Geert Wilders(Fitna) proposes fusion of The Netherlands and Flanders, is it possible?

[RSone]

See topic, and discuss please..

[Calanen]

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/1327/ned20flanders2po9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[RSone]

^WTF "Howdydoodle Neighbour!!!"

[Afro-European]

^WTF "Howdydoodle Neighbour!!!"
Zou een goed idee zijn.Zo krijgen wij de haven van Antwerpen en de luchthaven van Zaventem daarbij.p-)p-)p-)
Flanders can stand on their own feet,without anybody's help.
Its GDP is higher than those of Macedonia,Albania and Kosovo combined.
Per capita GDP at purchasing power parity was 23% above the EU average(according to Eurostat figures 2007).
But on a linguistical and cultural level,a "fusion" with The Netherlands wouldn't be that bad.

[dava]

Some are advocating cultural differences are too deep. (Protestant vs Catholic for instance)
I ll tell you next year, i m going for an exchange year to Rotterdam (EUR).

I m not against this proposal, it would create a country with more influence in the EU. We could potentially create a nice synergy, we have complementary features. It d also solve the problems around the deepening of the Schelde for the port of Antwerp. We would become the entrance country shipwise for Europe (Rotterdam + Antwerp).

Anyway, i think its ultimetaly is gonna evolve to something like this. Cooperation between Flanders and Netherlands is already big.

[RSone]

Rotterdam isn't exactly the quintessential Dutch City. Lot's of problems with racism etc. over there, but still if you stick to the higher circles(i assume you'll be going on a university exchange programme?) you should be fine.

The problem with Wilders' proposal is that it is far too NL centric. As he brought it, we'd be the dominant partner in the union(which actually would be true, unless the influence of both parties would be balanced somehow.) So pretty much everyone overhere started shouting it'd be unfair for the flemings etc., etc. The fact that he is generally seen as a bit of a basketcase over here isn't helping either.

I agree it could be a very good thing, and a lot of people over here seem to agree(60 % of the population would be for a "reunion" with flanders), but it is somewhat of a non-issue over here, and I suspect even more so in Flanders/Belgium.

There'd need to be more agreement on things like the military/foreign politics though. Belgium/Flanders isn't exactly, while in NL, the amount of ambition is growing."Not the biggest of the small, the smallest of the big"

[TheBelgian]

I would only agree if production of Heineken is ended and the Dutch sumbit to our rule. Then I think we can work something out.


Seriously though, the people that actually do want Flanders to separate from Wallonia for reasons beyond the purely economical are much too nationalistic to fuse with any other country, even Holland. And just from an economical standpoint, we dont really need to unit with Holland.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

I used to work for a Belgian company and there was some distrust amongst some members of the management concerning the Dutch customers we had on the books. They never hated the Dutch but were always very wary of them.

[Niels]

I'm all for a Groot-Nederland. I don't think the Flemish are though, or the Walloons for that matter. Which is a pity.

[Sato]

I'm all for a Groot-Vlaanderen. I don't think the Dutch are though, or the Walloons for that matter p-)

On a serious note though, I think "TheBelgian" was right in his assessment.

And by the way, Wilders doesn't seem to realise that there are the Bruxellois (geographically situated in Flanders, politicly situated in a swamp) to take into account.

But for what it's worth I also think that in theory some sort of a Union between The Netherlands wouldn't be such a crazy idea. However, in my opinion there are to many practical difficulties to overcome.

[Digital Marine]

No please, i don't want to pay taxes for Belgian problems. And i don't think the Belgians wish to pay taxes for Dutch problemsp-)

[klong]

Before the Wilders ilk people come with ideas like this, I believe they should (try to)explain some facts about other Dutch "fusion" attempts. For example, atrocities committed in Indonesia ? Failure to acknowlege these ? No talk of reparations ?

Best regards

[RSone]

WTF has Indonesia got to with this. It was never a fusion attempt. Maybe back in the 1700/1800's when we conquered it, but back then indonesia wasn't even a state. It only became a state after separation. And atrocities have been acknowledged, everyone here knows what westerling etc. have done. Doesn't make it right, but we were at war. Dutch POW's weren't treated very well either i can imagine. Now, if you can't contribute anything even remotely funny or meaningful to this topic, GTFO...

[Briggs]

A Union with the Netherlands? Why would we trade in the Francophone masters for Dutch? Forget it.

