United States of Europe???

toiletduck

righthand wrote:

For quite a number of years 'Irish Neutrality' was my sacred cow. It was the one issue I believed sacrosanct

it never ceases to amaze me how neutrality, a policy brought in because dev wanted to see the brits get a bloody nose, has become like a religion to so many people.

What persuaded me is the issues not directly connect with the war. It's the total bully tactics of the US on every world issue. Whether Trade, Justice, Environment, Resources, UN, and on and on.

Yes, how dare the U.S. use it's power to try and push forward its policies on these issues. It's not as if every other country on the planet does this :rolleyes:

bonkey

toiletduck wrote:

it never ceases to amaze me how neutrality, a policy brought in because dev wanted to see the brits get a bloody nose, has become like a religion to so many people.

Perhaps its because we're accustomed to the international respect and recognition that neutrality affords a small nation. Like it does the Swiss.

jc

toiletduck

bonkey wrote:

Perhaps its because we're accustomed to the international respect and recognition that neutrality affords a small nation. Like it does the Swiss.

but the swiss are actually neutral, we're "neutral" but let the US military through our airspace.

rsynnott

toiletduck wrote:

Yes, how dare the U.S. use it's power to try and push forward its policies on these issues. It's not as if every other country on the planet does this :rolleyes:

I think it annoys people because the US has blatantly taken advantage of the UN before, (in Korea, Vietnam, etc) and now ignores it when it suits them. It won't even follow the UN's rules on torture correctly, for goodness sakes.

If we have to be non-neutral, we're far better drift towards an EU superstate than towards American influence, IMO.

righthand

toiletduck wrote:

it never ceases to amaze me how neutrality, a policy brought in because dev wanted to see the Brits get a bloody nose, has become like a religion to so many people.

Yes, like a religion, it must start somewhere. Unlike religion, our neutrality hasn't cost lives, so it's been a lot more positive than any religion.

You may know that we were expected to give up our neutrality for Britain's 'need' when Churchill demanded out ports back. Consequently we were one of the few European countries not to benefit from the Marshall Plan. As neutrals, our very limited soldiers were able to serve as excellent peacekeepers in the UN. The Irish as warriors have enjoyed a fiercesome reputation, yet as peacekeepers and negotiators, I believe we are far more valuable. We would be pointless as a small cog in a large NATO army. As neutrals we are one, as a cog we are nothing.

toiletduck wrote:

Yes, how dare the U.S. use it's power to try and push forward its policies on these issues. It's not as if every other country on the planet does this

How silly. Is this a deliberate attempt to misunderstand. At this point I'll be charitable and conclude that it's a language problem with someone who's first language is not english.
.

toiletduck

rsynnott wrote:

I think it annoys people because the US has blatantly taken advantage of the UN before, (in Korea, Vietnam, etc) and now ignores it when it suits them. It won't even follow the UN's rules on torture correctly, for goodness sakes.

firstly how exactly did the US take advantage of the UN in regards to Korea? Secondly, my point was that every country tries to advance their agenda's using their international clout, it's not the just the US.

toiletduck

righthand wrote:

Yes, like a religion, it must start somewhere. Unlike religion, our neutrality hasn't cost lives, so it's been a lot more positive than any religion.

if our ports and/or airstrips could have been used by allied ships and patrol planes, maybe a lot fewer merchant ships would have been sunk by u-boats, maybe saving lives.

Consequently we were one of the few European countries not to benefit from the Marshall Plan.

we did benifit from the marshall plan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshal_plan

We would be pointless as a small cog in a large NATO army.

what an insult to the irish currently working under NATO command in Kosovo.

At this point I'll be charitable and conclude that it's a language problem with someone who's first language is not english.

:rolleyes: grow up and maybe lay of putting every few words in bold.

The Saint

toiletduck wrote:

what an insult to the irish currently working under NATO command in Kosovo.

Irish peacekeepers are operating in Kosovo under NATO command that is operating under the UN on the UN's behalf.

Therefore Irish troops are operating under the authority of the UN not NATO.

toiletduck

The Saint wrote:

Irish peacekeepers are operating in Kosovo under NATO command that is operating under the UN on the UN's behalf.

Therefore Irish troops are operating under the authority of the UN not NATO.

im aware of that, but as you and i have said they're under the command of NATO and i wouldn't consider them "as pointless as a small clog"

Bri

A couple of brief things (back on topic):

Having a common 'President'? If they called it something else would you be upset? There's current a presidency setup for the European Council; the plan is/was to extend it to make it more achievable to complete goals as opposed to constantly passing it on. A bit like the 'constitution' it's an unfortunate choice of terms because people literally can't see that Europe is not comparable to a state and is therefore not a superstate.

I don't need the constitution to tell me there won't be a USE. I'm happy enough in my knowledge of Member State's value of sovereignty that this is highly unlikely to happen. Economic integration is more achievable than political (and should in theory be pursued secondly); plenty of this integration is driven by self-serving states who looking for all they can get, without losing significantly. Simply because people delegate certain powers to supranational institutions, doesn't mean everyting in the EU is going to operate that way, plenty of it is necessary in order to fully reap the economic benefits. Intergovernmentalism is a key part of the EU and will remain so. I don't listen to a word Bertie says; there's no need. I can make up my own mind through reading other sources. I wish more people would do the same!

rsynnott

Part of the reason that I'm in favour of the constitution is simply that it makes the rules more explicit. It would make it very difficult for a member state to turn to torture, as the US has, or to go religion-controlled, or whatever.

Toiletduck and righthand-1 week ban
please obey the rules and deal with the posts and not the poster.
The report this post functionality is there for a reason.