EU constitution

Furios666 · Post by **Furios666** » Tue Dec 02, 2003 6:53 pm

Im totally agains a unified Europe, we as dutch people pay the most contribution, get the least of it back and we get most criticism. Fuck that!

Somebody should nuke all those french and german fuckers for ignoring europe's rules about budgets. I say Holland should get the hell out of there, we can fend for our own. We don't need Chiraque (or however you spell this idiot's name) criticising everything we do. They should be the ones to look at, but no, because they're a bigger country they get to do whatever they want. Fuck that even more!

EU sucks!

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Tue Dec 02, 2003 8:29 pm

Furios666 wrote:Im totally agains a unified Europe, we as dutch people pay the most contribution, get the least of it back and we get most criticism. Fuck that!

Hahaha, that's funny, because it seems every single farmer and enterpriser here in Finland is telling exactly the same

Honestly, it's all over the professional media (=mostly papers aimed to people of a specific profession, I mean) how "we Finnish have been bringing the bread on the table for those lazy European bastards and still haven't got anything in return". It seems everyone's feeling the same and such amounts of money can't just *poof* disappear in the air, can it?

Somebody should nuke all those french and german fuckers for ignoring europe's rules about budgets. I say Holland should get the hell out of there, we can fend for our own. We don't need Chiraque (or however you spell this idiot's name) criticising everything we do. They should be the ones to look at, but no, because they're a bigger country they get to do whatever they want.

Yeah, that thing was really fucked up. Smaller countries are sanctioned for every single error, no matter how minor it is, but when the Big Ones screw up Big Time they just go *whistling* and try to make everyone forget about it.

---------------

The whole voting system is based on three things. In order of importance:

The EU parliament, where each country has representatives depending on the country's population (and maybe other things, I don't remember). Finland for example has 16 representatives with 5 million people.

Then the comissare (sorry about the spelling) "council", where every country has one representative. Or at least for now, the Big Ones are trying to change that.

And then there's this council of the "head honchos" of all countries, meaning mainly the president/prime minister, foreign minister and other important people of each nation.

It's late now and I'm not sure if I mixed up some of those "chambers" or forgot something important, but that's pretty much the raw image how the European Union bureaucracy works.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Tue Dec 02, 2003 8:49 pm

Tho they are fuckheads, who's buying all your exportations? Big countries. Yea, duh.

MurPHy · Post by **MurPHy** » Tue Dec 02, 2003 11:39 pm

That's because DAC is a culturally and ethnically diverse community -- which means the United States is the only country that's acceptable to bash.

"Culturally and ethnically diverse", huh? What do you think the US is, eh?

I'm all for a Unified Europe - it the idea of a Federal Europe run by the French and the Germans that gives me the shits! I think the best bet for us Brits to keep our hertitage is to quit the EU and become the 51st State of the Union.

That warms my heart there, Viktor, but there's a small problem. Historically speaking, that happening would be a full 180 on Britain's part. First, the US breaks away from British rule, and now Britain becomes a part of the US? Weird.

It'd be a bad idea, really, as Britian has a rich cultural identity and some of that might be lost in the transition to the 51st state. Also the distance would be as big a problem as it was to the Brits in the late 1700s. You know, the Revolutionary War and all. One of the reasons why Great Britain lost was the distance that separated the two countries. There were huge monentary problems in Britain at the time too, so funding a war was straining the country's coffers. I'd go into more depth than this, but I don't want to do a whole history lesson right now.:)

Canada shall become the 51st.

Sounds good to me. But Canada is just too friggin' huge to be just one state. It'll become the 51st through 60th states. Yeah, that sounds right. The only problem is how are we going to fit all of the new stars onto the flag? It's pressed for space as it is.

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:05 am

MurPHy wrote:Sounds good to me. But Canada is just too friggin' huge to be just one state. It'll become the 51st through 60th states. Yeah, that sounds right. The only problem is how are we going to fit all of the new stars onto the flag? It's pressed for space as it is.

Something like 80% of Canada is unpopulated, so we'd have a lot of really empty states if we did it that way. We could just call all that land territory until it became populated enough to be states, I suppose.

bloodbathmaster2 · Post by **bloodbathmaster2** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:09 am

Doyle wrote:Something like 80% of Canada is unpopulated, so we'd have a lot of really empty states if we did it that way. We could just call all that land territory until it became populated enough to be states, I suppose.