Cultural co-operation already exists (taalunie). Economical co-operation can be intensified (but the EU is boss there). Naval co-operation should be a must (use all of our combined harbour assets), military co-operation as well. Heck, more of a confederation where each one of us still enjoys his sovereignty whilst 'working together'... I'd agree to that...if we step out of the EU as full members.

Is it possible? Theoretically but what Wilders is forgetting is the Brussels Capital Region. If Flanders would join with the Netherlands, or Flanders decides to go on its own we're going to have to fight to keep Brussels.

[RSone]

A Union with the Netherlands? Why would we trade in the Francophone masters for Dutch? Forget it.

Cultural co-operation already exists (taalunie). Economical co-operation can be intensified (but the EU is boss there). Naval co-operation should be a must (use all of our combined harbour assets), military co-operation as well. Heck, more of a confederation where each one of us still enjoys his sovereignty whilst 'working together'... I'd agree to that...if we step out of the EU as full members.

Is it possible? Theoretically but what Wilders is forgetting is the Brussels Capital Region. If Flanders would join with the Netherlands, or Flanders decides to go on its own we're going to have to fight to keep Brussels.

Define "fight" The Dutch government might be willing to assist/fight with the belgian landcomponent against Wallonian elements, but if France, for example, would get involved.......... You do the math. Do you really believe francophone element of the belgian armed forces would actually go as far as take up arms against the Flemish over Brussels?

[dava]

Not fight as in a military way ;)
Brussels is probably the most important region in Belgium. An independent Flanders without Brussels would be a severe drawback for the region. Loosing Brussels would be catastrophic for Wallonie.
Go to a non-eu country and ask if they know belgium. They ll probably say : "Oh yeah, isnt Belgium the capital of Brussels?" Or if they do know, you are definetaly dealing with chocolate addicts.
The divide of the country is a power struggle around Brussels, in my opinion, neither one can claim it. Basically, Brussels is a city full of foreign eurocrats and lobby groups.
Flanders and Wallonie will be in a deadlock forever.

[RSone]

Not fight as in a military way ;)
Brussels is probably the most important region in Belgium. An independent Flanders without Brussels would be a severe drawback for the region. Loosing Brussels would be catastrophic for Wallonie.
Go to a non-eu country and ask if they know belgium. They ll probably say : "Oh yeah, isnt Belgium the capital of Brussels?" Or if they do know, you are definetaly dealing with chocolate addicts.
The divide of the country is a power struggle around Brussels, in my opinion, neither one can claim it. Basically, Brussels is a city full of foreign eurocrats and lobby groups.
Flanders and Wallonie will be in a deadlock forever.

Well then, you guys might want to make sure you stop those financial transfers to the Walloons.p-)

[Briggs]

With 'Fight' I mean Manu Militari.

1.Brussels Capital Region is geographically situated in Flanders (North of the Linguistic border, in the territory that belongs to the Province of Vlaams Brabant).

2.Historically it was a Dutch speaking city, it is only since post-1945 that a French speaking majority grew due to several evolutions: a) discrimination of Dutch in favor of French language, b) Mass immigration flows from Walloonia/Belgian/French colonies, c) Eurocrats when the EU Lingua Franca was French.

3. There is a Dutch speaking minority residing, and the region has specific linguistic laws to protect the Dutch speaking minority and prevent 'enfrenchisation'. These laws exists since the 1930's. However, they have NEVER EVER been properly applied by the dominantly French speaking local political governance.

4. Brussels Capital Region has its existence based on the 1962/63 agreements, based on the bilingual linguistic-territory. Part of the deal was full bilingualism of public personnel (in order to protect the growing Flemish minority), in exchange BCR was formed but it has NOT the same status as the other two official regions in Belgium (it was specifically tailored to be able to 'operate as a capital') as well as a judicial as electoral district tieing Brussels with Halle Vilvoorde. Unfortunately the linguistic laws (designed to protect the Dutch speaking minority) have never been properly applied
and the dominant French speaking political governance refuses to do so (i'm talking municipal level, not regional administrative level).


