Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?

[Shuimo]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?
What would it be like?:)

[Calanen]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?
What would it be like?:)

Would you give the EU discounted Death Buses?

[Eztyga]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?
What would it be like?:)

It has been tried before, didn't work...

[Shuimo]

Would you give the EU discounted Death Buses?
Plz stop abusing your right to speak on a public forum.

[lag]

well, if the first language would be german or at least english, why not :)

[Policía Loco]

Is the internet doing your assignments for school??

[Shuimo]

Is the internet doing your assignments for school??
That is an amusing reply. LOL
Definitely not! I just find it interesting to talk to people from different parts of the world on issues I am interested in. Is that reason enough?

[Policía Loco]

Why not share your opinions first?

[Shuimo]

Why not share your opinions first?
But I need to know other people's opinions first. Then there is exchange of views.:)

[Policía Loco]

Can you imagine Taiwan or Tibet being sovereign counties?

[Bitogno]

well, if the first language would be german or at least english, why not :)
No, no, the only solution is that French become the first language :)

[Shuimo]

Can you imagine Taiwan or Tibet being sovereign counties?
I can hardly imagine that! Really !:)

[Policía Loco]

I can hardly imagine that! Really !:)


Please, do tell why.

[Basillicus]

Perhaps it could be, though the central government should be relatively weak so that somewhat large local differences could be taken into account in the decision making.

[Shuimo]

Please, do tell why.
The reason is the same as that when you imagine Hawaii or Montana become independent of the US.

[Britboy]

'Single united country'?

If you mean confederation, maybe some day far in the future.

If you mean anything tighter than that, v unlikely. Maybe a loose federation at the most in a few millennia or summat :p

I think the French, Cloggie and Irish decisions on the constitution were proof enough that a lot of Europeans aren't really into the idea of a unified EU. One big EU would make us part of an arrangement which has a lot more punch than separate states, however our voices would be less likely to be heard and acted on than everyone elses in the EU, and itd be pretty hard to get any sort of consensus on anything. Could be more of a drama than its worth.

[pocoloco]

well, if the first language would be german or at least english, why not :)


No, no, the only solution is that French become the first language :)

Aww no! It should be Finnish of course! So that there would be a tiny (5.1 million) elite and the rabble learning the master language p-)

But really think about it, that solution would put most of the Europeans on same level thus giving all equal opportunities language wise at least... Hmm, or maybe we (Europeans, that is) should start using only Esperanto?

[pocoloco]

Perhaps it could be, though the central government should be relatively weak so that somewhat large local differences could be taken into account in the decision making.


'Single united country'?

If you mean confederation, maybe some day far in the future.

If you mean anything tighter than that, v unlikely. Maybe a loose federation at the most in a few millennia or summat :p

I think the French, Cloggie and Irish decisions on the constitution were proof enough that a lot of Europeans aren't really into the idea of a unified EU. One big EU would make us part of an arrangement which has a lot more punch than separate states, however our voices would be less likely to be heard and acted on than everyone elses in the EU, and itd be pretty hard to get any sort of consensus on anything. Could be more of a drama than its worth.

Hmm, Europeans lack a sense of Europeanism on national level. There should be still more integration on political and social level to make Europe more united and uniform. On economical level things are going more and more one-tracked and the economical advantages retain EU's attractiveness to possible new members.

But when there should be more unity on political level, EU countries are still very divided. To make Europe more united, more political power to European parliament would be needed thus ripping power from national decision makers and its something that is in a far distant future.

[Calanen]

Can you imagine an internet without Chinese communist party agents asking stupid questions and creating multiple threads?

You know there is someone making a huge file on all of this. Woeful isnt it.

Comrade Commisar! I have the opinions of the evil Imperialist Capitalist Nation forum posters! They think that EU become single country some day!

[Lazy Lob]

Plz stop abusing your right to speak on a public forum.

Otherwise what.......?

http://www.liveleak.com/e/5f0_1175771241

[Calanen]

Otherwise what.......?



He's used to getting his way in China by flashing his party ID.

Doesnt work on us bucko.

[Basillicus]

The reason is the same as that when you imagine Hawaii or Montana become independent of the US.

Which is...?

[Billy No Mates]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?
What would it be like?:)

Perhaps it would possible in the aftermath of a future war in which Belgium is destroyed and Macs castrated,otherwise no way .

[TheBelgian]

I think it's pretty much inevitable that, after a lenghty process, Europe becomes a nation of itself. We may never quite give it that name, but in all aspects that matter, it will be a uniform actor on the international scene. This won't happen in the next year or even decade, but eventually, it will.
Even now, on so many issues, sovreignty lies with the EU and no longer with member states. Economy, agriculture, justice, trade, standards and practices, all these issues are to a large extent decided in Strasbough and Brussels rather than in the capitals of member states. And we're even seeing the humble beginnings of a common foreign policy and common defense policy.
It's become a process that can barely be stopped. Just look at the constitution. When that failed, they just brought it back as the Treaty of Lisbon. When Ireland vetoed that, no one said this was the end of the treaty, but rather that a way would have to be found around the Irish veto. The EU has a life of its own now, and it's going to become increasingly difficult for even large states to block the process of increased Union-wide integration. We might never actually call it a country, but if the EU, already the world's largest economy, could manage to allign its foreign policy and back it up with an integrated military capacity, it would be a powerful nation unto its own, in all but name.

[VansRV]

What would it be like?:)

The American Civil War.

[Shuimo]

I think it's pretty much inevitable that, after a lenghty process, Europe becomes a nation of itself. We may never quite give it that name, but in all aspects that matter, it will be a uniform actor on the international scene. This won't happen in the next year or even decade, but eventually, it will.
Even now, on so many issues, sovreignty lies with the EU and no longer with member states. Economy, agriculture, justice, trade, standards and practices, all these issues are to a large extent decided in Strasbough and Brussels rather than in the capitals of member states. And we're even seeing the humble beginnings of a common foreign policy and common defense policy.
It's become a process that can barely be stopped. Just look at the constitution. When that failed, they just brought it back as the Treaty of Lisbon. When Ireland vetoed that, no one said this was the end of the treaty, but rather that a way would have to be found around the Irish veto. The EU has a life of its own now, and it's going to become increasingly difficult for even large states to block the process of increased Union-wide integration. We might never actually call it a country, but if the EU, already the world's largest economy, could manage to allign its foreign policy and back it up with an integrated military capacity, it would be a powerful nation unto its own, in all but name.
Yes, that is so true.
I'd love to see a unified Europe on the international scene.

