| Click here to go to the original topic View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MoscowMatt
Joined: 16 Sep 2005
Posts: 1635
Location: UK / Hungary
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.
The EU is a bit like the UN in which all the main players fight for what they can get out of it and don't care about the smaller countries!
The EU is not anything like the UN. The UN has 194 memberstates some of which are openly hostile to other. U dont see any hostility of such a scale on the eu ground. The UNs role is to act as a forum where all the players - big and small - sit down and talk. The EU is much more active as it seeks economic progress and political unity.
Yes my friend, as you say the UN is were the big and small sit down and talk and the big have it all there own way. And the difference with the EU here is............................?!!!! :lol: |
|
| Back to top |
|
towelhead
Joined: 28 Oct 2006
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.
The EU is a bit like the UN in which all the main players fight for what they can get out of it and don't care about the smaller countries!
The EU is not anything like the UN. The UN has 194 memberstates some of which are openly hostile to other. U dont see any hostility of such a scale on the eu ground. The UNs role is to act as a forum where all the players - big and small - sit down and talk. The EU is much more active as it seeks economic progress and political unity.
Yes my friend, as you say the UN is were the big and small sit down and talk and the big have it all there own way. And the difference with the EU here is............................?!!!! :lol:
Next time read the whole thing carefully please...
The accession criteria of the UN are different in nature from the Copenhagen criteria (EU criteria - in case u couldnt figure it out). To become an EU member u have to first embrace liberal democratic principles and have a free market economy.
UN members are just being 'discouraged' from trampling on human rights.
Get it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
MoscowMatt
Joined: 16 Sep 2005
Posts: 1635
Location: UK / Hungary
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.
The EU is a bit like the UN in which all the main players fight for what they can get out of it and don't care about the smaller countries!
The EU is not anything like the UN. The UN has 194 memberstates some of which are openly hostile to other. U dont see any hostility of such a scale on the eu ground. The UNs role is to act as a forum where all the players - big and small - sit down and talk. The EU is much more active as it seeks economic progress and political unity.
Yes my friend, as you say the UN is were the big and small sit down and talk and the big have it all there own way. And the difference with the EU here is............................?!!!! :lol:
Next time read the whole thing carefully please...
The accession criteria of the UN are different in nature from the Copenhagen criteria (EU criteria - in case u couldnt figure it out). To become an EU member u have to first embrace liberal democratic principles and have a free market economy.
UN members are just being 'discouraged' from trampling on human rights.
Get it?
Yes, yes I know all that, but I'm focusing on the fact that like the UN the EU is effectively run by the big countries to their advantage, and screw the small!! Would you not agree that this is the case?
A case point being just ask yourself which EU country gets the biggest farming subsides? Right and when you can tell me that go on to which country has the poorest farmers. Then you will see what I mean! |
|
| Back to top |
|
DSwain
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 3552
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.
The EU is a bit like the UN in which all the main players fight for what they can get out of it and don't care about the smaller countries!
The EU is not anything like the UN. The UN has 194 memberstates some of which are openly hostile to other. U dont see any hostility of such a scale on the eu ground. The UNs role is to act as a forum where all the players - big and small - sit down and talk. The EU is much more active as it seeks economic progress and political unity.
Yes my friend, as you say the UN is were the big and small sit down and talk and the big have it all there own way. And the difference with the EU here is............................?!!!! :lol:
Next time read the whole thing carefully please...
The accession criteria of the UN are different in nature from the Copenhagen criteria (EU criteria - in case u couldnt figure it out). To become an EU member u have to first embrace liberal democratic principles and have a free market economy.
UN members are just being 'discouraged' from trampling on human rights.
Get it?
Yes, yes I know all that, but I'm focusing on the fact that like the UN the EU is effectively run by the big countries to their advantage, and screw the small!! Would you not agree that this is the case?
A case point being just ask yourself which EU country gets the biggest farming subsides? Right and when you can tell me that go on to which country has the poorest farmers. Then you will see what I mean!