Fact is the French speaking community in Belgium will never ever let BCR go with Flanders. That's what alle the fuzz is currently about, it was the same back in the 60s and the 70s...their demands is to have a territorial link with Walloonia in order to have a common 'border' and the expansion of BCR further into Flanders. If we break away (regardless if we take Brussels or not), they'll take Brussels and the municipalities adjecent to BCR with 'sufficient' French speaking population 'on the scene'. In other words: AT ALL COSTS they will take BCR and a bit more than that. 'Because BCR is a Francophone region, their 'population is the majority' and 'the Francophones are being maltreated/humiliated/opressed' by the Flemings in Flanders and 'the same will happen with those in BCR'. Additionally Brussels is so important to them 'international image wise' and economically that without it they're 'worthless'.

You unify Flanders and the Netherlands you'll have to resolve the BCR-deadlock. The deadlock's nature is such that the chances are very much more likely to favor conflict than 'peacefully resolved'.
France has a historical tendency to intervene. Don't chicken out, they don't have the stomach to go full throttle.

[dava]

Lol.
Fighting over Brussels would make it unnecessary to fight for.
EU would relocate all the major institutions and Brussels loses its charm. I wouldnt want a Brussels without EU institutions in it. Seen unemployment rate for BCR?

[RSone]

With 'Fight' I mean Manu Militari.



You unify Flanders and the Netherlands you'll have to resolve the BCR-deadlock. The deadlock's nature is such that the chances are very much more likely to favor conflict than 'peacefully resolved'.
France has a historical tendency to intervene. Don't chicken out, they don't have the stomach to go full throttle.

You do know we couldn't hope to go up against France in anything more than a limited conflict, right? Besides, this is all extremely hypotethical. We would be going to war with a NATO ally and fellow EU member. Subsequent political fallout would be heavy enough to bring the EU to it's knees, as members would take sides.
Why would Flanders need the BCR anyway? In a union with us, you could surive without it, heck, even when you'd go independant it wouldn't be a catastrophic loss. Solution: Make it a international city, a protectorate of the UN(it'd give them something to dop-)) or split it up ito two zones, a flemish and a Walloon one.

Besides, France has no interest in going to war with anyone over Wallonia, let alone a respected fellow EU member. If a violent separation were ever to take place, Holland would most likely only interfere if Flanders was attacked first, to prevent a destabilized "back yard" .Followed by the pacification of BOTH sides, possibly in conjunction with the French.

[Briggs]

Lol.
Fighting over Brussels would make it unnecessary to fight for.
EU would relocate all the major institutions and Brussels loses its charm. I wouldnt want a Brussels without EU institutions in it. Seen unemployment rate for BCR?

As if the EU would in a split second be able to relocate, there will be no consensus on where it should relocate to. Loses its Charm? Brussels' charm already has been destroyed, partially thanks to the EU. I'm aware of the unemployment rate of the BCR...I live just next door. Problem of unemployment is due to lack of Dutch knowledge, lack of proper education & skills, lack of incentives to actually work, lack of a 'dedicated economic hinterland' because two communities are bickling about it.

[Briggs]

You do know we couldn't hope to go up against France in anything more than a limited conflict, right? Besides, this is all extremely hypotethical. We would be going to war with a NATO ally and fellow EU member. Subsequent political fallout would be heavy enough to bring the EU to it's knees, as members would take sides.
Why would Flanders need the BCR anyway? In a union with us, you could surive without it, heck, even when you'd go independant it wouldn't be a catastrophic loss. Solution: Make it a international city, a protectorate of the UN(it'd give them something to dop-)) or split it up ito two zones, a flemish and a Walloon one.

Besides, France has no interest in going to war with anyone over Wallonia, let alone a respected fellow EU member. If a violent separation were ever to take place, Holland would most likely only interfere if Flanders was attacked first, to prevent a destabilized "back yard" .Followed by the pacification of BOTH sides, possibly in conjunction with the French.

Intervention as in military? Sure we can tackle France together with a combination of symmetric & asymmetric warfare, you can't win a popular insurrection and I'm pretty much confident that Flanders will not tolerate a French intervention on its territory- just a matter to arm them (and put up cells). If France intervenes then they're the ones going to war...not us nor the Netherlands. You're the one who uttered French intervention, rationally speaking the French wouldn't go for a full scale intervention but would more likely support Walloonia but I doubt they'd be willing to fight for them over Brussels - worst case scenario support a Belgian 're-unification strategy'. I anticipate a French intervention, as its their 'historical nature' in the region, havn't defined it. Thus in the most likely scenario (to me) the French would offer limited support to 'defend Walloonia' but let them handle Brussels. Doubt that the Netherlands is going to mingle into the Brussels fray either.