[Magnus18]

yes, it would be great!

[tea drinker]

Most Europeans don't seem to want it.
For example, Lisbon treaty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon
France voted against it, Netherlands voted against it. they then took the vote away from citizens on this matter, called the treat a different name and the Eurocrats made the decision for their citizens. Ireland still needed to vote due constitution reasons. Ireland voted against Lisbon.
Now we are hated in EU because of this.
To paraphrase GWB "they hate our democracy - our freedoms" p-)
I am not going to offer a critique of the Union but it seems to have no problem ignoring the wishes of it's voters.

We all want close and peaceful ties with our neighbours - we just don't want to end up with the same family name.

[Arbody]

well, if the first language would be german or at least english, why not :)

Opitimists learn english , realist chinese , pessimists russian

[Shuimo]

Opitimists learn english , realist chinese , pesemists russian
Why pessimists learn russia?

[Basillicus]

Why pessimists learn russia?

Have you ever been to Russia?

[pacifist]

Opitimists learn english , realist chinese , pesemists russian


Chinese is hard to learn unless you start as a kid.

It's especially hard to speak.

[pacifist]

Why pessimists learn russia?

Propably because not everyone likes the idea of strong Russia.

[Shuimo]

Have you ever been to Russia?
No.
At most, I was physically near Russia by a few meters when I went to China' notheseatern border province Heilongjiang a few years ago.:)

[Arbody]

Why pessimists learn russia?

It's joke from Eastern Europe ,
English -becuase it's gives you chance for good work/life etc.
Chinese - by some of visoners in few decades China well rule the world ( not in my opinion)
Russian - c'mon it's Eastern European joke , 20 years ago everyone in Eastern Europe learned Russian as main foreign language and some pessimists think that old good day's will back p-) , besides that russian is again very popular in Poland

[Shuimo]

Chinese is hard to learn unless you start as a kid.

It's especially hard to speak.
Chinese is a tone language unlike many western language.
Yeah, I hardly hear any foreign learners of Chinese can master the four tones of the language correctly. But then it is quite a delight for me to hear foreign speakers of Chinese with their exotic accent!:)

[Shuimo]

It's joke from Eastern Europe ,
English -becuase it's gives you chance for good work/life etc.
Chinese - by some of visoners in few decades China well rule the world ( not in my opinion)
Russian - c'mon it's Eastern European joke , 20 years ago evryone in Eastern Europe learned Russian as main foreiglanguage and some pessimists think that old good day's will back p-) , besides that russian is again very popular in Poland
I myself don't think China can rule the world!
How could we a country, whichever country it is, should rule the world?
never ever!

[widi243]

well, if the first language would be german or at least english, why not :)
Deffinitly not, al;l of my grandpa and his grandpa struggle to not speak in geraman. Deffinitly notp-)

[widi243]

Why pessimists learn russia?
russian pessimist should learn chinise p-)

[Shuimo]

russian pessimist should learn chinise p-)
Russia and China seem to enjoy a good relationship.
but in terms of non-govrnmental exchange between folks, there seems little enthusiasm. That is my feeling.

[lag]

No, no, the only solution is that French become the first language :)

mon dieu! that would be way to cruel p-)


The American Civil War.

good one :D


Deffinitly not, al;l of my grandpa and his grandpa struggle to not speak in geraman. Deffinitly notp-)

if they try to fight it, it just get's stronger, lol ;)

[Arbody]

russian pessimist should learn chinise p-)

Another good polish joke , "long live Chinese-Polish border" p-)

[Player]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?

No.

Europe is made up of a lot of different nations which were spilling each others blood for more than a millennium.
Anyone with a basic knowledge of European history knows how much some European nations dislike each other...
So no I can't imagine them as a single entity.

Besides that I remember one Chinese guy who was also asking a lot of questions, hmm what was his name, oh, Lee was it? Aren't you Lee by any chance?

[namvet46]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?
What would it be like?:)

you don't have to wait. its all Muslim.

[Stonewall71]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?
What would it be like?:)

It will never happen.

[Kjallakr]

The EU is already a "single unified" entity internationally

Problem is that the population has a different opinion. Democracy has never been EU's strong point. But many countries have that deficiency.

[oldsoak]

I dont like the idea of a single united country of Europe - there are too many distinct cultures in Europe, and I dont want them dissappearing under some huge colourless blanket. I want the Germans to be German, the French to be French etc. These cultures have developed with distinct "flavours" because they were independent states, different laguages etc - to loose that difference would be a great pity.

[The Dane]

No. I can't imagine that at all!

[BugHunt]

A nation of visionaries tried it in 1914 and 1945 - didnt stick p-)

[afreu]

The EU is already a "single unified" entity internationally

Problem is that the population has a different opinion. Democracy has never been EU's strong point. But many countries have that deficiency.

BS! The EU doesn't even have a coherent foreign policy.

I think you have to differentiate between nation and state. Nation being the collective identity and state being more of an administrative affair. I doubt that European nations will dissolve in the foreseeable future. What is going to and already is happening is that the decision-making process for certain political sectors will be transferred to the EU level. This concerns mostly sectors where EU policies are more effective than the policies of single states.

[Silent Reader]

No.

Europe is made up of a lot of different nations which were spilling each others blood for more than a millennium.
Anyone with a basic knowledge of European history knows how much some European nations dislike each other...
So no I can't imagine them as a single entity.



just think of how it was a few hundred years ago - britain was sülit in several countries... there was no Germany but dozens of Kingdoms, Free Imperial Cities etc... there was no single Italy but lots of city states... and so on.
seeing the development that has taken place so far id say that there is a chance for a unified Europe... but not in the near future.

[xav]

Tom Clancy sees it happening

http://resources.ubi.com/resources/89/89549-EFEC_concept_full4.jpg


In 2011, the United States of America and the European Union sign the historic SLAMS (Space-Land-Air Missile Shield) Treaty, agreeing to co-develop technologies for a comprehensive, interlocking anti-ballistic missile system. Left out of the treaty, Russia accelerates development of its own system. SLAMS is activated in 2014. The US and EU test launch nuclear salvos against each other, which the SLAMS weapons completely destroy. Emboldened by the success of the tests, the US and EU ****ounce "the end of strategic nuclear war," and the world celebrates a new age of peace and security.