Canada already has its own 'states.' Thay're called provinces, and most of them are better populated than the US state of Alaska.

MurPHy · Post by **MurPHy** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:10 am

This all sounds good to me, but I wonder what Canada thinks......

bloodbathmaster2 · Post by **bloodbathmaster2** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:13 am

Who cares what Canada thinks. We're gonna annex them should they like it or not!

/me has fond Fallout memories

"Our boys keep the peace in the newly annexed Canada."

*bam*

*waves*

Menno · Post by **Menno** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:58 am

I don't know too much about what's going on in the EU, except from what I hear my relatives bitching about in Greece. They sent me this link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3235436.stm

"I can only advise the Commission to come out of its corner and stop sulking."--Hans Eichel, German Finance Minister

Haha, and they call the US arrogant?

What do you guys in EU countries think about France and Germany getting a free pass?

bloodbathmaster2 · Post by **bloodbathmaster2** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 1:03 am

[sarcasm]I think all those little Euoprean nations are forgetting that France and Germany can conqour them in a heartbeat. Pay homage.[/sarcasm]

Menno · Post by **Menno** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 3:39 am

bloodbathmaster2 wrote:Canada already has its own 'states.' Thay're called provinces, and most of them are better populated than the US state of Alaska.

Alaska isn't a state...it's a HUGE military playground. Haha, we call it a state so we can test all our toys, tactics, and methods legally! I think the figure is around 97% of Alaska is uninhabited.

I think its inevitable that one day Canada will be absorbed, or merge, with the United States [The United States of North America perhaps?]. Most of the guys who live in the rural areas of Canada would love that, since they see Canada as a "brother" of the United States. There was a point where Alberta and British Columbia were once seriously considering becoming part of the United States. It's the people in some of the major cities (mostly the province of Quebec) that want to keep Canada as a seperate entity (seperate as in loose relations with the US). I know many Canadians, guys we used to train perodically with as well as others, that were outraged at Chretien for his seething remarks at the US (and they always call Quebec "Queerbec"). I believe, though I may be wrong, that Alberta was the first Canadian province to openly voice their support for the US action in Iraq, and then Ontario shortly followed suit.

Of all the allies in the world the United States has, Canada, Australia, and the UK are by far the best ones, because unlike most of the rest of the US's allies, their alliance with the US isn't all about financial/military gain (such as Turkey). But that Chretien guy has been using whatever power he has to screw up US-Canadian relations. I'm not just referring to Iraq (though it definately has gone further downhill from there), but a few years before that, and how Chretien has been trying to take Canada down the "EU mentality" instead of being what it is, the brother of the US.

My favourite Chretien blunder:

At trade talks a few years back, a representative of America said "we have to do something about the drugs passing the border"

Chretien said, "yes we have to do all we can to keep them moving freely"

Blank stares until someone said, "drugs?"

And Chretien said, "oh, I thought you said trucks!"

AND

Get a hold of the clip where I think he was asked about joing the war in Iraq and waiting until it is proven Sadaam had weapons..it goes something like:

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof, and when you have a good proof it's proven."

We don't need Chiraque (or however you spell this idiot's name) criticising everything we do.

Haha, now you know how the United States feels.

My favorite photo of Chretien, where he grabbed a protestors neck and strangled him briefly:

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 7:47 am

The thing is, that European Union can and will work as long as democracy works equally amongst all participating countries.

That means every country needs a comissare and more equally shared parliament members. I mean, Germany's 99, GB's 87, France's 87 and Italy's 87 representatives can make pretty much any decision valid. Finland for example, because of it's low population and remote location has very little to say in the parliament. Only Ireland and Luxembourg have less representatives than we do...

iohkus · Post by **iohkus** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 8:06 am

lmao that's a great picture

Chretien was Trudeu's protege and carried a lot of the same liberal values with him through his term as prime minister, from what I remember.

And lately he's been getting a shit load of praise and attention as his final days in office wind down...

it's highly unlikely that Canada will become "the 51st state" as Paul Martin is sure to grab another victory for the Liberals who are more liberal and left than their democrat equivalents in the States and Martin also has the respect and support of many Bloc-Quebecoi, infact 1 member of the party just switched over yesterday to the Liberals

and the other reason why Canada would likely never be assimilated by the US is the fact that unlike the US, Canada is a truely mosaic multicultural country whereas the US is just an integration of various cultures into a massive melting pot

the Canadian right wing is in shambles, they fucked up all of Ontario's public institutions in the last year and are currently split in 2 parties trying to merge for the upcoming elections, currently the even more left wing NDP seem to be more popular than all other right wing parties in Canada combined, which is good news

Menno · Post by **Menno** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 9:11 am

Well I wasn't necessarily referring to Canada as a whole, but the Western portions of Canada (Alberta and British Columbia). Western Canada doesn't feel like it gets the representation it desires in Canada's current government structure. The province of Alberta disagrees with many of Canada's policies, and the way their government is set-up they can't do a thing about it because of their lack of representation. I think the best solution for these two provinces is not necessarily becoming a state (though that would be attractive to both the US and perhaps those provinces), but becoming a United States Commonwealth (such as Puerto Rico). With Commonwealth status, they'd become somewhat independent and govern itself, as well as allowing some fiscal autonomy. But it also means the United States controls military defense, transportation, communications, immigration, foreign trade and other affairs. Those born in Alberta would be US citizens, pay no federal income tax but would not be able to vote for U.S. president. Citizens of Alberta would be able to easily pass through the former US border. They would though have to pay Social Security taxes, serve in the military and are subject to the draft. They also would receive federal welfare benefits.

This would be a win-win for both the US and Alberta and BC. This gives the US more open access to these provinces vast resources, and on the flip-side it would be result in great business opportunities for those former provinces. Alberta has very close ties with the United States (as do other portions of Canada), so psychologically it wouldn't be such a dramatic change for them. Fiscally, it gives Alberta plenty of new and exciting opportunities since it's biggest trading partner is the United States anyway, removing trade barriers and red tape without having to be burdened with heavy taxes that proportionately ended up going further east instead of back to them. There would also probably be one or two new military bases becoming established, leading to a greater influx of people and business opportunities. Every few years, Albert and BC could vote on whether or not they'd want to retain their Commonwealth status, become a State, or become an Independent nation; so the ball would always be in their court.

iokhus wrote:and the other reason why Canada would likely never be assimilated by the US is the fact that unlike the US, Canada is a truely mosaic multicultural country whereas the US is just an integration of various cultures into a massive melting pot

You're right with most of what you said, but I'm going to have to disagree with what you said here. That's really just a misconception, that the United States is one big melting pot and that you have to assimilate. For example, in NYC it's perhaps the most ethnically diverse city in the world. Go to Borough Park, Brooklyn and you'll find a pre-dominately jewish neighborhood; go to Astoria, Queens and you'll find a pre-dominately greek neighborhood; Bay Ridge, Brooklyn is predominately white and arabic; Chinatown in Manhattan, and so forth. So there is a large degree of retaining your culture in America.

Furios666 · Post by **Furios666** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 9:20 am

Quote:
We don't need Chiraque (or however you spell this idiot's name) criticising everything we do.

Haha, now you know how the United States feels.

Don't even dare to make that comparison, we didn't start a useless war. We made weed "legal".

It's a big difference...

Why doesn't America join Canada? Canada is bigger...and part of Brittain, then all of america could be part of the EU, wouldn't that be great...

We dutch people should never ever have sold new york for 60 bucks...it could have been us who started a *fill in lousy excuse* war.

Ahwell...

Menno · Post by **Menno** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 9:22 am

Furios666 wrote:
Don't even dare to make that comparison, we didn't start a useless war. We made weed "legal".

It's a big difference...

Why doesn't America join Canada? Canada is bigger...and part of Brittain, then all of america could be part of the EU, wouldn't that be great...

We dutch people should never ever have sold new york for 60 bucks...it could have been us who started a *fill in lousy excuse* war.

Ahwell...

Haha, you may think it was a useless war, but at least we didn't get suckered into joining the EU and now are screwed. Thank God for the Atlantic Ocean!

Also, Canada's government system is a mess, symbolized by the plight of several of it's providences. It's basially a parliamentary dictatorship. So for it to work parts of Canada would have to join us.

Viktor · Post by **Viktor** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 1:18 pm

Menno wrote: What do you guys in EU countries think about France and Germany getting a free pass?

Unless they're French or German, the average EU citizen thinks it sucks.

Calal · Post by **Calal** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 2:49 pm

Furios666 wrote:Don't even dare to make that comparison, we didn't start a useless war.

Useless? As a EU resident I find it hard to believe it was useless. Disposing of a tiranny is never useless. What I do find a pitty is the way the US and their closest allies dealt with it. True, perhaps it wasn' t necessary to invade Iraq but given the fact that Saddam is a despot that terrorised his population, he wouldn' t have stepped back, not even under the threat of a possible UN-army invasion. What would have been better was a global scale 'invasion' or liberation with all opposing nations joining the front, but given our present bureaucracy (?) it would have taken years to come to a decent proposal that would have benefited all participating nations and their involvement and ofcourse the then liberated people of free Iraq. So I guess we were fucked in any way. Legal (global point of few that is) would have been better by nigh on impossible or perhaps to late.

But this doesn' t relate to the topic.

EU sentiment towards the war and on other global points is easily explained by the fact that we consist of different cultures, different ideas and opinions, most of them emphasised again by that century old cultural heritage. Where the US bases it' s status of a worldpower and global diplomat/negotiator with an emphasis on strength and technological superiority, the EU leans more towards the way of the battlefield underdog, prefering a more diplomatic approach, more talking and remidiating, offering more supporting help in the way of humanitary actions and military inspectors or advisors. Look, I' m not saying the US doesn' t do in sending humanitary help, not at all, but given the fact that their military is much more superior and has seen more action than anyone else' s these last decades, along with the American way of thinking of 'only the stongest survive', they have no other choice. Then again, I' m not saying the EU is a superpower wholy yet since it lacks the military force and unity that is needed to act like a real one. But perhaps someday it might. (like in 2000 years if we don' t change the way our bureaucracy is working) In the meantime we seem to screw up a lot, but still I' m not losing hope.

Why doesn't America join Canada? Canada is bigger...and part of Brittain, then all of america could be part of the EU, wouldn't that be great...

Canada part of Brittain? Please tell me I just misread that one.

Im totally agains a unified Europe, we as dutch people pay the most contribution, get the least of it back and we get most criticism. Fuck that! We can fend for our own.

Sure, every angst-ridden teen that feels the need to oppose authority has need of tearing something down. None of the things you said are true though. France, Germany and the UK contribute the most since their GDP are the largest. Only the newly joined EU members get the least back since they can' t yet tell the difference on such short notice as to how it has affected their own GDP. It hapenned to the other nations as well. You just can' t expect things to change overnight now can you?. And it' s Italy and Berlusconi that get most of the criticism. And sure, I honestly believe you' d fend for your own. But then tell me why you did co-found the first EU instalment and even the Benelux, which was basicaly the first step in EU evolution during the modern times.

Sorry kiddo, I could have accepted your "I hate the EU" if you would have well argumented your opinion and stressed on the points with which you wholeheartedly disagree, but by heaving your bs in a typical puberal "big fuck you" attitude you don' t really contribute to a constructive debate.

As for the question what I think about the recent happenings: both France and Germany should be imposed penalties upon in relation towards their GDP in my opinion, in fact it might be applied to all members if it were up to me. This is the only way to ensure that no longer bigger fish could get away with almost no penalties whereas smaller ones would be utterly struck down with the slightest mistake. Keeping it all in relation to eachother. But hell, such proposals would always get bashed by the bigger fiends on the block, which in turn points towards the ...ehr...point that the EU is still far from being the unified power of equality it longes to be.

Well, I tried to be as objective about it as possible. My two cents.

Calal out.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 5:03 pm

Well, when you count up the population in EU and the economical power it would have if more unified, it's damn important.

377 million people and sturdy cultural basis (not to mention the new joiners with their vices & virtues) are something not to be ignored in the future.

Sure, EU is still "far from being the unified power of equality it longes to be" but like you said: things don't happen overnight. Rome wasn't built, nor destroyed overnight either and I guess unifying Europe the peaceful way will take even longer.

Brother None · Post by **Brother None** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 5:11 pm

Calal wrote:Sure, every angst-ridden teen that feels the need to oppose authority has need of tearing something down. None of the things you said are true though. France, Germany and the UK contribute the most since their GDP are the largest.

No, he's right

Recent statistics show the Dutch pay the most per head of the population. A Dutch citizens pays 3 times more than a German citizen to "EU taxes". *Three* times. Now that's a lot.

Also, we don't get the least back, but we get very little back directly, especially because our agricultural section is small compared to that of other countries. We do, of course, benifit a lot from the improved trade relations etc. The Netherlands is not exactly suffering because of the EU, but we're not getting as much out of it as some, hence the recent threat from our foreign minister to block the EU constitution.