Pages: 1 2 3 4

 

2007-02-27 04:40:31
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6521|Πάϊ
First off, let me say that IMO Europe is generally on the right track, regardless of any mistakes or misfortunes. But as far as peace now & forever is concerned, I'd be worried about Turkey.

It looks to me that the EU is rushing into this deal for some reason (maybe pressure from outside powers?), turning a blind eye to Turkey's general offensive stance towards standing members of the EU (occupation of Cyprus is a hotspot nowhere near a solution) and of course to all the human rights violations against the Kurds etc. Also, like superfly_cox said, "the Bosnian/Kosovo conflict will forever be a black eye for Europe's security policy" for many reasons... especially demonstrating the lack of cooperation in decision making. So today's high may sadly prove to be a historical zenith, if the EU doesn't manage to play Turkey by their rules.

Now as for this:

superfly_cox wrote:

Seems to me that the US reached this level of maturity and peace on its continent in 1900.  The US had wars between their states and with neighbors but all has been peaceful and stable for a really long time. Nothing really special about europe getting close to this 100 years later.
There simply is no comparison between the two. The US is a new country and the problems and conflicts they faced in their short history are nothing compared to those of the continent where civilization begun.

superfly_cox wrote:

Europe, for all its wonderful virtues, is from a global perspective in a period of decadence: they are complacent, indifferent, have weak leadership, and just don't have the competitive drive of a world power anymore.
Rounded up, I think Europeans might be the most well-informed people on the planet. Thus, Europe never was and never will be complacent or indifferent. It may seem that way, especially to Americans, because they tend lately to misinterpret the democratic process by which the people impose their will on their governments as "weak leadership". The leaders' role is merely to materialize their peoples' will, and not to impose theirs. And finally, I do not think that Europe's goal is to become a world power in the sense of dominating over others. For the time being at least, it is my understanding that the EU is keeping out of that game, setting as a primary target the wellfare of its citizens.

As for this fear rhetoric,

superfly_cox wrote:

We live in a world with conflicts, wars, dangerous ideologies, unscrupulous government, fierce competition from economic globalization, mass migrations and most dangerously the technologies so advanced that it can be used to kill millions at time, possibly even destroy the planet.  Seems to me that europe is ignoring human history by minimilizing these issues.
Nobody is minimizing them. I guess Europeans have quite a good grasp of the dangers mentioned, and thus cannot be easily feared into mindless action by those who stand to gain.

Last edited by oug (2007-02-27 04:48:06)

ƒ³
2007-02-27 05:49:12
superfly_cox
soup fly mod
+717|6784

CameronPoe wrote:

Some of the points you raise as being bad points are exactly what I believe to be Europe's strong points. By choosing the socialist path Europe has automatically ceded the competitive edge and lives with that in the knowledge that the chosen path leads to a higher standard of living and quality of life albeit lower levels of growth. As a consequence unemployment is higher - but unemployment in Europe is not quite the struggle it is in USA: free health care, dental care, welfare payments, subsidised housing, etc. - no real cause for complaint: a basic guaranteed quality of life, which is comfortable but not luxurious thus encouraging the unemployed to seek gainful employment and to better themselves, secure in the knowledge that if they fail they will always be able to bounce back given the safety net underneath them.
more on this below in my comments about European socialism.

CameronPoe wrote:

You speak of weak leadership. I do not want Europe going down the path of centralisation of power, one of the major flaws in the American political system. Devolution of power provides true democracy - centralisation of it breeds corruption and silences the voice of the little man. The sovereignty each of our constituent governments still retain means that we get truly representative government and that our leaders remain answerable to the people for their actions.
Uhm, let me break down the parliamentary system that is generally used in Europe: People vote for political parties in elections.  Based on voting percentages, political parties then assign their politicians to parliament which then (through a series of political negotiations between parties) elect a prime minister to form a government.  the head of government is NOT directly elected and there's no clear cut system of checks and balances between legislative branch and executive branch.  If i vote for political party X, then i have to accept all the fuck ups who weaseled their way onto the party's parliamentary list and then accept who they decide will govern my country.  This is not a big issue for me cause I could care less about the American political system but the fact is that in the US the executive and legislative branch is directly elected by constituents and their system of checks and balances is far better set up than the European system.  If you disagree with American politics that's one thing but don't start getting holier-than-though about Europe's parliamentary system.