However, in 2015 it is found that major oil companies have greatly overstated the amount of recoverable oil reserves. Energy security becomes the explicit priority of governments around the world. Russia, being the world's number one supplier of natural gas and crude oil, has its economy skyrocket up with the energy crisis, spending its oil profits on modernizing its armed forces and utilizing its new-found power to influence world events. A nuclear war occurs between Saudi Arabia and Iran in 2016, killing 20 million, further compounding the energy crisis and greatly destabilising the nations of Europe. With crude oil now at USD 800 a barrel, the EU member-states are forced to consolidate political, economic, and military power in the face of growing global security, environmental and economic concerns. Morphing to become the new "European Federation" (EF) in 2018, most of the wealthy Western European States are now recognized as a single independent state in its own right. The United Kingdom and Ireland decline membership while Switzerland remains neutral. The US and EF regard each other's power as a threat to their own, and the now fractured former allies embark on a costly space arms race with each other.

The militarisation of space reaches its peak in 2018, when the United States reveals plans to launch the "Freedom Star" space station into high orbit by 2020, in an effort to regain its position as the premier world superpower. While partly designed for civilian research purposes, the station will also house three companies of U.S. Marines, who can deploy anywhere on Earth within 90 minutes. International reaction is extremely negative, to say the least. The EF and Russia in particular despise the development, seeing it as a way the US could use to neutralise their portion of anti-ballistic defences and upset the balance of power. The EF withdraw from the already divided NATO in protest. In 2020, when the final module of the Freedom Star is set to launch from Kennedy Space Center amid international outcry, it comes as little surprise when a group of terrorists attack the launch site. In investigating the source of the attack, the US, the EF, and Russia find themselves at odds, rolling with unstoppable momentum toward full-scale global war.

We have 10 years...
(and remember he predicted Gerogia war :) )

[BugHunt]

Or maybe game designers and writers cant be arsed making a tonne of detail in the differences between national sides and hence "the EU" is better then 27 different armies?

For the same reaons the middle east is usually abbreviated into some single faction - and we can all see that happening......... when hell freezes over....

[AROUETLJ]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?


No.
-------------------------

[tsuri]

Since the whole point of the EU is to have all the benefits of a unified country without actually having one, I can give a definite no to that.

Rather the idea of statehood itself is becoming obsolete as Globalization develops. So in the future, the EU will not be a state but nobody will care.

[Jaap86]

Non-Europeans cannot understand that Europe consists of COUNTRIES and not of States. The question is repeated over an over again and stimulated by fear mongers who are against the EU.

The people of Europe will never lose their national identities, so there will never be a united country, no. That doesn't mean that European countries cannot be a superpower through tight co-operation financially, politically and militarily. We have a long way to go though.

[Kaapeli]

It's unlikely EU will become a single nation officially. But the federalization will continue until EU becomes almost indistinguishable from a nation. Having a common foreign, domestic, economic and defence policies and integrated government organizations etc.
EU members will stay independent nations mostly in name only and in practice will have similar autonomy and legislative power to Russian federal republics or US states.

All this will happen so slowly in the time span of decades that people will hardly even notice the change. There will be no sudden declaration of independence or a new constitution but a very long series of smaller integration steps that will have the same end result.
This is how EU has developed so far and this is how it will continue.

[~~~~]

Russia and China seem to enjoy a good relationship.
but in terms of non-govrnmental exchange between folks, there seems little enthusiasm. That is my feeling.

huhuh, that just the inverse of polish-russian relations :-)

[~~~~]

It's unlikely EU will become a single nation officially. But the federalization will continue until EU becomes almost indistinguishable from a nation. Having a common foreign, domestic, economic and defence policies and integrated government organizations etc.
EU members will stay independent nations mostly in name only and in practice will have similar autonomy and legislative power to Russian federal republics or US states.

All this will happen so slowly in the time span of decades that people will hardly even notice the change. There will be no sudden declaration of independence or a new constitution but a very long series of smaller integration steps that will have the same end result.
This is how EU has developed so far and this is how it will continue.

this is also how I see it. globalization constrain national countries to unite in some larger forms. remember that the idea of countries organized around a nation is quite new. it appeared first in the XIXth century with the so called "spring of nations".
before that, countries were organized rather around a dynasty then a nation, with no such national selfconsciousness as we have today.

(as, with some exceptions, at that times in most cases it was the king/queen/prince/imperor/etc who was the sovereign force in the country, not the ruled nation).

this makes me think, we should not worry of EU as federal state, as the idea of a national country is not eternal and is probably just an interim form when considering today's needs and a wider point of view on history. as long as it will be working on a democratic basis, I'm personally for an Europe united in one regular country. off course not yet, but in the years to come.

[Basillicus]

this makes me think, we should not worry of EU as federal state, as the idea of a national country is not eternal and is probably just an interim form when considering today's needs and a wider point of view on history. as long as it will be working on a democratic basis, I'm personally for an Europe united in one regular country. off course not yet, but in the years to come.

My thoughts exactly. Cultures didn't die and assimilate back then when nation states didn't exist. Why would they do that now? And cultures are always in a flux, adapting new things, and they should do exactly that since adaptation is imperative for survival. The current state of different cultures is not going to stay like this forever.

[Connaught Ranger]

Never Going To Happen!

Reasons:-

Too many deep based cultures.

(Ex. National Identities as opposed to a single identity.)

Too many deep based religious concept's.

(Ex. Orthodox and Catholic don't see eye to eye.)

Too much historical suspicions.

(Ex. We know what you did to us in a particular war.)

Too many languages.

(Esperanto never got off the ground).:roll:

Too many Political Parties.

(Cant hold a Political coalition in separate countries,

never mind a "unified" E.U.)

Connaught Ranger.

[Ordie]

The reason is the same as that when you imagine Hawaii or Montana become independent of the US.

You're looking at America through Chinese eyes and values.

China is a top-down country. The US is less so.

