the E.U.

edmundomcpot · Post by **edmundomcpot** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:42 pm

Anyone can discuss anything about the E.U here.

Question from me( inspired by turkish thread in general disscussion)

Should Turkey be allowed to join the E.U?... If so can russia aswell

vtmarik · Post by **vtmarik** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:53 pm

Well it all comes down to geography: Is Turkey part of Europe?

Stopper · Post by **Stopper** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:59 pm

I'd be generally in favour of Turkey joining the EU sometime in the next decade. The whole point of the EU (as I see it) is to promote human rights, secular democracy, and economic progress - this has worked well for most countries, including Spain, Portugal and Greece, and the rest, so it shouldn't do Turkey any harm. It's true that they probably still have some way to go on the issue of human rights (laws against publicising the Armenian genocide, the Kurds, use of the army to "defend" the constitution) but I don't think that's anything unsurmountable.

Some of the arguments against which I particularly dislike include the one about the Turkish being "too culturally different" from the rest of Europe - I assume the main thing people mean by this is Islam. This is a load of chauvinistic bollocks - as long as the government is broadly secular, then what religion (or none) is practiced by a nation's populace is neither here nor there.

edmundomcpot · Post by **edmundomcpot** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:01 pm

vtmarik wrote:Well it all comes down to geography: Is Turkey part of Europe?

thats the point....a small bit of it is

Hoff · Post by **Hoff** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:10 pm

why does it matter if turkey or any other nation is pysically part of europe to be in the EU. Its just a name and symantics, they could prove to be just as vital to the EU than any other EU nation, the fact that a nation isnt in europe shouldnt stop them from joining the EU if they want to and if they are up to the EU standards.

edmundomcpot · Post by **edmundomcpot** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:25 pm

then there would be no point in calling it the european union ..the point im getting at is where to the borders end and is enough of turkey in europe within them to justify it being in the E.U.

Wisse · Post by **Wisse** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:27 pm

vtmarik wrote:Well it all comes down to geography: Is Turkey part of Europe?

a bit

MeDeFe · Post by **MeDeFe** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:49 pm

enough of it. But I think they should have stopped expansion half a dozen countries ago and consolidated instead.

Genghis Khant · Post by **Genghis Khant** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:15 pm

If Turkey can get in line with the EU as regards human rights, animal rights, agricultural/food/health&safety standards, building regulations etc., then they should be allowed in. EU membership is a good incentive and trying to force these changes through sanctions would be counter effective vis-a-vis general bad feeling towards the west. I'd rather use a carrot than a stick any day.

cowshrptrn · Post by **cowshrptrn** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:17 pm

I tinhk we dropped the ball on Turkey. We shoudl have gotten it into the EU a whiel back, now its gotten a lot more religious, and we hardly have any Muslim nations that are pro-westernization and secularization.

Genghis Khant · Post by **Genghis Khant** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:33 pm

cowshrptrn wrote:I think we dropped the ball on Turkey. We should have gotten it into the EU a while back...

Couldn't do that. As it is it'll probably take Turkey 10-15 years to come up to our standards.

Bogusbet · Post by **Bogusbet** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:36 pm

*Turks are dirty by nature. Once they learn to shower and shave, I'm in for letting them take on the jobs that are to good for white guys, like rubbish collection and killing arabs.

*The above was said due to the wankness of this thread, no liability for racisim will be expected or accepted due to you trying to be a politically correct vegan/gay person.

edmundomcpot · Post by **edmundomcpot** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:45 pm

why is this thread wank?? if you dont like it you dont have to post in it...just because were discussing politics that doesent invole america..and its something america cant police

Bogusbet · Post by **Bogusbet** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:47 pm

edmundomcpot wrote:why is this thread wank?? if you dont like it you dont have to post in it...just because were discussing politics that doesent invole america..and its something america cant police

I never said I did'nt like it, I like you though xxx

were we are ae're politics, next grade.

'

xx

tool.

Stopper · Post by **Stopper** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:51 pm

MeDeFe wrote:enough of it. But I think they should have stopped expansion half a dozen countries ago and consolidated instead.

What, and make the EU a rich man's club? If that's all there is to it, I can't see the point of it.

edmundomcpot · Post by **edmundomcpot** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:58 pm

a rich mans club is what its becoming anyway... the people voting yes for assecinsion in eastern european countries are the ones who can just afford to get out of the countries to find higher paid jobs in western countries...not that im complaining thats what i think the eu should be allowing anyone to work anywhere...however the eu should help indivisual countries get the money and stability to offer higher paid jobs attracting its own citizens back

Stopper · Post by **Stopper** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:27 pm

But most of the people in the eastern countries only come to work in the UK temporarily - that is, seasonally. They raise the UK's GDP by doing work that we won't do (or not for such low wages) and then take the money back to their own countries. In theory, everybody gains, especially the eastern countries. The poorer economies should grow faster than the rich ones, which is only fair.

If we stopped expansion for no good reason, then we'd have a permanent fortress Europe, with uncontrolled immigration from poorer countries, which, more often than not, we actually keep poor, through CAP.

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:59 pm

E.U. or Revived Roman Empire..... same difference.

vtmarik · Post by **vtmarik** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 1:19 am

I like the EU. I'm still waiting for Japan to buy out California and form a conglomerate for the Pacific Rim.

Maybe then we can usher in the future according to Shadowrun.

MeDeFe · Post by **MeDeFe** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 6:15 am

Not to make it a rich mans club, but to deal with things like the constitution, whether every country should really have the right to veto everything or whether a 2/3rds majority is enough. Those sort of things.
Don't get me wrong, the EU is a great thing that has spread more wealth and democracy to the world than any war the USA has ever fought. But I think there were more pressing matters a few years back than getting in another half a dozen countries in a rush.

edmundomcpot · Post by **edmundomcpot** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:18 am

The E.U. don't hand out invititations the countries apply to join it. Wasn't there a european constitiution rejected by France.. or have i got the wrong end of the stick

vtmarik · Post by **vtmarik** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:58 am

I think that this world needs the EU, if the EU were to pool their common resources (money, weapons, armies, etc.) we could finally have a second superpower (or reasonable facsimile thereof) to balance the equation.

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:36 am

vtmarik wrote:I think that this world needs the EU, if the EU were to pool their common resources (money, weapons, armies, etc.) we could finally have a second superpower (or reasonable facsimile thereof) to balance the equation.

Except the fact that the EU will control the world and will be lead by a guy who will make Hitler look like a choir boy.

MeDeFe · Post by **MeDeFe** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:38 am

You mean someone who actually has some balls and isn't completely indoctrinated?

jay_a2j · Post by **jay_a2j** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 9:43 am

MeDeFe wrote:You mean someone who actually has some balls and isn't completely indoctrinated?

He will require all people to worship him. (If that's what you consider not being "indoctrinated")