EU - Croatia

Culchie

The Corinthian wrote:

Once they return Istria and Fiume, I think they should be allowed join.

Return Istria to who?

The Italians or the Austrians? I don't hear them complaining, in fact the Austrians sttod up the Croatians over recent EU entry talks, so there's obviuosly no problem there.

Conor ... As usual , you know it all :rolleyes:

Culchie

Culchie wrote:

Conor ... As usual , you know it all :rolleyes:

You'll find that on this board, as on most, there is some rule about attacking the post, not the poster.

I don't know it all. I have opinions. Clearly you don't like them. But I don't think I might necessarily have the same opinion on events up North as someone from the Derry's Bogside, I may not have the same opinion as someone from Washington on the War in Iraq, and I reserve the right to not accept at face value everything someone from Croatia might say about the Balkan conflicts...

Culchie

Deleted User wrote:

You'll find that on this board, as on most, there is some rule about attacking the post, not the poster....

Attack ???... not trying to get another ban enforced are you? If you are going to be so outspoken and offer 'opinions' on everything, surely you can take a little heat without running to mammy?

Deleted User wrote:

I don't know it all. I have opinions. Clearly you don't like them. But I don't think I might necessarily have the same opinion on events up North as someone from the Derry's Bogside, I may not have the same opinion as someone from Washington on the War in Iraq, and I reserve the right to not accept at face value everything someone from Croatia might say about the Balkan conflicts...

Or the vast majority of the international community?

Culchie

Culchie wrote:

Attack ???... not trying to get another ban enforced are you? If you are going to be so outspoken and offer 'opinions' on everything, surely you can take a little heat without running to mammy?

You really think I complained you?

Check with a mod or admin as to whether I got you banned.

Culchie

Culchie wrote:

Attack ???... not trying to get another ban enforced are you? If you are going to be so outspoken and offer 'opinions' on everything, surely you can take a little heat without running to mammy?

Well I havent see any reported posts.
But as a matter of course I do read this forum and I wont tolerate personal shoite in threads.
Either discuss or dont discuss , it's quite simple really.
Consider this a warning.

Whistle Blower

Just going back a little having Turkey in the EU would mean the EU Borders are from Galway to the Iraq Border :eek:

So the EU's border ends at a warzone, worrying me thinks although Northern Iraq aka Kurdish Iraq is not as bad as the rest it is still a warzone and our borders would end there hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

As for Croatia I would be in two minds considering the attrocites they carried out durning the war, I would leave it a little longer aswell IMHO

The Corinthian

Culchie wrote:

The Italians or the Austrians?

You've never been in Trieste then?

Culchie

Nope, never been Trieste.

and you conveniently edited out the rest of my post.

Please explain I'm interested.

Should we give back Dublin to the British?

The Corinthian

Culchie wrote:

Nope, never been Trieste.

I guessed.

and you conveniently edited out the rest of my post.

I didn't. It was irrelevant.

Please explain I'm interested.

Austria-Hungary was a multi-ethnic empire and as late as the mid-ninetieth century included Lombardy and Venetia (both ethnically Italian). After it's dissolution, the last two ethnically Italian regions (Trentino and Trieste-Istria) were added to Italy (Bolzano was also added, even though that is arguably Austrian).

World War II saw Italy lose Istria and it's Italian population ethnically cleansed (numerous mass graves exist), with property and wealth confiscated. Trieste herself barely avoided Yugoslav annexation, but remains a regional capital without a region.

Of course Italy is not officially seeking the return of Trieste from Slovenia / Croatia, but this does not mean that the entire matter is not still a sore point with many Italians or that they would retain the aspiration to regain it - not unlike the aspirations of a government closer to home.

Should we give back Dublin to the British?

Irrelevant at best, straw man at worst. Or you've not got a grasp on what irredentism is.

'Should the British give back NI to Ireland?' would be more relevant.

catholicireland

Just going back a little having Turkey in the EU would mean the EU Borders are from Galway to the Iraq Border

Thats right.
Europe is expanding far beyond what it should. I still believe that Ireland should pull out of Europe though. Its a destructive force for evil.

Culchie

The Corinthian wrote:

I guessed.

I didn't. It was irrelevant.

Austria-Hungary was a multi-ethnic empire and as late as the mid-ninetieth century included Lombardy and Venetia (both ethnically Italian). After it's dissolution, the last two ethnically Italian regions (Trentino and Trieste-Istria) were added to Italy (Bolzano was also added, even though that is arguably Austrian).

World War II saw Italy lose Istria and it's Italian population ethnically cleansed (numerous mass graves exist), with property and wealth confiscated. Trieste herself barely avoided Yugoslav annexation, but remains a regional capital without a region.

Of course Italy is not officially seeking the return of Trieste from Slovenia / Croatia, but this does not mean that the entire matter is not still a sore point with many Italians or that they would retain the aspiration to regain it - not unlike the aspirations of a government closer to home.

Irrelevant at best, straw man at worst. Or you've not got a grasp on what irredentism is.

'Should the British give back NI to Ireland?' would be more relevant.

Interesting.

Was this 'Yugoslavia' that took over this region, or Croatia, there is an important difference.

Also the Italians have had their moments as well (as has half of Europe), Kefalonia and some of the Greek Islands comes to mind very quickly.
Then we have our neighbours of course.