Most Americans could care less if Montana and Hawaii go thier separate ways. In fact many Americans and pundits often joke about separating from the union.

Our union is based more on Constitutional integrity than territorial integrity. Especially when it comes to representation in Washington DC. It is set up based on population with the House of representatives, and equal proportion in the Senate.

Much of the local laws and policies are formulated at the state level. The Governors of each state do not report nor answer to the President of the US.

[Connaught Ranger]

you don't have to wait. its all Muslim.

Major Fail!!

Seems that Hungary, Romania, Czech Republic, Slovakia have been denied their qouta of Muslims:roll:.

Connaught Ranger.

[TheBelgian]

I notice that many people really seem to cling to this culture argument. I've lived in half a dozen countries, in western and eastern Europe, and almost visited every country in the Union and the culture isn't THAT much different. Sure, the favorite local beverages may differ (though beer is pretty universal), people might eat at different hours and different dishes, holidays are different and there are slight differences in the daily lives people live. But what, I ask you, are these massive cultural differences that would make it impossible for us to unite!? We pretty much all believe in the same core values and live our lives along the same moral and cultural principles.
And what culture are we going to lose in uniting? You think the eurocrats are going to suddenly outlaw all holidays except 'Europe Day', or pass a ban on folkloristic costumes? Culture europe-wide is disolving as an effect of globalisation anyways, tightening European bonds and uniting under a common system of government won't make it worse.
Same with religion. I know in some hot spots religion is still an important issue, but in none of the countries I've lived in it's ever come up. Most people aren't really that religious anyways.
Where religion and culture are concerned, I submit the cleavages are greater between the north and south of the United States, but still they manage to work together under one government.
Language, granted, is an issue to be overcome, but we've come a hell of a long way without it being too much of a problem. Europeans who actually make it to the level of government where language really becomes an issue (EU level) invariable know English, German and/or French anyway, they make it work.

[Connaught Ranger]

I notice that many people really seem to cling to this culture argument. I've lived in half a dozen countries, in western and eastern Europe, and almost visited every country in the Union and the culture isn't THAT much different. Sure, the favorite local beverages may differ (though beer is pretty universal), people might eat at different hours and different dishes, holidays are different and there are slight differences in the daily lives people live. But what, I ask you, are these massive cultural differences that would make it impossible for us to unite!? We pretty much all believe in the same core values and live our lives along the same moral and cultural principles.
And what culture are we going to lose in uniting? You think the eurocrats are going to suddenly outlaw all holidays except 'Europe Day', or pass a ban on folkloristic costumes? Culture europe-wide is disolving as an effect of globalisation anyways, tightening European bonds and uniting under a common system of government won't make it worse.
Same with religion. I know in some hot spots religionis still an important issue, but in none of the countries I've lived in it's ever come up. Most people aren't really that religious anyways.
Where religion and culture are concerned, I submit the cleavages are greater between the north and south of the United States, but still they manage to work together under one government.
Language, granted, is an issue to be overcome, but we've come a hell of a long way without it being too much of a problem. Europeans who actually make it to the level of government where language really becomes an issue (EU level) invariable know English, German and/or French anyway, they make it work.

Belgium isn't that the country that had many months with no Government because of differences between the two cultural "eccentricities" basically Walleroon & Flemish?

So by your definition any day now the U.S.A. and Canada are going to become one great party zone :roll:

The Common language will be French of course p-)

By the way feel free to come and convince the Romanians and Hungarians that we are all one big happy family.rofl

Connaught Ranger

[Kadrun]

They will need system of "federation" not "union" if they are willing to combine.
Anyways, I do not think it will happen as long as Europe does not see something enough dangerous.

Different culture and language are the biggest problem I believe.

[cbreedon]

Most Americans could care less if Montana and Hawaii go thier separate ways.

Mr. Lincoln cared....

[SkyUS]

I never want to see a European Union nation. Maybe a quasi federal state in some distant future.

[RSone]

Belgium isn't that the country that had many months with no Government because of differences between the two cultural "eccentricities" basically Walleroon & Flemish?

Connaught Ranger

It's all part of our plan, dude. When they're fighting each other, we'll invade and subjugate the Flemish. The French can have the walloons.

At least they won't complain about the damn coffeshops anymore. We'll apoint Gerd Leers as Commisionner of the Queen. AND we finally get some more beer(and don't say OMGZ HEINEKEN IZ TEH BEZT!!!)

[dindin]

about united states of afrika united state of latin america

[PeterG]

Not only do i hate the EU and wish to god there will not be a single united EU country, i would in fact like to turn back time and re-erect the iron curtain. The eastern european criminals and beggars that have invaded us, is reason good enough all by itself. I swear i'm on the brink of stomping to death the next gypsie beggar/thief harassing me when i'm in town..

[Connaught Ranger]

Not only do i hate the EU and wish to god there will not be a single united EU country, i would in fact like to turn back time and re-erect the iron curtain. The eastern european criminals and beggars that have invaded us, is reason good enough all by itself. I swear i'm on the brink of stomping to death the next gypsie beggar/thief harassing me when i'm in town..

Well that will resolve the issue:roll:

[joka]

I think there are 4 areas that The EU needs to handle:
- Trade
- Infrastructure
- Foreign policy
- Defence policy

Also 2 major institutional reforms should take place:
- The budget should consist of money raised by The EU itself. Having a huge flamefest every 6 years where everyone has an incentive to screw the rest of the union is counter-productive.
- The roles of The Council and The Parliament should be more akin to The Senate and Congress in The US. The Commission should be directly accountable to both.

The Swiss call themselves a confederation but they're really more of a federation, I think something similar to what the they have going on would work great for The EU.

Just going to post this (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb69/eb69_en.htm) too to get rid of this persistent misconception that Europeans don't want matters to be decided in Brussels.

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/4271/eurdd0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/eurdd0.jpg/1/w477.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img227/eurdd0.jpg/1/)

Sadly "Transport" is very low, but I think it is an argument that can and must be won.