CameronPoe wrote:

I don't measure the success of a society in terms of GDP or stock market indices. People matter, not money. The system we have in place today here in Europe provides most Europeans with an average standard of living and quality of life over and above the average standard in the rest of the world. You're right - Europe is content to take it easy and that's exactly what I hold up as the way forward. We have chosen slow and steady growth as opposed to rampant cut-throat growth (regardless of who loses out and by how much given the unavoidable winner-loser nature of pure capitalism). Norway, with one of the highest standards of living in the world and one of the best economies, has taxation rates of circa 80% and yet you offer up high taxes as an example of an economic flaw?
The socialism you speak of is an unattainable utopia.  Human nature dictates that people aren't going to be very motivated to work so that they can provide a saftey net for others.  Hell, I'll stay home and collect my social assistance checks and you can go work to pay for them!  Mediocrity is not be a goal of modern European society.  I think you are off in your understanding of European Socialism as the great social panacea for everything wrong with capitalism.  Everybody else in Europe sees major problems in the system as it currently is.  I live in Europe, I work in Europe...I know what Europeans are saying about Europe.  They all want the European system to be fixed.  And if the EU is so content with their current state of being then what about the Lisbon Strategy which aims to make Europe the "most competitive knowledge based society in the world by 2010".  This wouldn't seem like a big priority if Europe was "content to take it easy" as you said.  Europe wants to be more than it is but doesn't have the drive to do so.  That's the current problem with European socialism: they want to be economically dynamic and competitive but at the same time they don't want to work that hard to do so. 

CameronPoe wrote:

We have the military resources to defend ourselves as well - something you seem to allude to us not having. We will defend ourselves when necessary, when provoked - we have the means and we have the deterrents to prevent others from attacking us.
That is if you consider today's real threats to be of a conventional nature.  I think that Europe is weak and indecisive in their security policy.  I don't think that playing nice and staying neutral will protect them against emerging global threats.

finally
For all purposes, I'm European and I'm not trying to bash Europe.  I love living in Europe and don't plan on returning to the state in the near future.  Life is great here and i work less than i used to in the states...much more time to enjoy life.  But let's not kid ourselves on what Europe is.  There are big problems here in terms of the economy, politics, society and security just like there are in other countries.  I could also write tons about what's wrong in the US and what needs to be changed there but that's not the point.  What i'm saying is that the notion that Europe has reached a state of stability, prosperity and peace (forever) as stated in the original post is wrong...and most Europeans (when speaking amongst other europeans) would agree that there are plenty of problems here.
2007-02-27 06:33:36
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6558

superfly_cox wrote:

Uhm, let me break down the parliamentary system that is generally used in Europe: People vote for political parties in elections.  Based on voting percentages, political parties then assign their politicians to parliament which then (through a series of political negotiations between parties) elect a prime minister to form a government.  the head of government is NOT directly elected and there's no clear cut system of checks and balances between legislative branch and executive branch.  If i vote for political party X, then i have to accept all the fuck ups who weaseled their way onto the party's parliamentary list and then accept who they decide will govern my country.  This is not a big issue for me cause I could care less about the American political system but the fact is that in the US the executive and legislative branch is directly elected by constituents and their system of checks and balances is far better set up than the European system.  If you disagree with American politics that's one thing but don't start getting holier-than-though about Europe's parliamentary system.
In many European nations the head of state - the President or Monarch has little or no meaningful power in everyday politics. In other nations you have one strong president who has the power of decree policy on many important matters. In the parliamentary democracies of Europe the leader of the majority party often has to placate back-benchers within their own party and those in opposition in order to get policy passed. Voters know who the leader of each party is and that voting for a particular party will lead to those leaders potentially becoming the prime minister. It seems to me like there are plenty of checks and balances. It fails in 'first past the post' systems like in the UK where one party obtains a landslide majority and can pass whatever legislation it wants - as extreme a legislation that it wants, without having to answer to opposing views or the electorate (until the next time comes around). Several European countries have proportional representation - truly representative government which almost always leads to coalition governments: a recipe for moderation and keeping everyone as happy as possible. I hardly see how this is so unrepresentative or lacking in checks and balances. 'First past the post' democracy leads to a polarised society, as witnessed in the USA today.

