What the Eurotwits would like George W. Bush to say

[KrazyHorse]

Which legislative powers?

Does it exercise them? What have they done? Have they written criminal law? Tax law?

By the way, I live in a federal system (much more federal than the US' is currently). The federal government still exercises a hell of a lot more power than the EU council seems to.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Ramo


OBL is primarily motivated by US presence in Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. Isolationism is not the answer; rather, we need to start acting responsibly in the world stage.

And one of the first places to start would be to withraw troops from foreign countries, and let the people there assume the responsibilty of security for themselves. Perceived domination can be just detrimental as de facto subjugation.

Here in Canada we have lots of oil that we sell to the US as well. But the US doesn't need to have troops in our country in order to protect their interests here. We can operate solely on a basis of trust. That goes much further towards building good relations than parking an army on some country's territory.

[HershOstropoler]

"You meant back when the state legislatures elected their Senators?"

Yes. It is a more indirect democratic legitimacy, but one that is perfectly normal for federal systems. If your definition of democracy is narrower, than you have to say that eg Germany isn't a democracy either.

"Which legislative powers?"

Mostly economic law. Free movement of workers, goods, services and capital; telecom deregulation; public procurement law; control of state aids; merger law etc.

"Have they written criminal law?"

That's a relatively new one. There is a limited power in making so called framework desisions that need to be transposed into national law. The main legislative process I mentioned does not apply there, and there is a serious lack of democratic legitimacy in that area. Who was most against getting the EP involved? The UK.

"Tax law?"

Harmonization of indirect taxation, recently capital gains taxes.

[HershOstropoler]

"The federal government still exercises a hell of a lot more power than the EU council seems to."

The EU is not yet a fully federal system, but it is way beyond the usual international organization. What's missing? Add foreign policy and defense, and you're pretty much there.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Velociryx

I do not see that Saddam's removal necessitates the rise of another dictator, and in fact, I think that pains can, should, and will be taken to ensure that doesn't happen.

Unfortunately, I think you're off base here. Iraq is a socially fractured country, with the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites all jockeying for position. Democracy is not really an option because a one man, one vote system would put the Shiites into power through sheer numbers. That gives Iran a much stronger position in the region which certainly would not be a good situation. Plus there'd be a very real possibility of vengeance against the Sunni. We could end up with another Rwanda.

The only real option I see for instituting Democracy at this point in history would be to partition the country and establish seperate nations for each of the groups. And that won't happen since Turkey would never allow a Kurdish homeland on it's border. At least not at the moment.

[KrazyHorse]

Roland:

I understand that the EU is beyond most other international organisations, but at the same time it falls short of being a unified state (even a federated one). It's somewhere in between right now. Similarly, it has democratic tendencies, but is not yet fully democratic (but is more so than other treaty organisations).

[DinoDoc]

Pardon me if I'm behind the times, but why does Roland have a new login?

[HershOstropoler]

"It's somewhere in between right now."

What's missing (apart from foreign/defense as an exclusive competence) ?

"Similarly, it has democratic tendencies, but is not yet fully democratic"

What's missing (apart from unifying all legislative procedures under the council/EP one) ?

[Velociryx]

Hey hey! Just got to work from the morning dentist trip....not bad...it only took me sixteen pages to get a Euro riled up enough to actually start talking! There is hope for you guys after all!

HO: First, let me say that NONE of the above was meant to be in any way personal, and I hope you didn't take it as such.

Second, do you not see, by your own response to my criticisms of the EU, a certain double standard? What I mean is, it's seen as okay for Euros to SLAM the USA on any number of issues (our internal politics, our external politics that don't effect you directly, our handling of....pretty much anything (because of...well, I don't know why exactly....but one would have to guess, given the general attitude and tone, that it has to do with feelings of superiority....that "aristocratic, over-your-shoulder bearing" that we're not very fond of here), and the preferred American response....the one you seem to be looking for is deference to your supposedly more enlightened opinions.

But, when the shoe shifts to the other foot, we get the same kind of cagy, almost catty defensiveness we see when you attack us. Is this surprising? Not at all, but IMO, it drives home the point very nicely.