[muttbutt]

I'd also be in favour of a Federated EU, I don't believe it means that French culture, German, Finnish, Greek ect becomes diluted, even in the US there are "cultural" differences between Texas and New York, or Utah and Florida....plus on a purely selfish note,

I look to the future and what do I see, if the World turns out as expected, we'll have what?.....3,4, maybe 5 huge/large powers, US/China/India/Brazil maybe Russia, maybe more then that, each with hundreds if not Billions of people, seperately no EU country can have a voice or much say in that World, Germany will have only 75,80 million people, there will be cities in China and India with population half to 2/3s of that!!:|, we either work together to survive and prosper or be disregarded and sidelined.....

and that goes for the UK too, and yes I've heard all the pie in the sky "new commonwealth" ect ideas.

[PeterG]

Well that will resolve the issue:roll:

Well, tell me what the EU is good for, for prosperous european nations? Nothing. It is good for ambitious bureaucrats and politicians salivating over the massive bureaucracy, and Nirvana itself: A job in Brussels.. Other than that? Nothing. Paying billions in subsidies to poor easter european nations, and allowing a limitless number of eastern europeans to immigrate - competing for, and lowering wages for everyone, and being a massive burden on their hosts, because of their EU rights to benefits. And the criminals and beggars polluting our streets, making a mockery of the good society we had created for ourselves here. A thing of the past now, though. With the scores of worthless 'refugees' we are also forced to accept by the UN, our very welfare system will crumble eventually. All our efforts since WWII, will have been for nothing.

Military security? The combined 'might' of the EU was completely powerless even in the ( comparatively ) miniscule civil war in the balkans. Imagine how impotent it would be in a real war. The EU is better suited to creating policies on how much curvature that can be allowed in cucumbers.

[Lazy Lob]

Well, tell me what the EU is good for, for prosperous european nations? Nothing. It is good for ambitious bureaucrats and politicians salivating over the massive bureaucracy, and Nirvana itself: A job in Brussels.. Other than that? Nothing. Paying billions in subsidies to poor easter european nations, and allowing a limitless number of eastern europeans to immigrate - competing for, and lowering wages for everyone, and being a massive burden on their hosts, because of their EU rights to benefits. And the criminals and beggars polluting our streets, making a mockery of the good society we had created for ourselves here. A thing of the past now, though. With the scores of worthless 'refugees' we are also forced to accept by the UN, our very welfare system will crumble eventually. All our efforts since WWII, will have been for nothing.

Military security? The combined 'might' of the EU was completely powerless even in the ( comparatively ) miniscule civil war in the balkans. Imagine how impotent it would be in a real war. The EU is better suited to creating policies on how much curvature that can be allowed in cucumbers.

Good post.

[Basillicus]

Well, tell me what the EU is good for, for prosperous european nations? Nothing. It is good for ambitious bureaucrats and politicians salivating over the massive bureaucracy, and Nirvana itself: A job in Brussels.. Other than that? Nothing. Paying billions in subsidies to poor easter european nations, and allowing a limitless number of eastern europeans to immigrate - competing for, and lowering wages for everyone, and being a massive burden on their hosts, because of their EU rights to benefits.

I believe the whole Europe benefits when then continent develops. Hell, even the development in its own right is purely a good thing, stabilizes the continent and increases competitivess against e.g. the US and China.


And the criminals and beggars polluting our streets, making a mockery of the good society we had created for ourselves here. A thing of the past now, though. With the scores of worthless 'refugees' we are also forced to accept by the UN, our very welfare system will crumble eventually. All our efforts since WWII, will have been for nothing.

I don't mind a couple of gypsies begging in the streets. Not really a problem to mention, maybe not a pretty sight but I really don't care. About the refugees I agree partially, but you can't blame EU for that, it's a more deeper issue.


Military security? The combined 'might' of the EU was completely powerless even in the ( comparatively ) miniscule civil war in the balkans. Imagine how impotent it would be in a real war. The EU is better suited to creating policies on how much curvature that can be allowed in cucumbers.

You mean the war that didn't directly involve EU in any way and which happened when the EU was only a shadow of what it is now? How can you draw any conclusions based on that?

[tsuri]

Sadly "Transport" is very low, but I think it is an argument that can and must be won.


Fun Fact: Transport is actually exclusively handled by the European Union, at least per treaty. But every member state so far has chosen to ignore this and even the EU itself for that matter. Nobody really understands why but it is one of many mysteries.


Well, tell me what the EU is good for, for prosperous european nations? Nothing. It is good for ambitious bureaucrats and politicians salivating over the massive bureaucracy, and Nirvana itself: A job in Brussels.. Other than that? Nothing.
Fun Fact: The whole EU(400 Million people) spends about as much on bureaucracy as the city of Cologne (900.000 people)

[Lazy Lob]

Fun Fact: The whole EU(400 Million people) spends about as much on bureaucracy as the city of Cologne (900.000 people)

Cologne spends €120 Billion per year????? Bugger me.

On top of that it's filthy. Needs a bit of a sweep and a wash.

[TheBelgian]

Well, tell me what the EU is good for, for prosperous european nations? Nothing. It is good for ambitious bureaucrats and politicians salivating over the massive bureaucracy, and Nirvana itself: A job in Brussels.. Other than that? Nothing. Paying billions in subsidies to poor easter european nations, and allowing a limitless number of eastern europeans to immigrate - competing for, and lowering wages for everyone, and being a massive burden on their hosts, because of their EU rights to benefits. And the criminals and beggars polluting our streets, making a mockery of the good society we had created for ourselves here. A thing of the past now, though. With the scores of worthless 'refugees' we are also forced to accept by the UN, our very welfare system will crumble eventually. All our efforts since WWII, will have been for nothing.

Military security? The combined 'might' of the EU was completely powerless even in the ( comparatively ) miniscule civil war in the balkans. Imagine how impotent it would be in a real war. The EU is better suited to creating policies on how much curvature that can be allowed in cucumbers.

Did it occur to you that we might not be "prosperous european nations" it it weren't for the EU? We're not all as lucky as Norway to be floating on a sea of oil and gas. As muttbutt pointed out, with the emerging global players we see today, individual European member states don't mean squat anymore (economically or militarily). Even large states like the UK, France and Germany. Germany and France seem to have accepted that their only path towards keeping some relevance in the near future is to engage themselves in helping the EU develop. Hopefully the UK will soon realize they're not the British Empire anymore and will soon follow suit.

