[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51013233]Those issues are already centralised... both fiscal policy AND immigration are largely handled and coordinated on the EU level[/QUOTE]
this is not true
fiscal policy is still largely handled on the national level
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51013271]this is not true
fiscal policy is still largely handled on the national level[/QUOTE]
but coordinated on the EU level, both through EU fiscal law and the EU fiscal policy union.
Before you say something is not true, do a quick google search.
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;51013229]I don't trust the Germans or French to defend and/or even understand the issues smaller countries face. Big countries would dominate the smaller countries even worse than before. Legislation would bend towards dumb French or German standards instead of what works locally etc. Instead of fairly homogenic countries that work rather well managing their issues we get a mishmash of very different cultures trying to force their own values on each other.
I'm fine with EU as an entity focused on trade and keeping Europe competitive on the global stage. I'm iffy on the monetary union and I'm definitely not okay with federalization.[/QUOTE]
The EU allocates funding based on need, my government allocates funding based on whether or not it can get more votes.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51013160]Uk is a socialist totalitarian pseudodemocracy[/QUOTE]
this is like backwards stupid
socialist? when it's run by the fucking tories?
EU army?
This sounds like a beginning of one world army...
Another step in the evolution of control of the world.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51013281]but coordinated on the EU level, both through EU fiscal law and the EU fiscal policy union.
Before you say something is not true, do a quick google search.[/QUOTE]
how about you post some actual evidence as to why you think the EU is largely responsible for fiscal policy
before you mention the EFC, bear in mind that the EFC is an intergovernmental treaty which signatories are recommended to [I]attempt to pass into EU legislation[/I], which also has exceptions and entries from outside the EU
there is no european fiscal policy union, there is a monetary union, but not a fiscal one
literally the first result on google so take your own advice.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_union[/url]
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51010128]compared to what? the f-35?[/QUOTE]
You mean the jet that would win every engagement with a Eurofighter because it doesn't dogfight? The one that would see the Eurofighter anywhere and, regardless of its orientation, shoot it down because it doesn't have to worry about boresight? The one that is stealthy enough to completely fool most air to air radar systems so as to never actually show up on the Eurofighter's radar? That F-35?
Oh I'm sorry, I forgot that the super exotic F-35B STOVL variant having some problems means that the totally functional F-35A variant sucks.
[QUOTE=GunFox;51013462]You mean the jet that would win every engagement with a Eurofighter because it doesn't dogfight? It would see the Eurofighter anywhere in and, regardless of its orientation, shoot it down because it doesn't have to worry about boresight? The one that is stealthy enough to completely fool most air to air radar systems so as to never actually show up on the Eurofighter's radar? That F-35?
Oh I'm sorry, I forgot that the super exotic F-35B STOVL variant having some problems means that the totally functional F-35A variant sucks.[/QUOTE]
did you bother to read the rest of the thread or did you just decide to slam in a comparison that literally wasn't being argued on the other two pages to make a quip about the superiority of the F-35
to sum up what was already said: not comparing the performance of two fighter jets, asking why zillamaster thought the eurofighter wasn't getting off the ground and in comparison to what.
i'm sure that the F-35 gives twice as many handjobs as the eurofighter, has thrice as many cupholders and is so stealthy that it doesn't cast a shadow: but that wasn't the point
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51013465]did you bother to read the rest of the thread or did you just decide to slam in a comparison that literally wasn't being argued on the other two pages to make a quip about the superiority of the F-35
to sum up what was already said: not comparing the performance of two fighter jets, asking why zillamaster thought the eurofighter wasn't getting off the ground and in comparison to what.
i'm sure that the F-35 gives twice as many handjobs as the eurofighter, has thrice as many cupholders and is so stealthy that it doesn't cast a shadow: but that wasn't the point[/QUOTE]
Ohhh, I see. I must have been confused given that the F-35 is already in active service.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/34th_Fighter_Squadron[/url]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/58th_Fighter_Squadron[/url]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/61st_Fighter_Squadron[/url]
My bad.
[QUOTE=GunFox;51013485]Ohhh, I see. I must have been confused given that the F-35 is already in active service.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/34th_Fighter_Squadron[/url]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/58th_Fighter_Squadron[/url]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/61st_Fighter_Squadron[/url]
My bad.[/QUOTE]
cool, that's something I didn't know
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51013443]this is like backwards stupid
socialist? when it's run by the fucking tories?[/QUOTE]
pfft just another communist shill
If we're not totalitarian explain the queen. Check and mate, mate.
