OT:US don't qualify for EU membership, don't spank children, WW2 history.

[oleg]

Originally posted by Thermodyne:
IIR, The western parts of old Russia were considered part of Europe. When the USSR came on the scene, the demarcation began to move west. Then with almost fifty years of the iron curtain, it became the norm to partition the area based on form of government.

PS: Yep I just looked up Europe in a 1929 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. And I quote:

“Europe within the narrowest of physical limits (to the crest of the Urals and the Manych depression and the Caspian Sea,----)”.

About a 1000 words on the boundaries, but I’m not going to type them all.

Then how about such common terms as Western Europe, Central Europe and Easter Europe
And how did you guys called for example Bulgaria before 1990 ? Asia ?

[ July 25, 2003, 20:01: Message edited by: oleg ]

[Thermodyne]

LOL, those of us who grew up as Americans during the cold war were taught that Bulgaria was deep in the dark evil heart of the communist block. We saw them as munitions suppliers of the Viet Cong. So to be politically correct, we couldn’t include them in the same geographical location as our European allies. Hence, the political partitioning of Europe.

[ July 25, 2003, 20:07: Message edited by: Thermodyne ]

[Thermodyne]

As I look at the EU, I see it being a smaller Version of the world economic situation. There are the have’s in the west, and the have not’s in the east. There is the old established guard in the west and the re-emerging states in the east. There is religious hatred, racial tension and rampant socialism. (I am getting a feeling of dajavoux here.) There are two economic powerhouses and a few nations that are ripe for the exploitation of cheap labor. As the economic power of the EU grows, Asia and the Americas will move to protect themselves, and this will cause the members of the EU to look inward for markets. The two powers will again be in direct competition with each other. Only this time they will be propping up a common currency. (Now I really have a feeling of dajavoux.) How will the two powers handle this situation as it evolves? Germany will rearm, it will be required that they contribute to keeping the peace in the southeast regions. And they will fear a rearmed Poland, even though they won’t say so publicly. France has already demonstrated that they reject the idea that they are not a superpower, and are actively rearming. Perhaps we are genetically meant to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Note:

France has begun to very quietly modernize its nuclear forces. If I were a German that remembers that Last war, I would be calling for a deterrent force for Germany. Remember that it was France that declared war on the Germans. And many Germans still believe that their government was only interested in righting the wrongs of Versailles [sp] and barring the gates to communism.

[Ruatha]

The issue of this thread is not that if US WANT to or CAN join the EU, the issue was that the US don't even fulfill the basic criterias.
Mostly that which also has hindered Turkey from joining; the death penalty.
But propably also some minority group issues and some economic issues.

That which Thermo says about Germans and French relations propably exists most in his mind and not in reality, the tensions now are mostly between Italy and Germany, tensions spanning from the end of WW2 and the war between them (After Germany occupied nort italy and instituted Mussolini again as a puppet).
Relations between Germany and France has propably never been better, and I do not belive any Germans feel threatened by Poland.
There are no reasonable possibilities of war inside the current EU for atleast 10-30 years, it might change if Turkey and/or the turkish part of Cyprus gets accepted into the EU, and some of the balkan countries including Serbia want's in.
The Coal and Steel union (EU) never existed prior to WW2 and I think that it is a good way to defuse any potential inflammations in Europe.

Germany are not required to keep peace in the south-east regions, there is no current large EU military force, there might be in the far future, but now we have only a small fast reaction force.
Most military cooperation is carried out in NATO and PFP, security issues are mostly handled in Europe by the OSSE, which is an organisation outside of EU.
The south border is guarded by the nations that have those borders.
Germany needs it money for other things right now.

And EU doesn't consist of two powers, there are alot of countries, including the powerful UK, so far all countries including our small Sweden has equal say in all issues, that might change in the future though.
Svensk försvarutredning

[ July 25, 2003, 20:51: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

[tesco samoa]

Thermo....

France and Britain delivered an ultimatum to Germany on the 1st of Sept to withdraw forces from Poland

On the 3rd they declared war when this ultimatum was not met.

This is quite well known.

[Loser]

Originally posted by Ruatha:
... the US don't even fulfill the basic criterias.
Mostly ... the death penalty.
But propably also some minority group issues...

I just have to ask. What, exactly are you talking about when you say "minority group issues"?

Please go into as much detail as you possibly can, as there is some chance for an anxious person to take offense to this and I am confident that you did not mean this in that sort of way.

[Slynky]

Originally posted by Ruatha:

What are the thoughts on this from you US fellows, are we Europeans squemish about human rights? (I don't think so), aren't you worried about your federal budget defeceit?

Death penalty? I'm certainly not worried about it. Of course, I believe in spanking children. To me, spanking children is the "junior" Version of the death penalty. Far as I'm concerned, there's a place and time for both. So, if getting rid of the death penalty, for example, helps us gain membership, to heck with it.

Deficit? Yeah, I don't like it. But you have to understand, this country runs on the premise that everyone needs to be in debt (spending all their money on crap they don't need so that corporations can make their dollars so that they can donate it to get "their" politicians elected/re-elected so that laws can be passed that benefit the corporations and allow them to make even more profit) and therefore, why not the government as well. Lead by example is what I say! After all, the money at the disposal of the US (and local) governments is there to be used to make sure favors are dispersed to the correct people (and a few dollars returning under the table) so that politicians can "invest" in getting re-elected and keeping the cycle going.

There are lots of "cycles", "vicious circles", and "scratch my back and I'll scratch your back" practices that have been going on for many many years. Just to darn bad the "lessor gods" don't understand there is an end to it coming. After all, we can't do ALL the US manufacturing outside the borders, all the IT support and design outside the borders, buy most of our energy outside the borders, have trade agreements with countries that continually favor the other countries, etc.

So, you see, those coffers you speak of are there for the legitimate looting of by the elected politicians. (of course, as long as a few bones are thrown to the "sheep" once in a while, it's OK ).

[ July 25, 2003, 21:01: Message edited by: Slynky ]