As for the balkans war, no wonder we couldn't respond militarily, Eurosceptics like you are doing whatever they can to stop military integration. That was before the days of common defense policy, battle groups and EU led missions. We're still a long way from achieving military unity or cooperation on a high enough level, but, god willing, we'll get there. You think that if there was no EU, somehow the individual european nations would have rallied more effectively to stop the conflict?
Also, the balkans aren't in the EU, no eastern European states where at that time, so berating the EU for not putting a stop to a conflict there is like chiding the US for not putting a stop to every latin american conflict, by virtue of proximity. What IS true, however, is that over the last half a century of the EU's existance (in its varried, evolving forms) there hasn't been a single war in western Europe. Maybe the EU's presence is in large part to thank for that.

And thanks for pointing out, tsuri, that the European bureaucracy, innefficient and archaic as it may be, still works on an extremly modest budget compared to the territory it oversees and the tasks it handles.

[SkyUS]

Well, tell me what the EU is good for, for prosperous european nations? Nothing. It is good for ambitious bureaucrats and politicians salivating over the massive bureaucracy, and Nirvana itself: A job in Brussels.. Other than that? Nothing. Paying billions in subsidies to poor easter european nations, and allowing a limitless number of eastern europeans to immigrate - competing for, and lowering wages for everyone, and being a massive burden on their hosts, because of their EU rights to benefits. And the criminals and beggars polluting our streets, making a mockery of the good society we had created for ourselves here. A thing of the past now, though. With the scores of worthless 'refugees' we are also forced to accept by the UN, our very welfare system will crumble eventually. All our efforts since WWII, will have been for nothing.

Military security? The combined 'might' of the EU was completely powerless even in the ( comparatively ) miniscule civil war in the balkans. Imagine how impotent it would be in a real war. The EU is better suited to creating policies on how much curvature that can be allowed in cucumbers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7735603.stm


A report by the commission says the proportion of Eastern Europeans in old EU member states rose from 0.2% of the population in 2003 to 0.5% by 2008.
But they helped growth by filling jobs, and did not drive down wages, it says.

The commission says the economic slowdown has already led to a substantial reduction in immigration to some member states, along with an increase in return migration.

"This is a sign that free labour mobility is self-regulatory by nature and provides a much-needed flexibility in both directions," the report says.

[tsuri]

Cologne spends €120 Billion per year????? Bugger me.

[ ] You understand how the EU budget works

2 to 5 % of this go into actual costs of bureaucracy(and even there most of the money is the keepup for the buildings).

Most of the EU budget is spent on Agriculture, Internal development etc.

[Bohemoth]

No single united country. The EU is an artificial conglomerate of very diverse countries founded by politicians for economic reasons. It is a beaurocratic construct with no heart and emotions to the people of its member countries. Only loved by politicians for reasons they cannot properly explain to the people of their country they are supposed to represent.

[muttbutt]

Good post.No it isn't, it's a meandering rant, he even name checks the UN FFS.....the EU has no influence on refugees going anywhere, especially to non-EU Norway:|, various EU countries put limits on the numbers from accession countries coming in, don't blame the EU for something your's, mine anyone else's countries didn't do.

[muttbutt]

No single united country. The EU is an artificial conglomerate of very diverse countries founded by politicians for economic reasons. It is a beaurocratic construct with no heart and emotions to the people of its member countries. Only loved by politicians for reasons they cannot properly explain to the people of their country they are supposed to represent.That's ok, I on the other hand feel comfortable where ever I go inside Europe, like home, maybe thats just me, but there is a phenomenon called "Generation E" who might disagree with you....

[Dmitriev]

Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?

Um..no, but if that happens they economy is suposed to be stonger than the American.

[TheBelgian]

Um..no, but if that happens they economy is suposed to be stonger than the American.

Isn't it already?

[Kaapeli]

Um..no, but if that happens they economy is suposed to be stonger than the American.

It is. EU is the biggest single market zone in the world.

[Dmitriev]

It is. EU is the biggest single market zone in the world.

Oh yeah, my bad, you are right, I just checked p-), the only thing is that the EU is not one country, but I wonder if one day they would unite how would international position shift.

[Thom]

I love the idea of a more integrated Europe, and despite some of you hating it for various reasons, I believe it will be on the whole beneficial to everyone involved.

More co-operation means that we get better economies of scale in everything, common policy means less money wasted on individual countries different projects. Bringing Eastern Europe and the newer countries to the union may seem like a handout or draining, but it's beneficial to us all. They will benefit for obvious reasons, and the older union countries will benefit by their growth, it's a long term thing.

The EU isn't perfect by any means, there's alot of things in practice that range from **** to idiotic, but we're not going to solve these problems by bickering and staying independant - gradually becoming less and less influential on the world stage.

[joka]

Paying billions in subsidies to poor easter european nations, and allowing a limitless number of eastern europeans to immigrate - competing for, and lowering wages for everyone, and being a massive burden on their hosts, because of their EU rights to benefits. And the criminals and beggars polluting our streets, making a mockery of the good society we had created for ourselves here. A thing of the past now, though. With the scores of worthless 'refugees' we are also forced to accept by the UN, our very welfare system will crumble eventually. All our efforts since WWII, will have been for nothing.

The relationship EFTA countries have with The EU is a privilege, not a right. If Norwegians are unsatisfied with this arrangement and problems it causes for the Norwegian society you are free to discontinue it. Until that day, I'd rather hear "thank you" coming from your neck of the woods.

[PeterG]

The relationship EFTA countries have with The EU is a privilege, not a right. If Norwegians are unsatisfied with this arrangement and problems it causes for the Norwegian society you are free to discontinue it. Until that day, I'd rather hear "thank you" coming from your neck of the woods.

I would tell the EU to stuff it, so would the vast majority of all norwegians. Any 'relationship' we have with the EU ( paying them billions without getting nothing in return - well, preventing them from strangling us with inflated customs barriers, and a limitless number of beggars, criminals and asylum seekers that have travelled through the entire EU without any border checks whatsoever ) is our politicians, salivating with the thought of one day joining the club and getting an office in brussels. Many of them keep trying to convince us how good it would be for us to leave more decisions to brussels. Not many buying it though..

I hate the EU with a passion - as much as i hate the UN actually, and don't feel grateful whatsoever for anything they have ever done. I understand why the poor, underdeveloped nations that stand to get billions from the other members, are for it though.