I honestly can't see a problem with Croatia joining the EU, they have now met the 300 odd stipulations put before them by the accession committee, the country is predominantly Roman Cathlolic, architecture and heritage is of Italian and Austria/German influence, depending on North or South.
Dubrovnik was once busiest shipping and trading port in Europe, so all said and done, in the broader sense of the word, Croatians are more 'European' than we Irish are.
It's just that their recent 'troubles' are scrutinised to an extent other European countries are not, as more time has lapsed by.

There are stories that we Irish couldn't be too proud about when fighting for our independence, there was a war on, and undoubtedly Croatia had instances of similar occurences, but they were fighting for their Independence, much like we were, so I just think that should be recognised, not ignored.

catholicireland

catholicireland wrote:

Thats right.
Europe is expanding far beyond what it should. I still believe that Ireland should pull out of Europe though. Its a destructive force for evil.

You are very funny.
I like you.
My liking is not infinite though.

*general warning time* applicable to all posters-Blatant disruptive trolling will be dealt with appropriately if it's either brought to my attention or I come across it myself

The Corinthian

Culchie wrote:

Was this 'Yugoslavia' that took over this region, or Croatia, there is an important difference.

How so? Are you suggesting that if Britain dissolved and, say, Scotland retained NI, there would be a similar important difference?

Also the Italians have had their moments as well (as has half of Europe), Kefalonia and some of the Greek Islands comes to mind very quickly.

Irrelevant.

There are stories that we Irish couldn't be too proud about when fighting for our independence, there was a war on, and undoubtedly Croatia had instances of similar occurences, but they were fighting for their Independence, much like we were, so I just think that should be recognised, not ignored.

Yet I fail to see where this differs from Irish irredentism - especially areas in NI that were ethnically cleansed of the original Irish?

Indeed, if you want to talk about 'fighting for independence' you should consider all those Italians who fought against Austro-Hungarian occupation, through to World War I, where Italian volunteers from those occupied territories were hanged as traitors by the Austro-Hungarian authorities rather than being treated as POW's.

Meanwhile, you're suggesting that Croatia was some form of oppressed vassal to the greater Serbia. Certainly Serbia was primo inter pares, but that did not make Croatia 'occupied' or give it a history of resistance that existed in either Ireland or in Austrian occupied Italy.

Seriously, read up on the history of the area before pontificating.

Culchie

The Corinthian wrote:

How so? Are you suggesting that if Britain dissolved and, say, Scotland retained NI, there would be a similar important difference?

Irrelevant.

Yet I fail to see where this differs from Irish irredentism - especially areas in NI that were ethnically cleansed of the original Irish?

Indeed, if you want to talk about 'fighting for independence' you should consider all those Italians who fought against Austro-Hungarian occupation, through to World War I, where Italian volunteers from those occupied territories were hanged as traitors by the Austro-Hungarian authorities rather than being treated as POW's.

Meanwhile, you're suggesting that Croatia was some form of oppressed vassal to the greater Serbia. Certainly Serbia was primo inter pares, but that did not make Croatia 'occupied' or give it a history of resistance that existed in either Ireland or in Austrian occupied Italy.

Seriously, read up on the history of the area before pontificating.

Whose pontificating? I'm offering an opinion, or is that not allowed.

Funny how all my points are irrelevant isn't it?

You're being the obnoxious prat, but I guess because you are a moderator :rolleyes: you can get away with ramming your opinions down peoples throats.

Culchie

Culchie wrote:

You're being the obnoxious prat, but I guess because you are a moderator :rolleyes: you can get away with ramming your opinions down peoples throats.

No doubt you were expecting a weeks ban for that?
here it is in technicolour

The Corinthian

Culchie wrote:

Whose pontificating? I'm offering an opinion, or is that not allowed.

Sure, but it helps if you know something about what you're talking about before you express an opinion. You also should know that we have to accept that if we express an opinion it may be questioned.

Funny how all my points are irrelevant isn't it?

Not all your points, just the one's that are irrelevant. If I'm wrong, please point out how they are relevant. Go on.

You're being the obnoxious prat, but I guess because you are a moderator :rolleyes: you can get away with ramming your opinions down peoples throats.

So it's because I'm an evil moderator (although on the politics board I'm a normal user just like you - I've even been temp banned here in the past) and nothing to do with you're talking through your arse.

That's it. Must be the evil mods. Fight teh powah!

The Corinthian

Earthman wrote:

No doubt you were expecting a weeks ban for that?

Awe... and he was about to dig deeper too

The Corinthian

The Corinthian wrote:

Serbia was primo inter pares

I...ahhh...the old 'inter pares', huh?...ummm....could you just excuse me for a minute, I'll be right back...;)

sceptre

Deleted User wrote:

I...ahhh...the old 'inter pares', huh?...ummm....could you just excuse me for a minute, I'll be right back...;)

First among equals (makes sense if you stare at it for a minute)

It's "primus" as a general rule in Latin so I assume that's Italian, of which I know nothing, though revera linguam latinam vix cognovi.

It's also a fair point - the Croats felt much more oppressed before WW2, after which Tito marshalled all of the constituent states into something more approaching equality.

The Corinthian

sceptre wrote:

First among equals (makes sense if you stare at it for a minute)

It's "primus" as a general rule in Latin so I assume that's Italian, of which I know nothing, though revera linguam latinam vix cognovi.

Upps... I meant primus and wrote primo. My bad.