Several pages ago, in reference to my opinions of Europe, you said you would not call me an ignorant American, but rather, and uninformed American, with regards to Europe.

I agree.

Likewise, I would say that the vast bulk of Euro-criticisms are equally uninformed.

And now that all that's out of the way, and you seem riled enough to actually talk about options and alternatives, rather than just split hairs back and forth and rail against the current plan, shall we?

-=Vel=-

[KrazyHorse]

Is Roland angry? I hadn't noticed.

Vel, you got him talking, but that isn't hard. Most of the Americans here don't even bother. But at the same time you need to find better sources. The one you gave us for a sampling of European opinion is pretty far out there.

[Velociryx]

Frogger - sixteen pages. That's what it took to get a real, heartfelt *response* from a Euro.

As to my "source," do you not see the parallel between that and your use of sarcasm yesterday, in order to get a response?

THAT's what I was going for. Something engineered to finally get a response that had a little emotional kick to it, and to demonstrate the double standard that seems to be in place in the Euro mindset which seems to say:

You are petulent children who should listen to your elders and betters. Suck up and take it when we criticize you.

And yet, when the criticisms start flying the other way, they are revealed as every bit as defensive and thin skinned.

Given the FACT (and no matter how you slice it, this is fact) that America's economy is orders of magnitude stronger than that of any European nation you'd care to name, given the fact that since WWII, Europeans have chosen to invest in welfare state infrastructure and coast under the umbrella of a strong US military to keep them safe, due to the fact that Europe whines about losing its front seat position on the world stage, but lacks the will and fortitude to change things (germany couldn't even get it's equipment to Afghanistan on its own, such is the sad state of it's military's ability to project its power)....I'd say the will is weak in Europe, even if the spirit is willing (which it hasn't seemed to be lately).

But, you point out any of this to a Euro, and you get:

Yawn.

We know, we're working on it.

Uh huh.

-=Vel=-

[Willem]

Originally posted by Velociryx
... and coast under the umbrella of a strong US military to keep them safe, due to the fact that Europe whines about losing its front seat position on the world stage...

In all fairness, do you honestly think that the US hasn't played a role here? Why is the US still so heavily involved in NATO, now that there's no longer a Soviet Union? The Pentagon would not be happy with a strong Europe, and has no intention of reducing their control over military power in the area. Leave NATO, and I think you'll see how quickly they can muster up a capable military force.

[Velociryx]

No....there's more to be said on that, and I hit "reply" too early.

Isn't is possible....just *possible* mind you, that Americans *might* be considered to know a thing or two about what they're doing....that our success since WWII wasn't just some gigantic fluke, and our continuing success isn't some bizzare continuation OF that fluke?

And, given that....is it at all conceivable that perhaps it is the Euros who ought to be taking a couple notes from the playbook of the US, instead of insisting that they know what's best constantly, and never doing anythingn to prove it?

Or, is it easier to join the Rah rah brigade, and just bash the USA without providing any substantial counterpoints and positions?

"We are all Americans."
"Unlimited support."

Two quotes from Euro leaders....France and Germany respectively.

Uh huh. And with friends like these....

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Willem, I do not believe that either the US or NATO has any authority to set defense spending levels for any European nation.

If so, I'd say that's pretty big news!

No....that was a conscious decision by those governments, and a continuation of the EXACT same behavior that's gotten them in hot water before.

War, Peace, Disarm, rely on paper treaties to protect them.

Guess what?

Paper treties didn't defeat fascism. Guns did.

Paper treaties didn't win the cold war. Guns did.

If Europe wants to be treated as an equal partner on the world stage, then they should, quite simply, start by acting the part.

Europe itself might be all warm and fuzzy, everybody loves wine and holidays, but the rest of the world is still armed and dangerous, and willing to unmake what we have created together.

Now, how 'bout lending a hand?

-=Vel=-

[Willem]

Originally posted by Velociryx


War, Peace, Disarm, rely on paper treaties to protect them.

But the other side of the coin is the chance that a military buildup triggers an accidental war, the way it happened in WWI. One man gets assassinated, and the entire world is dragged into a bloody conflict.