[Lazy Lob]

No it isn't, it's a meandering rant, he even name checks the UN FFS.....the EU has no influence on refugees going anywhere, especially to non-EU Norway:|, various EU countries put limits on the numbers from accession countries coming in, don't blame the EU for something your's, mine anyone else's countries didn't do.

Yes it is.

At least PeterG talks straight. Your post reflects the excuses that are spewed out from the EU when things go wrong.

[The Beard]

For an organisation based on freedom of trade within its own borders, it's odd how protected status has arisen over the years. First Champagne can only be called that if it's made in the region of France with that name and now the Melton Mowbray pork pie (Gord [sic] love it and save it) has acquired the same status. Personally as the EU (whatever happened to the Common Market?) develops I'm looking forward to living in England which is part of the U.K. which is in the British Isles which in turn is part of Europe. Henceforth to be known as Administrative district 1, Area 5, the Beuracratic Nation of Europe. First, the mile is going to have to go. Then the pound (avois dupoid [spelling anyone?]) oh, and we can't have any driving on the left, despite the fact there are no common borders with other countries. To avoid making the Germans feel guilty, the events of 1914-1918 and 1939-1945 will be expunged from the record books. Then of course if any of the councils that run these adminstrative districts wish to spend any money (for instance the one formerly known as Westminster) and raised from the "friends" which is what we'll call the people who live there they will have to ask Brussels for the cash. After a 2 year decision making process during which the MEPs will attend more and more meetings after taking several fully expensed first class flights, the decision will have to go for further consultation after which it will be too late. Long live the glorious Union.

[Eventine]

Economic integration, without political and cultural integration, will not lead to a single, unified nation-state. The EU managed to achieve the former (somewhat), but it lacks political vision. Its member states don't agree, and cannot make their people agree, on what an European state means. For this reason, the EU cannot achieve the unification of Europe. Something more is needed.

[joka]

Any 'relationship' we have with the EU ( paying them billions without getting nothing in return - well, preventing them from strangling us with inflated customs barriers, and a limitless number of beggars, criminals and asylum seekers that have travelled through the entire EU without any border checks whatsoever )

There you go again, thinking you're entitled to something for nothing. The access you have to The EU market is a generous gesture, if Norwegians feel that this isn't working for them then do something about it.

[The Balkan]

Never. Way too many cultures and peoples in it. 100% against such stupidity.

[Vandervahn]

Yes it is.

At least PeterG talks straight. Your post reflects the excuses that are spewed out from the EU when things go wrong.

Um, even talked straight, its still complete bollocks that he blames the EU for Norways demographics, and apparently for most other domestic shortcomings as well. Quite imaginative, I have to say.

[Neoboy]

I think quite a few countries are just too different to become one big state. Frankly I hope it doesn't happen, too much history down the pan and I like the Queen on my money :p

[Limeyfellow]

I see it happening about the same time the US vote to become a state in the country of Mexico. That is not very likely.

[filochard]

First Champagne can only be called that if it's made in the region of France with that name

Good example.
So you want anybody making donkey piss with bubbles to be able to call it Champaign ?
Champaign is the name of a region, instead of stealing its reputation, make your own good wine with bubbles, say in Cornwall, call it "Cornwall" and if it's good, may be after a few centuries you would be able to make as much money as we do with Champaign. No need to cheat and parasite the reputation the Champaign built over the years thanks to its excellence.
That's exactly one of the main use of the EU: gang together so we can defend against cheaters/unfair trade. Alone, even the big three, we are too weak.
What's true for Champaign in France is true for any brand anywhere in the EU, it's not as if Britain is only able to build junk bond.

[muttbutt]

Yes it is.

At least PeterG talks straight. Your post reflects the excuses that are spewed out from the EU when things go wrong.
Ah so, "straight talking"="truth"?....so by that logic Fred Phelps "straight talker" that he is, is also right?...no that doesn't cut the mustard of logical argument Lazy, he may feel he is right and therefore come off rightously and you may agree, but it doesn't mean it's true, the EU has no effect on refugees going anywhere, especially to non-EU Norway....


And I don't believe my "facts" are excuses...you have a weird way of debating.

[afreu]

I hate the EU with a passion - as much as i hate the UN actually, and don't feel grateful whatsoever for anything they have ever done. I understand why the poor, underdeveloped nations that stand to get billions from the other members, are for it though.

Yes, international cooperation is a bitch. rofl

[The Beard]

Good example.
So you want anybody making donkey piss with bubbles to be able to call it Champaign ?
Champaign is the name of a region, instead of stealing its reputation, make your own good wine with bubbles, say in Cornwall, call it "Cornwall" and if it's good, may be after a few centuries you would be able to make as much money as we do with Champaign. No need to cheat and parasite the reputation the Champaign built over the years thanks to its excellence.
That's exactly one of the main use of the EU: gang together so we can defend against cheaters/unfair trade. Alone, even the big three, we are too weak.
What's true for Champaign in France is true for any brand anywhere in the EU, it's not as if Britain is only able to build junk bond.
Rugby was invented at Rugby school near Rugby in England, but we let the French, and anyone else who wants to, play it and the game is better because of it. In fact it might be better if they weren't quite so good at it
mind you, but that's another story.

[smalandian]

Rugby was invented at Rugby school near Rugby in England, but we let the French, and anyone else who wants to, play it and the game is better because of it. In fact it might be better if they weren't quite so good at it
mind you, but that's another story.

Is that a good comparison...really?

[The Beard]

Is that a good comparison...really?
No, and to be honest it was intended to be a bit flippant. Personally I think if Champagne is to be protected then it should be because it is the best of it's kind. I'm afraid I'm not a fan of overly fizzy wine, be it Champagne or Asti Spumante or any other type. France has more to be proud of than that. The countryside around Reims and Epernay is far more to be treasured than the drink. The genius of Andre Citroen that among others gave us the Traction Avant, the D Speciale and the CX is something to be treasured. The memory of the resistance fighters who took on overwhelming German forces in 1944 in the South East of France and ultimately were almost wiped out because the Allies didn't arrive in time. Walking round the small museum that commemorated that bravery had such an effect on me that I can remember the deeds but not the town it was near. That is the kind of thing that needs to be protected not a drink that is mainly used to break over a ship's bow or sprayed from a motor racing podium. Vive le Resistance, Viva la France. (No irony, sarcasm or flippancy in the last statement.)