I'm not happy about this. Producing weapons and raising army's never solved conflicts, it caused them and then cleaned up the mess it created.
Why in God's name do we need this? All this money, time and energy could be spend elsewhere. Like science, Healthcare etc.. I get that with the resent aggression in the world and the nature of humans there will be wars but why build a big stick to point at others when we can try different thing.
This can only end badly
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;51013229]I don't trust the Germans or French to defend and/or even understand the issues smaller countries face. Big countries would dominate the smaller countries even worse than before. Legislation would bend towards dumb French or German standards instead of what works locally etc. Instead of fairly homogenic countries that work rather well managing their issues we get a mishmash of very different cultures trying to force their own values on each other.
I'm fine with EU as an entity focused on trade and keeping Europe competitive on the global stage. I'm iffy on the monetary union and I'm definitely not okay with federalization.[/QUOTE]
we're going to have to deal with them on a number of levels either way. either you deal and make compromises or you just eliminate yourself from the decision process, the more powerful and self-sufficient you are the more leeway you get to go your own way but you still have to take everyone else into account, you can't have your cake and eat it too in the modern world.
this doesn't directly mean federalisation obviously even though i'd be pretty fine with european defence treaties.
[QUOTE=Mattheus;51013590]I'm not happy about this. Producing weapons and raising army's never solved conflicts, it caused them and then cleaned up the mess it created.
Why in God's name do we need this? All this money, time and energy could be spend elsewhere. Like science, Healthcare etc.. I get that with the resent aggression in the world and the nature of humans there will be wars but why build a big stick to point at others when we can try different thing.
This can only end badly[/QUOTE]
frankly, would you rather have a stick to point at the guy pointing his at you, or just be left at the mercy of the guy pointing his stick at you
Or let's not point sticks at all? In an ideal world people would be focusing on other things, this isn't the case, sadly.
It just boggles me that people in this thread are fighting over 'who has the bigger/more effective stick' while it actually is a bad thing. Everyone I know here sees war as a waste of energy and I don't want to see this happen. Even if it means that i'll be speaking russian in 10 years from now.
[QUOTE=Mattheus;51013658]Or let's not point sticks at all? In an ideal world people would be focusing on other things, this isn't the case, sadly.
It just boggles me that people in this thread are fighting over 'who has the bigger/more effective stick' while it actually is a bad thing. Everyone I know here sees war as a waste of energy and I don't want to see this happen. Even if it means that i'll be speaking russian in 10 years from now.[/QUOTE]
Good luck convincing the guy on the other side to put down his stick, it's not that easy.
[QUOTE=Mattheus;51013658]Or let's not point sticks at all? In an ideal world people would be focusing on other things, this isn't the case, sadly.
It just boggles me that people in this thread are fighting over 'who has the bigger/more effective stick' while it actually is a bad thing. Everyone I know here sees war as a waste of energy and I don't want to see this happen. Even if it means that i'll be speaking russian in 10 years from now.[/QUOTE]
So you'd willingly sign away your freedoms, nation and almost certainly a few lives just so that you could feel superior about being above conflict?
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;51012841]These questions are easily answered:
Germany, Germany and Germany.[/QUOTE]
To be fair out of all the european countries who else would you rather do it
Sure, power should be equalized, but lets be realisic
Eh just looks like a unified command for European Battlegroups. So nothing new.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;51012841]These questions are easily answered:
Germany, Germany and Germany.[/QUOTE]
You know, apart from the fact France is generally seen as a stronger military powerhouse and has an incredibly strong political position. Likewise compared to Germany is a lot more interventionist. Germany has the benefit of close cooperation with the Danish as a fast start. But even so, Nordic countries tend have a decent military presence, France has boots on the ground in places, Poland's military is relatively big etc.
[QUOTE=Mattheus;51013658]Or let's not point sticks at all? In an ideal world people would be focusing on other things, this isn't the case, sadly.
It just boggles me that people in this thread are fighting over 'who has the bigger/more effective stick' while it actually is a bad thing. Everyone I know here sees war as a waste of energy and I don't want to see this happen. Even if it means that i'll be speaking russian in 10 years from now.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah, lets just agree to world peace. Grow up, and leave your naive idealism at home.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51011182]
And this is a shitty idea altogether. Who does the EU army answer to? Who gives the orders? Can you veto where the army goes? Who funds this? How does the training of different nationality armies look like? Do swedes train in Spain and spaniards train in Poland?
[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure the intention is not to necessarily create an EU army, for now at least. They want better cooperation between the member states' armies to defend the EU, which would function as an EU army.
As I said before, EU battlegroups in which units from the various member states are grouped already exist, this looks like it's just calling for better military structure to deploy them.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51013160]
Uk is a socialist totalitarian pseudodemocracy
[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't exactly call the UK socialist...
I think calling the UK totalitarian is also a bit of an exaggeration lol
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51013160]
The Netherlands are a pseudo-secular liberal protestant social democracy
[/QUOTE]
How so are the Netherlands pseudo-secular
and how so is the Netherlands protestant? Historically that may be true, but 50% of people in the Netherlands have no religious affiliation, are agnostic or atheist. Only 15% of the population is protestant
[editline]7th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Dutch Flowers;51013906]Oh yeah, lets just agree to world peace. Grow up, and leave your naive idealism at home.[/QUOTE]
no need to be aggressive
I agree that just disbanding your army is a stupid idea though because who says the country you have tensions with will?
This is just so Europe can stay politically relevant, it's a bad idea and gives the EU way too much power.
I can't believe Sargon was actually right.
[QUOTE=space1;51014011]This is just so Europe can stay politically relevant, it's a bad idea and gives the EU way too much power.
I can't believe Sargon was actually right.[/QUOTE]
The EU is relevant already, it doesn't need a way for it to coordinate it's battle groups (which is essentially what this is) to stay relevant. I mean, collective EU security is already a thing. I'm not a huge fan of a pan-Euro army but with the existence of NATO it's practically already there.
[QUOTE=space1;51014011]This is just so Europe can stay politically relevant, it's a bad idea and gives the EU way too much power.
I can't believe Sargon was actually right.[/QUOTE]
if you think Europe needs a military to be "politically relevant", i think you're ascribing too much political power to militaries
also underestimating a continent of some of the most advanced nations on Earth.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;51013833]Eh just looks like a unified command for European Battlegroups. So nothing new.
You know, apart from the fact France is generally seen as a stronger military powerhouse and has an incredibly strong political position. Likewise compared to Germany is a lot more interventionist. Germany has the benefit of close cooperation with the Danish as a fast start. But even so, Nordic countries tend have a decent military presence, France has boots on the ground in places, Poland's military is relatively big etc.[/QUOTE]
But france throws less shit, at least publicly... and i realize france being in control could very well be the reason germany throws so much shit publicly, but i doubt it.
[editline]7th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=space1;51014011]This is just so Europe can stay politically relevant, it's a bad idea and gives the EU way too much power.
I can't believe Sargon was actually right.[/QUOTE]
The EU already has more economic political lifting power then the USA does at the moment... but the point is the EU has to agree pretty much unanimously first before it can source all that lifting power...
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51014040]if you think Europe needs a military to be "politically relevant", i think you're ascribing too much political power to militaries
also underestimating a continent of some of the most advanced nations on Earth.[/QUOTE]
The EU is basically trying to become a country.
It's not so much that they're not relevant now, it's that they're losing relevancy and that by joining together under one banner, they retain some influence in world politics. Expect restrictions on human rights and a more authoritative government in Europe.
[QUOTE=space1;51014052]The EU is basically trying to become a country.[/quote]
Yeah, some people want that I guess. Maybe it's the end point, but it's pretty far away right now.
[quote]It's not so much that they're not relevant now, it's that they're losing relevancy and that by joining together under one banner, they retain some influence in world politics.[/quote]
Yes, a unified foreign policy definitely carries more leverage. It only makes sense for a nation like Denmark to band together with other countries in order get more leverage internationally - otherwise we'd have very little.
[quote]
Expect restrictions on human rights and a more authoritative government in Europe.[/QUOTE]
???
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51013128]yo how is the EU corrupt[/QUOTE]
At this point I am confident that blizzerd doesn't know what the word means
[QUOTE=space1;51014052]The EU is basically trying to become a country.
It's not so much that they're not relevant now, it's that they're losing relevancy and that by joining together under one banner, they retain some influence in world politics. Expect restrictions on human rights and a more authoritative government in Europe.[/QUOTE]
well considering that everyone is losing influence because the developing world is rapidly becoming the developed world, this isn't a surprise to anyone
though not sure where you've got the whole authoritative government from, explain.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51014091]At this point I am confident that blizzerd doesn't know what the word means[/QUOTE]
You being confident about stuff you either have no proof for to back it up or stuff 3 posts later is shown to be factually inaccurate seems to happen a lot these days.
Currently on the bus, but going to compile a nice post about all the corrupt things the EU has pulled off just the last few years.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.