My first peek into the European Parliament

[Guest]

 

[Starblayde]

It's weird.

One guy from France (there seemed to be different political groups being represented within the member nations) even said the EU was dead, NATO was dead and long live France!

For some reason we elect MEPs (Members of European Parliament) who do very little (except fucking up the laws for the rest of us). So Britain sends Labour and Conservative and a few other MEPs to the European Hot-Air shop... er I mean Parliament

 

[Guest]

 

[Starblayde]

Star, can you tell what's meant by "John Q, speaking for the (pick three initials)" means?

Are these political parties being represented within each country?

Uhhh sometimes... I would think it would be political parties, but the only one i can think of is the SNP, the Scottish National Party.

 

[bluespoke]

It is a strange place. Each member country sends represented by a cross section of their own political parties, thus the differning opinions.

It's preoccupation with the US is a temporary thing, at least it's stops them from insisting on straight bananas and other trivia!

They are a odd bunch Euro MPs, with little apparent relevance to the ordinary voter.

Morning Lioness

 

[Guest]

 

[Byron In Exile]

This is a particularly hard time for the EU, and the US is largely to blame. The situation with Iraq has shown that the EU is effectively fictional — there is no single EU policy on the matter. There are some members that side with the US, and are joining their military forces against Iraq, and others that are against, attempting to obstruct the US in the Security Council of the UN.

Are nations like France and Germany ready to subordinate their sovereignty to this concept of a Eurostate, when it might commit their troops to fight in a war they oppose? It doesn't look like it. France would probably pull another stunt like the withdrawal of its forces from NATO in 1966, which forced the headquarters to move from Paris to Brussels and the closure of all US bases in France. That makes the idea of Europe acting as a single nation seem just as unlikely as ever. And as much of the motivation for the EU was to compete with America, and an American initiative is currently showing its weakness, it isn't surprising that the US should be an obsession at the "Europarl" right now. It may continue to be for quite some time.

 

[bluespoke]

But if the EU Council members have veto power, how do they expect to reconcile all this focus on differences and blame instead of similarities of purpose?

Veto is not available on all subjects. On some there is qualified majority voting.

Veto, though is still aailable on defence and taxation, thank goodness!

 

[Byron In Exile]

There was some talk about creating a European defense force, some about leaving it to the UN, and a little about having a single Ambassador from the EU on the security council instead of Ambassadors from individual countries.

This is going to be a problem, since they'll want to be regarded as a single entity without losing all their UN votes. But the US doesn't have fifty seats at the UN, so why should the EU have twenty-five? And its member states France and Britain are two of the five permanent Security Council members. (Maybe Texas should have a seat too! lol)

 

[Guest]

 

[Ishmael]

This is going to be a problem, since they'll want to be regarded as a single entity without losing all their UN votes. But the US doesn't have fifty seats at the UN, so why should the EU have twenty-five? And its member states France and Britain are two of the five permanent Security Council members. (Maybe Texas should have a seat too! lol)

The very same point I made in *Goddess emi*'s thread. A thread that parallels this one quite well.

This is probably the beginning of the collapse of the EU as envisioned by France and Germany, the two states that were vying for domination of the alliance.

I can readily see Europe broken into 3, maybe 4, blocks of states in the not so distant future. I can also readily see France and Germany begining an "arms race" soon. The US withdrawal of most of our forces from NATO will ensure that event taking place. The future is going to be an amazing thing to watch unfold.

Ishmael

 

[Byron In Exile]

As you always do, Byron, you summed that up perfectly. I bet you didn't even see it either, did you, you stinker?

No — in fact I'm surprised something like that would be on C-span. Was it because of the situation with Iraq, or is it a regular item?

 

[bluespoke]

This is probably the beginning of the collapse of the EU as envisioned by France and Germany, the two states that were vying for domination of the alliance.

Can't come soon enough!

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

 

[bluespoke]

Cynic alert!

Me? Such a thought.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Scots first, British second, European never!

 

[Bidin~Time]

A question i asked in another thread

Lioness, it seems you and I are on a similar wavelength today.

Maybe some one in this thread can answer this question:


As far as the U.N. is concerned, once the EU is fully and completely in place, isn't the obsolesence
of the U.N. guaranteed? Afterall, the member nations will no longer be nations in their own right, but satellites
of the larger whole? Won't any treaties or agreements such as NATO and the U.N. be nullified?
Granted, this is years in the future, but that the countries of the EU will lose their sovereignty, is
inevitable (isn't it?), and how much does the understanding of this inevitabilty have to
do with their reluctance to "rock the boat" in regard to the questions of balances of power worldwide?


Any ideas here?