[Red-Phos]

The eu can rim my arse hole.

[Lazy Lob]

The eu can rim my arse hole.

Careful what you wish for, you may like it.

[filochard]

No, and to be honest it was intended to be a bit flippant. Personally I think if Champagne is to be protected then it should be because it is the best of it's kind. I'm afraid I'm not a fan of overly fizzy wine, be it Champagne or Asti Spumante or any other type. France has more to be proud of than that. The countryside around Reims and Epernay is far more to be treasured than the drink. The genius of Andre Citroen that among others gave us the Traction Avant, the D Speciale and the CX is something to be treasured. The memory of the resistance fighters who took on overwhelming German forces in 1944 in the South East of France and ultimately were almost wiped out because the Allies didn't arrive in time. Walking round the small museum that commemorated that bravery had such an effect on me that I can remember the deeds but not the town it was near. That is the kind of thing that needs to be protected not a drink that is mainly used to break over a ship's bow or sprayed from a motor racing podium. Vive le Resistance, Viva la France. (No irony, sarcasm or flippancy in the last statement.)

It's not the allies that were late, it's the general insurrection orders that came too soon.
When you play or watch Rugby you know what you play or watch. When you buy Champaign you know what you buy. Would it be a progress if anybody could write Champaign on his bottle? Would just add confusion as if life wasn't complicate enough with all the contracts and the agressive commercial methodes. Work both way: not long ago the world biggest producer of Greek Feta was .. France. They had to stop calling it Feta and that's fine like that.
Names like brands need to be defended, that's normal. Like when I buy Michelin tires I don't want Chinese junk.
The EU can help at that cause it's a multiplication of power for all its member. It's not perfect but the idea is good, can be fixed and helped provide peace on a continent populated with dangerous b@stards :)

[RSone]

It's not the allies that were late, it's the general insurrection orders that came too soon.
When you play or watch Rugby you know what you play or watch. When you buy Champaign you know what you buy. Would it be a progress if anybody could write Champaign on his bottle? Would just add confusion as if life wasn't complicate enough with all the contracts and the agressive commercial methodes. Work both way: not long ago the world biggest producer of Greek Feta was .. France. They had to stop calling it Feta and that's fine like that.
Names like brands need to be defended, that's normal. Like when I buy Michelin tires I don't want Chinese junk.
The EU can help at that cause it's a multiplication of power for all its member. It's not perfect but the idea is good, can be fixed and helped provide peace on a continent populated with dangerous b@stards :)

Troof... It's just brand protection, and a bit of economic protection. For example, jenever(Dutch spirit, kinda like gin) is a protected name as well. AFAIK only distilleries in The Netherlands, Belgium, two French provinces and two German states can use the name, with the traditional jenevers only being produced in a few towns/cities in The Netherlands. Korenwijn,for example has to be matured in a oak cask according to traditional "recipe",for a few years, before it's bottled.

You buy the stuff because it's made in a certain way ,which guarantees you're going to buy a quality product. If some Chinese manufacturer makes a similar product but inferior product and sells it under the same name, customer satisfaction of a particular product/brand will go down, which in turn, hurts the local economy.

[The Beard]

Mmm, I see a slight problem here, maybe I'm just being picky, but we have certain Italian food stuffs being advertised on TV here, including Dolmio and Ragu sauces with names like Bolognese etc. Bolognese refers to that native to the city and environs of Bologna in Italy; except that natives of that wonderful place call it al Ragu, which is in turn an adaptation of the French word Ragout. These appear to be made in Holland/Nederlands/Pays Bas. Then again we have pizzas advertised here made by the very un-Italian sounding Dr. Oettker in Germany.

[Constantin]

Why pessimists learn russia?
russian version:
Opitimists learn english , pessimists chinese, realist АК-47.
Can you imagine that EU would become a single united country some day?
No.:)
Becouse:

well, if the first language would be german or at least english, why not :)

No, no, the only solution is that French become the first language :)

[Vandervahn]

The idea of the EU law is to protect agricultural products and products "close to the origin" (with only few steps of procession) that whose characteristics can be directly attributed to the specific region they are from - including the people producing them, whatever that is supposed to mean.

A good example is the Roquefort cheese which can only be produced using a looking breed of sheep, using local methods and knowhow and, most importantly, a series of caves to be found near Roquefort-sur-Soulzon.

Pizza and Ragout Bolognese are not only processed foods which are largely independent of their origin, they are also generic names for a wide variety of recipes and products nowadays - EU law excludes generic names from protection of origin. Sorry Naples, no chance.

[The Beard]

The idea of the EU law is to protect agricultural products and products "close to the origin" (with only few steps of procession) that whose characteristics can be directly attributed to the specific region they are from - including the people producing them, whatever that is supposed to mean.

A good example is the Roquefort cheese which can only be produced using a looking breed of sheep, using local methods and knowhow and, most importantly, a series of caves to be found near Roquefort-sur-Soulzon.

Pizza and Ragout Bolognese are not only processed foods which are largely independent of their origin, they are also generic names for a wide variety of recipes and products nowadays - EU law excludes generic names from protection of origin. Sorry Naples, no chance.
If Roquefort is only Roquefort because the milk from a particular breed of sheep and the humidity in particular caves (hope I've got that bit right) is what makes it unique, then it does not need protection. An Islay single malt Scotch whisky can only be distilled there because certain factors, the peat and rock the water runs through etc. are what makes it an Islay.
Therefore, it doesn't need protection. Cheddar cheese originates from a particular area of South West England yet is made in many places outside Britain and is none the worse for that. I'm sure the process is less complex
than Roquefort, but as I said before if a product's unique that is it's own defence. Once, a few years ago, I was returning to Le Havre to catch the ferry back home when we stopped at a small roadside bar/cafe. The owner said he had stopped serving food and was about to close, but could probably find us something simple to eat. I never knew bread, and cheese could taste so good. The proprietor apologised for the sparse fayre, but in truth, the place, the countryside and the people added something special to that meal. The bread was somehow nicer than the same product made in Britain and the cheese was sublime and I can't even remember what it was.