France flexes its muscles

Anna Jayne Metcalfe

Sadly true. There are very few politicians whose word I would trust. Anna :rose: www.annasplace.me.uk

"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch

Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Add-In for Visual C++

KaRl

The real translation isn't "They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet", but "They missed a great opportunity to shut up", which is IMHO harsher (in french at last) The point is the letters signed by the Eastern countries were a reason of clash inside the existing EU. It was previsible, and the perhaps-future members knew it exactly. I disagree with Chirac when he's bashing other countries because they took an alternative opinion, even if they choose to follow a country which is launching a verbal carpet bombing on us. However, I agree with him when saying the eastern countries have taken a great risk. Each country of the existing Union must approve first the adhesion of potential new members before it becomes effective. If one of the existing members doesn't approve, the eastern countries will stay out of the Union. By choosing to defy France and Germany, these countries took politically a very big risk. Moreover, a recent poll says that 87% of the french disagree with a war without UN support. These could remember the position of the "New Europe" if there's one day a referendum about the adhesion: they could say this day to the candidates to postulate to the US rather than to the EU. Brit wrote: Looks like the EU is off to a good start. One has to wonder to what extent the French envisioned the EU becoming a lever to extend its power The different letters, the one made by Aznar and the one of the Vilnius group killed the hopes of a political EU. It was deliberate, these countries want to profit from a free market but also want that Europe stays a political midget on the World scene. They totally succeeded in their Goal.

Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

ColinDavies

KaЯl wrote: It was deliberate, these countries want to profit from a free market but also want that Europe stays a political midget on the World scene. They totally succeeded in their Goal. Yes but in reality Europe is still quite young, further oportunities will exist for Europe to be more cohesive. The mix of countries being in or not in either of the EEC and NATO will continue to cause a lot of confusion. Regardz Colin J Davies

Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

I'm guessing the concept of a 2 hour movie showing two guys eating a meal and talking struck them as 'foreign' Rob Manderson wrote:

KaRl

Colin Davies wrote: The mix of countries being in or not in either of the EEC and NATO will continue to cause a lot of confusion. That's the problem, most of the countries want an EEC, not a EU, and also want the US protect them, not to build an European defence. I'm very pessimistic about the political future of the EU, I think it's over. We'll have to create a new "club", with stricter rules and less compromises, and this even if we are only two or three at the beginning. After all, we were only 6 countries to sign the Rome treaty, the foudation act of an european community.

Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

Lost User

No matter who you vote for, politicians get in X| Elaine The tigress is here :-D

David Wulff

Well said.

David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk

h.a.s: 0.0.4

David Wulff

There are lies, damned lies, and politicians. :rolleyes:

David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk

h.a.s: 0.0.4

Brit

KaЯl wrote: The real translation isn't "They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet", but "They missed a great opportunity to shut up", which is IMHO harsher Yes, I've seen a few different translations one was "keep quiet" and another said "shut up". I also noticed that some translations said "childish" whereas other ones said "infantile". KaЯl wrote: I disagree with Chirac when he's bashing other countries because they took an alternative opinion, even if they choose to follow a country which is launching a verbal carpet bombing on us. When you say "verbal carpet bombing" are you talking about the "Old Europe" comment? I read the "Old Europe" comment as a burst of frustration by Rumsfeld that the French and Germans aren't going along with the Americans. I don't really support it and I think it was counterproductive, but it's not much different than France's frustration at eastern Europeans for doing the same to them - which lead to Chirac's outburst. KaЯl wrote: The different letters, the one made by Aznar and the one of the Vilnius group killed the hopes of a political EU. It was deliberate, these countries want to profit from a free market but also want that Europe stays a political midget on the World scene. They totally succeeded in their Goal. What you're saying is that the divisions in the EU killed the idea of a political EU. I can't really blame the eastern european nations for that - afterall, France could save the idea of a political union by yielding. I'm not saying that they should do that, I'm just saying that it seems rather partisan to blame "the other" whenever there is a disagreement and expect "the other" to yield to the opinion of France (rather than the other way around). ------------------------------------------ They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin In an encampment expecting daily attack from a powerful enemy, self-preservation is paramount to all law. - Thomas Jefferson