I wonder what the British stance would be, I'm guessing perhaps in favor of Flanders due to historical reasons (not solely WWI). Germany, I'm opting for a neutral stance 'WW2 Syndrome'.

BCR is not a matter of survival, its a mater of territorial integrity. How about I give Maastricht to the Germans! Protectorate ha, never.

[RSone]

Intervention as in military? Sure we can tackle France together with a combination of symmetric & asymmetric warfare, you can't win a popular insurrection and I'm pretty much confident that Flanders will not tolerate a French intervention on its territory- just a matter to arm them (and put up cells). If France intervenes then they're the ones going to war...not us nor the Netherlands. You're the one who uttered French intervention, rationally speaking the French wouldn't go for a full scale intervention but would more likely support Wallonia but I doubt they'd be willing to fight for them over Brussels - worst case scenario support a Belgian 're-unification strategy'. I anticipate a French intervention, as its their 'historical nature' in the region, havn't defined it. Thus in the most likely scenario (to me) the French would offer limited support to 'defend Walloonia' but let them handle Brussels. Doubt that the Netherlands is going to mingle into the Brussels fray either.

I wonder what the British stance would be, I'm guessing perhaps in favor of Flanders due to historical reasons (not solely WWI). Germany, I'm opting for a neutral stance 'WW2 Syndrome'.

BCR is not a matter of survival, its a mater of territorial integrity. How about I give Maastricht to the Germans! Protectorate ha, never.

Great idea, let Ze Dgermanz handle the drug problems...

IF wallonia would mount a assymetric or symmetric on Flanders, We'd surely interfere, you're basically the same people as us. It'd be about as antagonizing to ethnical Dutch as Ze germanz messing with Friesland. We have the military capability to fight and win a war(although i'm basing this on statistics and experiences abroad) against the combined Belgian military, so tackling Wallonia by its self shouldn't be a problem and it'd be preferable to a protracted assymetrical civil war between the two sides. In such a event we would be more or less supporting Flanders with equipment and intel, France would be doing the same for the Wallonians, which would most probably result in a deadlock, or at least a very long stalemate, with a high cost in life on both sides.

Don't you think Jan Kaas the average Dutch Guy would riot if he saw people that are basically our genetic brothers getting killed on the NOS 6 a clock news? Not to mention that warzones/destabilized areas generally tend to get infested with crime(Antwerp 'd make for a excellent smuggling area) and that is something we simply can't tolerate so close to our borders, forcing us to beef up security, or mount a resolving operation, thus setting the stage for larger interventions. Somehow, someway, we'd get involved, trust me.

As for allies, Í'd pretty much bet on it that public opinion in the UK, Germany and the nordic countries would favour the Flemish/ Dutch side.

[Briggs]

Great idea, let Ze Dgermanz handle the drug problems...

IF wallonia would mount a assymetric or symmetric on Flanders, We'd surely interfere, you're basically the same people as us. It'd be about as antagonizing to ethnical Dutch as Ze germanz messing with Friesland. We have the military capability to fight and win a war(although i'm basing this on statistics and experiences abroad) against the combined Belgian military, so tackling Wallonia by its self shouldn't be a problem and it'd be preferable to a protracted assymetrical civil war between the two sides. In such a event we would be more or less supporting Flanders with equipment and intel, France would be doing the same for the Wallonians, which would most probably result in a deadlock, or at least a very long stalemate, with a high cost in life on both sides.

Don't you think Jan Kaas the average Dutch Guy would riot if he saw people that are basically our genetic brothers getting killed on the NOS 6 a clock news? Not to mention that warzones/destabilized areas generally tend to get infested with crime(Antwerp 'd make for a excellent smuggling area) and that is something we simply can't tolerate so close to our borders, forcing us to beef up security, or mount a resolving operation, thus setting the stage for larger interventions. Somehow, someway, we'd get involved, trust me.

As for allies, Í'd pretty much bet on it that public opinion in the UK, Germany and the nordic countries would favour the Flemish/ Dutch side.

I rather think the average Dutch would be flabergasted at first, not really the rioting type. France has no advantage for a full scale intervention into Flanders unless it wants to re-establish Belgium by force (unlikely) or it wants to take in Brussels as well (EU capital, prestige) which I deem possible but not likely. If the Netherlands joins into the fray on our side, France will definately joy into the fray even further.

You're forgetting that if 'we' were to battle for Brussels it will be 50-50 if the army splits along its linguistic division. Add to that Brussels is moslty populated by French speakings who probably rather die for Belgium than be part of Flanders (or flee), add to that a large immigrant community who'll be fearing being part of Flanders (fear of being kicked out)...all would oppose the Flemish side. Meaning we're going to have to muster more people and the Francophone side will have a 'Kosovo advantage', whilst they can (already do) picture us as neo-Serbian Neo-Milosevic's.

I don't know what Germany will do. I think it will remain neutral, not wanting to blow up relations with the Dutch nor the French. The UK, I'm hoping would side with us and be able to deploy quickly and help sustain air superiority.

[Ynck47]

I don't see this happening. Ever heard of Jan van Speijk?And how about this? The democracy index 2007:

3 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg) Netherlands 9.66
20 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg/22px-Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg) Belgium 8.15

[Dispatcher]

Before the Wilders ilk people come with ideas like this, I believe they should (try to)explain some facts about other Dutch "fusion" attempts. For example, atrocities committed in Indonesia ? Failure to acknowlege these ? No talk of reparations ?

Best regards

Quoted for utter stupidity.

And back on topic;

We shouldnt want to merge at all costs. A strong balanced relation is all we need.

[Briggs]

I don't see this happening. Ever heard of Jan van Speijk?And how about this? The democracy index 2007:

3 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg) Netherlands 9.66
20 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg/22px-Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg) Belgium 8.15

Inedx based on what? Secundo, we're talking abt Flanders not Belgium.

[Ynck47]

Inedx based on what? Secundo, we're talking abt Flanders not Belgium.

Google is your friend.

The democracy index 2007 is based on:
free and fair election process, civil liberties, functioning of government, political participation and political culture.

I know it's about Flanders but that would mean a lot should be changed, not?

[RSone]

I don't see this happening. Ever heard of Jan van Speijk?And how about this? The democracy index 2007:

3 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg/22px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg) Netherlands 9.66
20 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg/22px-Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg) Belgium 8.15


Ofcourse I've heard of Van Speijk. He p0wned a crapload of belgians and got a 30 killstreak on the Gunboat multiplayer map p-)
(perhaps if it would be wise of you to not underestimate the weight his name carries for certain elements of the Dutch society and perhaps even members of MP.net...)

Also i'd imagine if you'd separately crunch the numbers for Flanders and Wallonia, the number for Flanders would be close to the Dutch figure, if not equal.
Mjolnir is right though. Currently a union would be too much of a political hassle, because of the size of the two would be partners. NL would dominate too much for it to be politically "correct" and acceptable, simply because of our demographic,economical size compared to Flanders.

[Briggs]

Google is your friend.

The democracy index 2007 is based on:
free and fair election process, civil liberties, functioning of government, political participation and political culture.

I know it's about Flanders but that would mean a lot should be changed, not?

Depends on the quantifications & operationalisation. Voting is mandatory, so no 'free elections'. Civil liberties are jealously guarded but hollowed out under pretexts of anti-discrimination & racism. Functioning of government...euh ya that doesn't really function well on Belgian level, bit better on Flemish level. Political participation, no referenda due to communautarian fears. Political culture...as in making moral assumptions/moral weighing of political parties...is not kosher.
When I have time I'll check their website...

[klong]

A little touchy, are we ? But don't worry. No one in their right mind would ever agree to merging with the Netherlands.

My question still stands, but of course, is not being addressed. Wonder why.

[sp2c]

http://images.art.com/images/-/The-Simpsons---Mr-Burns-Excellent--C11749617.jpeg

erm ... wait who said that?

cute thing about these proposals is that 99% of the time they are made by Dutch people.
It is not our country to rip apart and it is not our land to grab, the Belgians keep saying they don't want to merge with the Netherlands so why do people keep bringing it up???

but stupid as it is, I applaud Wilders for bringing up a non islamic subject for once

[sp2c]

Before the Wilders ilk people come with ideas like this, I believe they should (try to)explain some facts about other Dutch "fusion" attempts.
there's never been a fusion attempt before
maybe the Netherlands Antilles in the near future


For example, atrocities committed in Indonesia ? Failure to acknowlege these ? No talk of reparations ?

