They have joined because they see the benefit it has brought to the countries who have already joined. Structural adjustment acts like a long term loan - that is all and everyone understands the deal.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the EU could surely only possibly argue that for the 20 years since 1990, since before that it was the US & NATO on one side and the Warsaw Pact on the other, and the EU was frankly pretty irrelevant in the middle, certainly from a military point of view. Of course, after 1990, true, peace reigned everywhere in Europe.

... er, don't mention Yugoslavia, anyone .... :unsure2:

Name me a time in which the three key countries of Britain, France and Germany have been at peace for so long ?

Yugoslavia can hardly be blamed on anyone else other than the Soviet Union - of which it was a satellite nation. It was not within the remit of the EU to intervene in a sovereign nation outside of the EU.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after Brs history lesson, he fails to mention that the UK joined the EEC for trade and then benefits of that trade, from Britain joining the EEC to modern day the world has changed, the EU is so far removed from the what the EEC was. we went from trade and co-operation to the current situation where we are hamstrung by EU legislation, which is implemented even if its not in our interest. when you have the modern day EU forbidding the UK the worlds fifth largest economy in the world from striking its own trade deals, then we are limiting ourselves. The EU effects our everyday lives, from how our mail is delivered, to bin/rubbish collections. and that shows you just how intrusive it is.

To say the EU has kept peace in europe is laughable, and not even the mention of thousands of American troops stationed in europe. and the fact both the UK and France both gaining Nuclear weapons. - helped keep a lid on things'

the europhiles fail to mention their epic error of judgement which they gloss over, just remember this, the europhiles on here wanted to the UK to ditch the pound sterling and join the euro currency, - its now a known fact that if the UK had ditched the pound we'd have been in a depression for the last six years and on par with the Greek economy. so just bear that in mind when they spout their pro EU rubbish - just think of the massive error of judgment and the situation we'd find ourselves in to day if we'd have gone along with them. their argument was Britain needed to join the Euro, just like their argument is today we need to remain EU members.

Truth is the UK can and should go it alone, lets prove once again, they were wrong about us joining the Euro. and they will once again be proven wrong if we leave the EU. the only thing to fear is fear alone.

The nature and intent of the EEC would have been more than clear at the time of joining, and the various accords where certainly a clear indication of what was required of a member state upon joining. The EEC was never just a trading block and if you actually read about its history at that stage you would realize you are been more than a little naive.

I have addressed your frankly laugable statement about peace in Europe elsewhere. The primary stated objective of the EEC was to make a European general conflict impossible by fostering transnational cooperation between the states and a means of resolving disputes in a fair and equitable manner. Any objective analysis would show that it has achieved its primary central objective admirably.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The poorer states are in it for one reason only Bruce,and thats to see how much Money they can grab out of it.END OF STORY.

Really Bob?? I suppose I'll have to take your word for it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the heck would you call the EU telling Greece (for instance) that they'll have to make enormous cuts in public services or they won't get the bailout from the EU that they need to stop their economy collapsing? Doesn't that sound like extortion to you? And yes, that's what the Whinging is about; the amount that's poured into the EU parliament and the EU Central Bank in order for them to be able to extort others. You don't really think that the European parliament and the European Central Bank exist purely out of an altruistic desire to help those in countries that are less fortunate, do you? Like all Banks, they exist to make themselves even richer through extortion.

So, the beef is with the Banks. If the ECB is doing what Banks do, extort people, the problem isn't the EU but the Banking system.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the EU could surely only possibly argue that for the 20 years since 1990, since before that it was the US & NATO on one side and the Warsaw Pact on the other, and the EU was frankly pretty irrelevant in the middle, certainly from a military point of view. Of course, after 1990, true, peace reigned everywhere in Europe.

... er, don't mention Yugoslavia, anyone .... :unsure2:

EU in the middle of NATO/US and the Warsaw Pact??!! LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nature and intent of the EEC would have been more than clear at the time of joining, and the various accords where certainly a clear indication of what was required of a member state upon joining. The EEC was never just a trading block and if you actually read about its history at that stage you would realize you are been more than a little naive.

I have addressed your frankly laugable statement about peace in Europe elsewhere. The primary stated objective of the EEC was to make a European general conflict impossible by fostering transnational cooperation between the states and a means of resolving disputes in a fair and equitable manner. Any objective analysis would show that it has achieved its primary central objective admirably.

Br Cornelius

Still no acknowledgment of the thousands of US troops and armament of the UK & France with nuclear deterrents / NATO for keeping peace. and no mention of the error in judgment, for the UK to ditch the pound in favour of joining the euro currency. typical. :td: and you have the cheek to say others wear rose tinted glasses. :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still no acknowledgment of the thousands of US troops and armament of the UK & France with nuclear deterrents / NATO for keeping peace. and no mention of the error in judgment, for the UK to ditch the pound in favour of joining the euro currency. typical. :td: and you have the cheek to say others wear rose tinted glasses. :no:

NATO was there to defend Europe against foreign invasion - it never had any remit to intervene inside of Europe which makes your point rather irrelevant. Nuclear deterents apply to a small proportion of the countries of the EU and wouild never have been invoked to settle minor disputes between waring countries.