KaRl

Brit wrote: When you say "verbal carpet bombing" are you talking about the "Old Europe" comment I was also referring to the "cheese-eating surrender monkeys", "wimps", "rats", "axis of weasels", "chorus of cowards", and also the wonderful title of the NYPost, "They Died for France but France has Forgotten" Brit wrote: it seems rather partisan to blame "the other" whenever there is a disagreement and expect "the other" to yield to the opinion of France (rather than the other way around). It's an interpretation, the one chosen by all the anglo-saxon media. They reports he bashed them because they issued pro-American statements on Iraq. They just forget he really said "These countries have been not very well behaved and rather reckless of the danger of aligning themselves too rapidly with the American position". "too rapidly" are here the keywords. I don't think Chirac was eagered because the Eastern countries disagreed with Germany and France, but because they made a political statement without any consultation with the EU, political statement which is a major event of this crisis. These countries knew this question was tearing European union apart since the declaration of the gang of the 8, and they decided volunteerly to put more gasoline on the fire.

Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

Brit

KaЯl wrote: I was also referring to the "cheese-eating surrender monkeys", "wimps", "rats", "axis of weasels", "chorus of cowards", and also the wonderful title of the NYPost, "They Died for France but France has Forgotten" (Hmmm, maybe I'd better keep a better eye on what Rumsfeld has been saying. I didn't see any of these quotes until I just did a search on google.) KaЯl wrote: These countries knew this question was tearing European union apart since the declaration of the gang of the 8, and they decided volunteerly to put more gasoline on the fire. (nod) But, the blame cannot be placed quite so securely on the shoulders of the eastern europeans - Chirac's comments could be seen as "tearing the European union apart", too. ------------------------------------------ They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin In an encampment expecting daily attack from a powerful enemy, self-preservation is paramount to all law. - Thomas Jefferson

ColinDavies

KaЯl wrote: I'm very pessimistic about the political future of the EU, I think it's over. Okay, KaЯl wrote: We'll have to create a new "club", with stricter rules and less compromises, and this even if we are only two or three at the beginning. Yes but to do this their is no reason to "Disband totally" the EEC yet. It must still be technically possible for countries such as France, and Germany to pull out of both the EEC and NATO or are they constitutionally fixed in. IMHO: Really should be aimed at is a single European Country incorporating the client countries as states or groups of states. Like 16 for Germany and 22 for France and a single Parliament instead of Berlin or Paris. Although I'm sure this takes a large leap in faith for most major countries to accomplish. Regardz Colin J Davies

Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

I'm guessing the concept of a 2 hour movie showing two guys eating a meal and talking struck them as 'foreign' Rob Manderson wrote:

KaRl

Brit wrote: Chirac's comments could be seen as "tearing the European union apart", too. You're probably right, he may have overreacted. Chirac is known here to be the king of the majors BS (the nuclear tests in 1995 for example). However in foreign policy he made also IMO brilliant things, as to order to re-take the Vrbanja bridge from Serb forces in Sarajevo on 27 May 1995.

Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

KaRl

Colin Davies wrote: Yes but to do this their is no reason to "Disband totally" the EEC yet you're right. I should rather have said that the evolution of EU to a political attitude is over. We are keeping that, but will have to create something new over it, as a new layer. The 25 current nations don't have the same conscience of what Europe should be, they can't integrate themselves as France and Germany, IMHO, would like to do. Colin Davies wrote: Like 16 for Germany and 22 for France and a single Parliament instead of Berlin or Paris If the federal vision is common for Germany, it's not for France, which is very centralized. We could for example begin to create "common ministers", for Defence and Foreign Policy, responsible in front of both our parliaments. Colin Davies wrote: Although I'm sure this takes a large leap in faith for most major countries to accomplish. I think, I hope, France, Germany and probably Belgium want it and are ready to do it.

Angels banished from heaven have no choice but to become demons Cowboy Bebop

ColinDavies

I really think a lot of the "new" EEC countries are involved almost entirely because of the economic benefits. It often seems like they are clawing at the edges to get in. Yes, I have no idea whether the "new Europe" should be a Federal type or a centralized organization. It does mean for all involved though that a lot of what is considered "normal" will have to change. Personally here in NZ I'm not big on sovereignty issues, eg NZ one-day may become part of Australia or a Pacific group. But many people seem to worry about there sovereignty. Regardz Colin J Davies

Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

I'm guessing the concept of a 2 hour movie showing two guys eating a meal and talking struck them as 'foreign' Rob Manderson wrote: