Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, the European member states are more leaning toward nationalism, than the American states. Basically, Ohio nationalism or Utah nationalism sounds quite ridiculous, but Polish nationalism is a quite real thing.Viewed objectively, the current form is the only working one for now. A common market would work but not in the broad picture. It would not move the countries closer to each other. In the current situation, the competition can even lead to tensions.
On the other hand a federation is not yet suitable. Europe is not America, where the states always were in some form of unity. The Europeans are not ready for a unity government. I personally tend to the conclusion that the current situation is a result of the EU and prefer an exit for now.
I agree to the first point but not to the second.Yes, the European member states are more leaning toward nationalism, than the American states. Basically, Ohio nationalism or Utah nationalism sounds quite ridiculous, but Polish nationalism is a quite real thing.
There is contradiction in your words. 'The current form is the only working one for now' and 'prefer an exit for now'. If you prefer an exit from the EU, it means the EU in the current form doesn't work properly.
No, they can´t leave. Dissolving the national states would be a decision of the national states. An exit is also a decision of a national sate. But when the national states vanished there is no more authority that can order the exit. Unless a revolt takes place.If they start to oppose the EU, they can leave anytime they want, no? One can't get financial benefits, offering nothing in return. Get rid of a unanimous vote principle. It is long overdue and it would be more than enough for now.
Man, no one says about dissolving national states. The EU will remain a union of its member states. And these member states will keep their governments, legislatures, national symbols and so on.No, they can´t leave. Dissolving the national states would be a decision of the national states. An exit is also a decision of a national sate. But when the national states vanished there is no more authority that can order the exit. Unless a revolt takes place.
The financial benefits are free for the net receivers. The transfer of sovereignty to the EU takes place anyway.
You are right and that is my major point of criticism. Instead of creating fields of competences, EU legislation always weighs more than national. In every single field, not just some. This reduces certainty of the law and thus the state of law and democracy. To me a Union´s most important task is a common foreign policy. But that does not exist in the EU. It is rather about how yellow bananas can be, what bulbs you can have and how many posts you may write per day.Man, no one says about dissolving national states. The EU will remain a union of its member states. And these member states will keep their governments, legislatures, national symbols and so on.
The point is about the primacy of all-European institutions in some fields - like financial sector, military, foreign policy, some judicial system - over the national ones. Some questions will be a matter of 'federal' level, and some - a national one.
which way would you vote?
in Europe?
And here we again return to a unanimous vote rule. How effective can a common foreign policy be of one member can block any decision of the Union? So, only bananas and bulbs remain.You are right and that is my major point of criticism. Instead of creating fields of competences, EU legislation always weighs more than national. In every single field, not just some. This reduces certainty of the law and thus the state of law and democracy. To me a Union´s most important task is a common foreign policy. But that does not exist in the EU. It is rather about how yellow bananas can be, what bulbs you can have and how many posts you may write per day.
I am going even further and say in a true Union, the member states don´t do foreign policy at all. In the Ukraine case I guess our opinions differ. I think a possible Russian threat for Europe is a result of the countries´ war efforts against Russia, not of a Russian victory in Ukraine. But if we are about to support another countries´ war efforts it would be the easiest way if a single Union body makes a quick and binding decision. The unified block is this strong that no threats can emerge from the support. But look how they actually act: Germany is too coward to send cruise missiles to Ukraine. So they want to give them to the UK and France and tell them they should send theirs to Ukraine. The country that depends on such countries´ support is doomed.And here we again return to a unanimous vote rule. How effective can a common foreign policy be of one member can block any decision of the Union? So, only bananas and bulbs remain.
My point was not about Ukraine at all. And not about Hungary. Doesn't matter whether it is Hungary or Estonia or Greece or France. One member state per itself, without some legal procedure, just voting 'no' can't block a decision of the whole Union. It is quite destructive and unfair.I am going even further and say in a true Union, the member states don´t do foreign policy at all. In the Ukraine case I guess our opinions differ. I think a possible Russian threat for Europe is a result of the countries´ war efforts against Russia, not of a Russian victory in Ukraine. But if we are about to support another countries´ war efforts it would be the easiest way if a single Union body makes a quick and binding decision. The unified block is this strong that no threats can emerge from the support. But look how they actually act: Germany is too coward to send cruise missiles to Ukraine. So they want to give them to the UK and France and tell them they should send theirs to Ukraine. The country that depends on such countries´ support is doomed.
But I agree that a unanimous vote rule can be very obstructive and should never apply in urgent security matters. But the EU has a way to get around Hungary´s financial aid vetoes. They do not decide for every aid package but make a big one of 50 billions. The money will be spent in tranches like before but the decision is made in advance so no country can oppose it once enacted. And all 27 EU states agreed now.
Sure, it applies to any hypothetical case.My point was not about Ukraine at all. And not about Hungary. Doesn't matter whether it is Hungary or Estonia or Greece or France. One member state per itself, without some legal procedure, just voting 'no' can't block a decision of the whole Union. It is quite destructive and unfair.
BTW, not sure what you meant about the 'Ukraine case'. Our opinions differ in what exactly?Sure, it applies to any hypothetical case.
I think you are in favor of the aid for Ukraine. I prefer negotiations.BTW, not sure what you meant about the 'Ukraine case'. Our opinions differ in what exactly?
Heh, then you maybe haven't read any of my posts in the last year. I want all 'aid' to Ukraine to be halted immediately.I think you are in favor of the aid for Ukraine. I prefer negotiations.
For what reason?Heh, then you maybe haven't read any of my posts in the last year. I want all 'aid' to Ukraine to be halted immediately.
Because the war in its current form has no sense for Ukraine at all. And will only lead from bad to worse.For what reason?
Sure, my point as well.Because the war in its current form has no sense for Ukraine at all. And will only lead from bad to worse.
Germany needs a leader like Netanyahu. You voided all points you ever made when you started cheering for Hamas.voting in German style
Raise your arm .
Say now .
Do not argue .
Jarwohl . Ich liebe Nutty Yahoo ..
Ukraine is toast. It is more or less clear now that the best solution for it would have been peaceful agreements with Russia in April 2022. But the bastards in London, DC and Kiev decided differently having no plan what to do next or what to do if something went wrong.Sure, my point as well.
Ukraine has been taken over by the US in 2014 and since been prepared for the current war. So there is little chance they will let Selensky make peace. He will have to fight until the Russians knock at his door.