Stirling and the British economy is in as bad a way as the Euro so I do not see that staying out of the EURO zone has done Britain to many favours.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NATO was there to defend Europe against foreign invasion - it never had any remit to intervene inside of Europe which makes your point rather irrelevant. Nuclear deterents apply to a small proportion of the countries of the EU and wouild never have been invoked to settle minor disputes between waring countries.

Stirling and the British economy is in as bad a way as the Euro so I do not see that staying out of the EURO zone has done Britain to many favours.

Br Cornelius

still, you dont give credit where credit is due, and how you can say NATO didnt play apart in peace in europe is beyond me. how many european countries are members of NATO. this fact alone would help keep the peace. - am surprised you said NATO was there to defend against Russia, surprised you have credited that to the EU along with everything else.

Has for the UK and Euro, its a fact, if the UK had joined the Euro we'd be in a worse state. in short it would have been a disaster and we'd have been in a recession for the last six years. we'd have been the same as Greece. Nick Clegg even admitted this, and this from a politician and former MEP is pro EU in the fullest. and was in favour of us joining the Euro, along with the Liberal Democrats. so we avoided a Greece style disaster by staying out of the euro and keeping the pound. whose to say we wont be averting another similar - future disaster by leaving the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EU in the middle of NATO/US and the Warsaw Pact??!! LOL

that's correct, yes, look at a map. To the left: the US, Canada & the countries in Western Europe that were part of NATO. To the right: The Warsaw Pact. In the middle, and militarily irrelevant, the EU. LOL why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There real beef is that its Johnny Foreigner telling us what to do :lol:

Br Cornelius

If by that you mean a lack of any true democracy then yes. The very same lack of democracy that made your countrymen vote twice until the right decision (for the EU) was reached.

Edited by itsnotoutthere
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Name me a time in which the three key countries of Britain, France and Germany have been at peace for so long ?

Yugoslavia can hardly be blamed on anyone else other than the Soviet Union - of which it was a satellite nation. It was not within the remit of the EU to intervene in a sovereign nation outside of the EU.

Br Cornelius

Since 1948, but that was nothing to do with the EU, it was because of NATO and the Warsaw Pact to provide a balance of power. After the Warsaw Pact collapsed, the EU wasn't able to do anything at all to prevent the civil wars in Yugoslavia, was it, and similarly it can do nothing about the threat from Terrorism. So its argument that it's kept the peace in Europe for 60 years is irrelevant, because that was nothing to do with the EU and those threats to Peace that have occurred, it's been able to nothing about.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since 1948, but that was nothing to do with the EU, it was because of NATO and the Warsaw Pact to provide a balance of power. After the Warsaw Pact collapsed, the EU wasn't able to do anything at all to prevent the civil wars in Yugoslavia, was it, and similarly it can do nothing about the threat from Terrorism. So its argument that it's kept the peace in Europe for 60 years is irrelevant, because that was nothing to do with the EU and those threats to Peace that have occurred, it's been able to nothing about.

Unfortunately I do not accept any of you statements as fair reflections of the facts. The EU played a significant and dominant part in maintaining peace across Europe but had no democratic remit to intervene in the sovereign states of former Yugoslavia. Would you have had the EU invade Yugoslavia ?? I am certain you would not.

The EU has a remit to regulate trade and disputes between its member states, and it has done so admirably. It has created a fair and equitable system of justice which is binding on all member states and which prevents illegal exploitation of a weaker state by a stronger one.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If by that you mean a lack of any true democracy then yes. The very same lack of democracy that made your countrymen vote twice until the right decision (for the EU) was reached.

The EU is no more or less democratic than the UK government.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nature and intent of the EEC would have been more than clear at the time of joining, and the various accords where certainly a clear indication of what was required of a member state upon joining. The EEC was never just a trading block and if you actually read about its history at that stage you would realize you are been more than a little naive.

I have addressed your frankly laugable statement about peace in Europe elsewhere. The primary stated objective of the EEC was to make a European general conflict impossible by fostering transnational cooperation between the states and a means of resolving disputes in a fair and equitable manner. Any objective analysis would show that it has achieved its primary central objective admirably.

Br Cornelius

You really don't see that the primary stated objective of the EEC, set out, presumably, in its Holy Book {as it really does seem to be viewed with almost religious fervour by those who admire it}, to make a European general conflict impossible by fostering transnational cooperation between the states and a means of resolving disputes in a fair and equitable manner, really was completely a load of meaningless flannel, as with the geopolitical situation after 1945 that idea, that Europe would go back to fighting among themselves, was now obsolete now that the balance of power was between NATO and the Warsaw Pact? The EU is congratulatuing itself on achieving something that was pretty much meaningless. They might as well say that they've prevented a recurrence of the religious conflicts that were caused by the Reformation. And besies, they didn't, did they? They didn't make a European conflict impossible, because they had no power at all over Yugoslavia. To congratulate themselves that they'd "prevented conflict in Europe", by which they meant that they'd stopped France & Germany from going to war again, while looking the other way from Yugoslavia and saying "nothing to do with us" is frankly very, very hypocritical. If anyone's statement is frankly laughable it's the self-congratulation of the EU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU is no more or less democratic than the UK government.

Br Cornelius

Except of course we do get a chance to vote them out every five years (not that theres much between them these days).

(p.s. you've used the term 'johnny foreigner' twice now & to be honest it's starting to sound a bit racist)

Edited by itsnotoutthere
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.