superfly_cox wrote:

The socialism you speak of is an unattainable utopia.  Human nature dictates that people aren't going to be very motivated to work so that they can provide a saftey net for others.  Hell, I'll stay home and collect my social assistance checks and you can go work to pay for them!  Mediocrity is not be a goal of modern European society.  I think you are off in your understanding of European Socialism as the great social panacea for everything wrong with capitalism.  Everybody else in Europe sees major problems in the system as it currently is.  I live in Europe, I work in Europe...I know what Europeans are saying about Europe.  They all want the European system to be fixed.  And if the EU is so content with their current state of being then what about the Lisbon Strategy which aims to make Europe the "most competitive knowledge based society in the world by 2010".  This wouldn't seem like a big priority if Europe was "content to take it easy" as you said.  Europe wants to be more than it is but doesn't have the drive to do so.  That's the current problem with European socialism: they want to be economically dynamic and competitive but at the same time they don't want to work that hard to do so.
Unattainable utopia? How about Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Luxembourg? Mediocrity is not the goal of Europe. A sensible medium being mediocrity and runaway progress (which in itself brings social ills) is what the aim of Europe is. The further integration of Europe is grinding to a halt - the people have spoken and have spoken out AGAINST an EU consitution and any of the trappings of a proper federal government. Most Europeans realise that we can't be as competitive as the other great world powers by virtue of the constraints placed upon us by virtue of the mix of capitalism and socialism that we have adopted. Europe does not want to be China or USA or the USSR.

Why don't I stay at home and collect assistance cheques? Because the standard of living it affords you is very basic! And because Europe affords me the opportunity to make something of myself!! It is not in human nature to be a lazy bum. When a human sees the benefits of work they won't lay idle long.

superfly_cox wrote:

That is if you consider today's real threats to be of a conventional nature.  I think that Europe is weak and indecisive in their security policy.  I don't think that playing nice and staying neutral will protect them against emerging global threats.
I think you'll find that the many stings and ongoing security operations against terrorism are far more effective than engaging in needless wars in other countries that serve no purpose but to exacerbate the problem. Europe is long used to terrorism, ask the Brits - they had to deal with the IRA for 30 years. We realise that terrorism is something you police and manage and we have experience in that field second only to Israel.

superfly_cox wrote:

finally
For all purposes, I'm European and I'm not trying to bash Europe.  I love living in Europe and don't plan on returning to the state in the near future.  Life is great here and i work less than i used to in the states...much more time to enjoy life.  But let's not kid ourselves on what Europe is.  There are big problems here in terms of the economy, politics, society and security just like there are in other countries.  I could also write tons about what's wrong in the US and what needs to be changed there but that's not the point.  What i'm saying is that the notion that Europe has reached a state of stability, prosperity and peace (forever) as stated in the original post is wrong...and most Europeans (when speaking amongst other europeans) would agree that there are plenty of problems here.
Every society has its problems - I never stated Europe actually was a utopia, it's quite clear in the OP. I asked the question. Personally I think we're going in the right direction - the middle path to prosperity and well-being.
2007-02-27 06:49:37
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6774|PNW

For all we know, France could bomb Algeria and spawn a whole new ruckus.
2007-02-27 06:59:27
autopilot
banned
+115|6350

Call it western europe. I think letting Turkey into the EU would contribute to a possible Muslim vs. All other war in europe...
2007-02-27 07:02:30
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6812|Nårvei

autopilot wrote:

Call it western europe. I think letting Turkey into the EU would contribute to a possible Muslim vs. All other war in europe...
Or maybe the total opposite ?