Once his country has been in the EU as long as ours, he'll learn MM |
|
| Back to top |
|
towelhead
Joined: 28 Oct 2006
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
All Im saying is there should more to economic cooperation than just common agricultural policy for it to remain stable. Political and economic issues go hand in hand. Two countries with different political and territorial interests could never successfully cooperate on the economic level. Take US and UK for example - US is focusing more on cooperation with canada and mexico as these countries share borders with each other. They r of primary concern to USA. UK on the other hand has - throughout history - always been economically and thus politically bond with continental europe. The political bond has therefore always existed, you cannot evade it. It is there and it has always been there. It is given by the UKs geographical location.
Now in order to decide on how big a role should each memberstate play within EU, a constitution has to be passed first. Preferably one that ensures proportional representation. Farmers subsidies are a problem. But the problem can be solved via legislation. All you need is political consenzus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Achilles The Myrmidon
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 4415
Location: Hellas
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
DSwain wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: MoscowMatt wrote: towelhead wrote: But czech law didnt disappear off the face of the planet. Now there r two separate laws (just like in the US) - a european law which is superior and a czech law which is inferior. The Eu law just sets a frame of limitations. I personally didnt vote to join the EU because i wanted to see the road outside my house to improve. I wanted to be part of an organisation that stands up for principles that i believe are worth fighting for.
The EU is a bit like the UN in which all the main players fight for what they can get out of it and don't care about the smaller countries!
The EU is not anything like the UN. The UN has 194 memberstates some of which are openly hostile to other. U dont see any hostility of such a scale on the eu ground. The UNs role is to act as a forum where all the players - big and small - sit down and talk. The EU is much more active as it seeks economic progress and political unity.
Yes my friend, as you say the UN is were the big and small sit down and talk and the big have it all there own way. And the difference with the EU here is............................?!!!! :lol:
Next time read the whole thing carefully please...
The accession criteria of the UN are different in nature from the Copenhagen criteria (EU criteria - in case u couldnt figure it out). To become an EU member u have to first embrace liberal democratic principles and have a free market economy.
UN members are just being 'discouraged' from trampling on human rights.
Get it?
Yes, yes I know all that, but I'm focusing on the fact that like the UN the EU is effectively run by the big countries to their advantage, and screw the small!! Would you not agree that this is the case?
A case point being just ask yourself which EU country gets the biggest farming subsides? Right and when you can tell me that go on to which country has the poorest farmers. Then you will see what I mean!
Once his country has been in the EU as long as ours, he'll learn MM :roll: |
|
| Back to top |
|
DSwain
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 3552
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
towelhead wrote: All Im saying is there should more to economic cooperation than just common agricultural policy for it to remain stable. Political and economic issues go hand in hand. Two countries with different political and territorial interests could never successfully cooperate on the economic level. Take US and UK for example - US is focusing more on cooperation with canada and mexico as these countries share borders with each other. They r of primary concern to USA. UK on the other hand has - throughout history - always been economically and thus politically bond with continental europe. The political bond has therefore always existed, you cannot evade it. It is there and it has always been there. It is given by the UKs geographical location.
Now in order to decide on how big a role should each memberstate play within EU, a constitution has to be passed first. Preferably one that ensures proportional representation. Farmers subsidies are a problem. But the problem can be solved via legislation. All you need is political consenzus.
All we need is free trade between the nations - we don't even need CAP. Then your countrymen decide what happens in your country, my countrymen decided on what happens here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
towelhead
Joined: 28 Oct 2006
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
DSwain wrote: towelhead wrote: All Im saying is there should more to economic cooperation than just common agricultural policy for it to remain stable. Political and economic issues go hand in hand. Two countries with different political and territorial interests could never successfully cooperate on the economic level. Take US and UK for example - US is focusing more on cooperation with canada and mexico as these countries share borders with each other. They r of primary concern to USA. UK on the other hand has - throughout history - always been economically and thus politically bond with continental europe. The political bond has therefore always existed, you cannot evade it. It is there and it has always been there. It is given by the UKs geographical location.
Now in order to decide on how big a role should each memberstate play within EU, a constitution has to be passed first. Preferably one that ensures proportional representation. Farmers subsidies are a problem. But the problem can be solved via legislation. All you need is political consenzus.
All we need is free trade between the nations - we don't even need CAP. Then your countrymen decide what happens in your country, my countrymen decided on what happens here.
Agreed but lets have common foreign policy, citizenship and currency along with free trade. You have to be in the EU all the way or not at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Click here to go to the original topic |