Best regards
name them and I'll go into it

[Briggs]

there's never been a fusion attempt before
maybe the Netherlands Antilles in the near future

name them and I'll go into it


Never been a fusion attampt before? Hmm 1815-1830 wasn't a fushion?

[dava]

It is not our country to rip apart and it is not our land to grab, the Belgians keep saying they don't want to merge with the Netherlands so why do people keep bringing it up???

I think flemish population is nicely divided 50-50 on this issue.
We are definetaly fed up with the walloons, we even want to trade them for some dutch :)

[Niels]

My question still stands, but of course, is not being addressed. Wonder why.
Maybe because it had sod all to do with the topic being discussed and was a poor attempt at trolling.

[sp2c]

Never been a fusion attampt before? Hmm 1815-1830 wasn't a fushion?

no?

if you want to say something then say it, don't make fish for it

[RSone]

Never been a fusion attampt before? Hmm 1815-1830 wasn't a fushion?

MOAR LIEK a formalisation of the de facto situation before and during the French Empire. Heck even during the eighty years war we were (sort of) one country,parts of the south and "Belgium" were commonly referred to as the Burgundian/Southern Netherlands.

But i'd like to see how a new "Unified Kingdom of The Netherlands" would work out. We could do a dual capitol city thingy with Amsterdam and Brussels like in the first atempt, that way Briggs would have something to fight forp-)( you really don't like the wallonians do you?) and ofcourse Sp would become Governator of Antwerp:)(why the fascination with it anyway?)

And Klong: Make your own topic and GTHO or contribute to the discussion plz..

[Briggs]

MOAR LIEK a formalisation of the de facto situation before and during the French Empire. Heck even during the eighty years war we were (sort of) one country,parts of the south and "Belgium" were commonly referred to as the Burgundian/Southern Netherlands.

But i'd like to see how a new "Unified Kingdom of The Netherlands" would work out. We could do a dual capitol city thingy with Amsterdam and Brussels like in the first atempt, that way Briggs would have something to fight forp-)( you really don't like the wallonians do you?) and ofcourse Sp would become Governator of Antwerp:)(why the fascination with it anyway?)

And Klong: Make your own topic and GTHO or contribute to the discussion plz..

sp2c what, you don't like fishing? You sure you're navy? Long story Short. Napoleon gets ass kicking at Waterloo. 'Southern Netherlands' get turned over to the Dutch Crown making a big jolly unified State. I believe it was the first one since the seperation (you know 16th century). So...1830 pops up, we fight a bit and by 1839 Belgium is fully formed & autonomous.(not real 'flemish' popular support for either side). So...if we'd unify again you'd probably give us another reason to secceede again. So, how about just a confederacy.

@RSone
Thing is I doub't we'd be going for a Kingdom but rather a Republic. Unless we can find someone with real bloodlines related to either the Counts of Flanders (unknown) or the Dukes of Brabant (known, Who's the hubby of the British Queen?). The Walloonians are ok, just their Brussels based relatives I despise, rather flush them all out (legally). Well the ego of Antwerp would be satisfied if we'd make it into the 'joint Capital'.
But we don't need a joint capital or switching capitals. Heck, lets just stick to a sort of confederacy...'like the good ole days'.

Reminds me, I saw a short presentation on a daft plan to develop some sort of Island in front of the Flemish/Dutch coast to turn it into a large airport & harbor terminal (with Amsterdam/Rotterdam/Antwerpen becoming hinterlandports) otherwise those harbors would be fully congested and would be easier to handle bigger cargo's. Found it quite interesting, could work on that, plus the Iron Rhine and other railroad works, military cooperation.

[RSone]

[quote=Briggs;3252324]sp2c what, you don't like fishing? You sure you're navy? Long story Short. Napoleon gets ass kicking at Waterloo. 'Southern Netherlands' get turned over to the Dutch Crown making a big jolly unified State. I believe it was the first one since the seperation (you know 16th century). So...1830 pops up, we fight a bit and by 1839 Belgium is fully formed & autonomous.(not real 'flemish' popular support for either side). So...if we'd unify again you'd probably give us another reason to secceede again. So, how about just a confederacy.