 

[Starblayde]

Re: A question i asked in another thread

Maybe some one in this thread can answer this question:

As far as the U.N. is concerned, once the EU is fully and completely in place, isn't the obsolesence
of the U.N. guaranteed? Afterall, the member nations will no longer be nations in their own right, but satellites
of the larger whole? Won't any treaties or agreements such as NATO and the U.N. be nullified?
Granted, this is years in the future, but that the countries of the EU will lose their sovereignty, is
inevitable (isn't it?), and how much does the understanding of this inevitabilty have to
do with their reluctance to "rock the boat" in regard to the questions of balances of power worldwide?

It isn't inevitable that the EU (or some kind of United States of Europe in the much feared federal superstate) will be fully formed, ever.

France and Germany want to rule the world, when they couldn't do it with gun and tank they now use attache case and suit. Poorer countries see the EU as a way of getting more money (e.g. Spain) and/or more power (eastern European countries too). For Britain, at least, we don't want beauocratic control of europe, so they can all fuck off and do what they want.

Personally I'd rather be thought of in the same league as USA and Canada, both politically and culturally.

 

[bluespoke]

Re: A question i asked in another thread

Lioness, it seems you and I are on a similar wavelength today.

Maybe some one in this thread can answer this question:


As far as the U.N. is concerned, once the EU is fully and completely in place, isn't the obsolesence
of the U.N. guaranteed? Afterall, the member nations will no longer be nations in their own right, but satellites
of the larger whole? Won't any treaties or agreements such as NATO and the U.N. be nullified?
Granted, this is years in the future, but that the countries of the EU will lose their sovereignty, is
inevitable (isn't it?), and how much does the understanding of this inevitabilty have to
do with their reluctance to "rock the boat" in regard to the questions of balances of power worldwide?


Any ideas here?

It would be the case if there were total integration but it will not happen. Britain will never give up its defence policy to anyone else and is unlikey to give up its fiscal policy either.

I tend to think that the European superstate is doomed before it is born.

 

[Byron In Exile]

The very same point I made in *Goddess emi*'s thread. A thread that parallels this one quite well.

I'm glad this is occurring to people. Hopefully it won't escape notice amongst the other members of the UN — especially India, which ought to be on the Security Council, as the second-most populated country in the world. The problems will be getting changes to the UN charter past the current permanent Security Council members, and getting the EU as a whole to agree to have a single seat.

This is probably the beginning of the collapse of the EU as envisioned by France and Germany, the two states that were vying for domination of the alliance.

The problem may not be that it will collapse (established bureaucracies are as hard to get rid of as rust), but that it simply won't move any more toward the single-state idea. There's no question that France was (and still is) being "Napoleonic" about the project.

I can readily see Europe broken into 3, maybe 4, blocks of states in the not so distant future.

As groups of independent states, that's already happening. But merging any of those groups into single states will probably be just as hard as merging all of them into an EU. The tendency is for groups to seek self-determination, and split large nations into small ones, as with Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. Putting them back together can be a daunting task, even for all the King's horses and all the King's men.

 

[Lancecastor]

It was followed by a couple of hours of BBC news and Canadian Broadcasting Company news (better in some ways than the BBC offering).



L.

CBC is widely considered one of the most unbiased new sources in the world...which is quite neat considering it's government owned.

I've always liked BBC because US networks always skew anything out of Europe quite badly, particularly anything having to do with the Middle East.

I think all americans should make an effort to look at non-American media as often as possible.

 

[Starblayde]

CBC is widely considered one of the most unbiased new sources in the world...which is quite neat considering it's government owned.

I've always liked BBC because US networks always skew anything out of Europe quite badly, particularly anything having to do with the Middle East.

I think all americans should make an effort to look at non-American media as often as possible.

I was flipping between Sky News, BBC News 24 and CNN International. Interesting to see the more sensatioanlised (i.e. non-BBC ) versions, Sky News in particular had the headline 'AIR SIRENS GOING OFF IN KUWAIT CITY'

 

[Byron In Exile]

Me? Such a thought.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Scots first, British second, European never!

Well, having put up with the English as long as they have, the Scots and Irish deserve their own seats in the UN, at least.

 

[Ishmael]

There's no question that France was (and still is) being "Napoleonic" about the project.As groups of independent states, that's already happening. But merging any of those groups into single states will probably be just as hard as merging all of them into an EU. The tendency is for groups to seek self-determination, and split large nations into small ones, as with Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. Putting them back together can be a daunting task, even for all the King's horses and all the King's men.

The precise reason I used the term "blocks" of nations. Related by alliance but not a common government.

And you're right, Humptey Dumptey will be put together again with military might only. But that will be what it was from the beginning, an artificial merger.

Ishmael

 

[Lancecastor]

I was flipping between Sky News, BBC News 24 and CNN International. Interesting to see the more sensatioanlised (i.e. non-BBC ) versions, Sky News in particular had the headline 'AIR SIRENS GOING OFF IN KUWAIT CITY'

Yeah, I meant to mention Sky...I kinda like Sky; sort of the Fox of Europe. I have an old buddy from law school days who does emerging story scouting for Sky; apparently they're great fun to work for.