@RSone
Thing is I doub't we'd be going for a Kingdom but rather a Republic. Unless we can find someone with real bloodlines related to either the Counts of Flanders (unknown) or the Dukes of Brabant (known, Who's the hubby of the British Queen?). quote]

Despite what some people on MP.net might think about the Monarchy, we are NOT going to cut out the monarchy. They are still blood relatives of William of Orange. The overwhelmig part of the population loves the monarchy and this'll most likely even grow when Willem Alexander and Maxima become King and Queen(which is actually the first time in history we've had both a a King and a Queen) plus the Military is HEAVILY intertwined with the House. It's just not going to happen, but why would it be obstacle? it's only ceremonial for the biggest part, and it could be (like it already is for us) the glue that bonds it all together.

[klong]

Still want to live in denial ? My question still stands. However, do not expect much competent response from you, DH.

[sp2c]

sp2c what, you don't like fishing? You sure you're navy?

no I don't like fishing, waiting for hours on end to catch these little freaky slimy critters that don't taste good and need to be thrown back in ... what a waste of time!

and I aint no navy either!!!


Long story Short. Napoleon gets ass kicking at Waterloo. 'Southern Netherlands' get turned over to the Dutch Crown making a big jolly unified State. I believe it was the first one since the seperation (you know 16th century). So...1830 pops up, we fight a bit and by 1839 Belgium is fully formed & autonomous.(not real 'flemish' popular support for either side). So...if we'd unify again you'd probably give us another reason to secceede again. So, how about just a confederacy.

that was no fusion since the Belgians had no say in the matter

the southern Netherlands did not fuze (is that a word :D) with the real Netherlands but they were glued to it by the powers that be

in fact, we are the victims of all this

[sp2c]

Still want to live in denial ? My question still stands. However, do not expect much competent response from you, DH.

cite some examples?

I can do it for you, they are out there but I wonder if you actually know what you are talking about so I'll just wait for it before answering your 'question'

[Briggs]

no I don't like fishing, waiting for hours on end to catch these little freaky slimy critters that don't taste good and need to be thrown back in ... what a waste of time!

and I aint no navy either!!!

that was no fusion since the Belgians had no say in the matter

the southern Netherlands did not fuze (is that a word :D) with the real Netherlands but they were glued to it by the powers that be

in fact, we are the victims of all this

It's a verb, IIRC. Right....so hammering two parts together is not a fusion? Qué?

RSone: Doubt the Dutch Monarchy will be 'accepted in Flanders'. Cant really make a union that is republican on one side and monarchic on the other.

[klong]

cite some examples?

I can do it for you, they are out there but I wonder if you actually know what you are talking about so I'll just wait for it before answering your 'question'

I am not here to cite history. If you acknowlege these events, that's good enough for me.

[sp2c]

I am not here to cite history. If you acknowlege these events, that's good enough for me.

what events?

[Niels]

I am not here to cite history. If you acknowlege these events, that's good enough for me.
And who the hell are you? We don't give a rat's arse about your issues or whether you think it's good enough.

[klong]

what events?

Go to google and check "dutch atrocities"

[klong]

And who the hell are you? We don't give a rat's arse about your issues or whether you think it's good enough.

Oh really ? You will.

[Briggs]

Klong how about you try and stay on topic before some MOD comes in an gives you a kick

[dava]

Go to google and check "dutch atrocities"

Maybe Klong should do a research on indonesian atrocities.

[klong]

Klong how about you try and stay on topic before some MOD comes in an gives you a kick

Are you threatening me ? Watch out, BIG DUTCH BOY ha ha

[klong]

Maybe Klong should do a research on indonesian atrocities.

So, two wrongs make a right ?

[sp2c]

Go to google and check "dutch atrocities"

you want me to prove your point?
why'd you open your mouth in the first place?

strange

[sp2c]

It's a verb, IIRC. Right....so hammering two parts together is not a fusion? Qué?


I don't think there was any hammering two parts together, it was making one part bigger at the expense of the other.
we weren't trying to build a new state out of two old ones like mr. Wilders seems to be suggesting but we were trying to add Belgium to the Netherlands and the Belgians just had to agree with it

we were 'rewarded' for joining the winning team in time ... it was no fusion, it was landgrab
and the Belgians didn't like it

[dava]

So, two wrongs make a right ?

No.
But you did start talking about dutch atrocities out of the blue.
So i can start talking about indonesian one's. Just so people also remember those ;)

[Kradder]

http://www.zoover.nl/images/manneke.jpg

Are those clog shoes? :D