What speaks for and what speaks against such a merger ?

Dont just rush off an opinion just to have one, back up your statement young one
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2007-02-27 07:16:04
JahManRed
wank
+646|6630|IRELAND

autopilot wrote:

Call it western Europe. I think letting Turkey into the EU would contribute to a possible Muslim vs. All other war in europe...
If we can integrate a nation of Muslims into a predominately Christian Europe then we prove to the rest of the world that such change is possible if done sensitively. And that Christians (generally) are willing to welcome Muslims into an economic community formed to bring the whole area to an economic par.
2007-02-27 07:32:01
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6812|Nårvei

JahManRed wrote:

autopilot wrote:

Call it western Europe. I think letting Turkey into the EU would contribute to a possible Muslim vs. All other war in europe...
If we can integrate a nation of Muslims into a predominately Christian Europe then we prove to the rest of the world that such change is possible if done sensitively. And that Christians (generally) are willing to welcome Muslims into an economic community formed to bring the whole area to an economic par.
This should have it`s own thread if you ask me, well said Red and i totally agree
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2007-02-27 07:52:17
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6531|Global Command
Europe, enjoy your peace. While you can.

The general pussification and disarmament of the population, combined with a continental weariness of war, combined with a lax immigration policy is simply fattening you up for the slaughter.
http://tmq2.wordpress.com/2007/02/01/is … s-suicide/

Should the united States fail in Iraq at the insistance of the democrats the Islamo-extremists will be emboldened and attempt to carry out their well stated and publicized intentions to institute Sharia Law across Europe.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/a … 004051.php

debate from Swedish Parliment wrote:

On Monday, Social Democratic immigration spokeswoman Anne-Marie Meldgaard issued an ultimatum to Muslim party members, demanding that they condemn sharia in order to remain in the party.
Party leader Mogens Lykketoft has so far declined comment on the ultimatum, and Meldgaard has since modified her original remarks.

"Of course it's OK to fast. As long as an individual is not acting in violation of the constitution, Danish jurisprudence, principles of equality or democracy, we can accept it. But I still maintain that people have no business with us if they place Islamic law above our democratic system, or support execution by stoning," said Meldgaard.

Social Democratic party member Hamid El Mousti, a Moroccan by birth, currently sits on Copenhagens City Council. El Mousti claims it is impossible for Muslims to disavow sharia in its entirety.

"Sharia is a part of our identity - part of being Muslim. It's unreasonable to ask us to swear off our religion - but demanding that we accept the values of Denmark is fine," said El Mousti, emphasising that he in no way condones the stoning of adulterous women or amputation of hands to punish thieves.
Perhaps the Tet offensive in Iraq everyone predicted would actually be a general offensive across Europe.

I'd advise observing how France dealt with the Muslim riots. They didn't.
My advice would be for all to stock pile food water and what weapons you can as the authorities will do little to protect you.
2007-02-27 08:09:53
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6812|Nårvei

ATG wrote:

Europe, enjoy your peace. While you can.

The general pussification and disarmament of the population, combined with a continental weariness of war, combined with a lax immigration policy is simply fattening you up for the slaughter.
http://tmq2.wordpress.com/2007/02/01/is … s-suicide/

Should the united States fail in Iraq at the insistance of the democrats the Islamo-extremists will be emboldened and attempt to carry out their well stated and publicized intentions to institute Sharia Law across Europe.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/a … 004051.php

debate from Swedish Parliment wrote:

On Monday, Social Democratic immigration spokeswoman Anne-Marie Meldgaard issued an ultimatum to Muslim party members, demanding that they condemn sharia in order to remain in the party.
Party leader Mogens Lykketoft has so far declined comment on the ultimatum, and Meldgaard has since modified her original remarks.

"Of course it's OK to fast. As long as an individual is not acting in violation of the constitution, Danish jurisprudence, principles of equality or democracy, we can accept it. But I still maintain that people have no business with us if they place Islamic law above our democratic system, or support execution by stoning," said Meldgaard.

Social Democratic party member Hamid El Mousti, a Moroccan by birth, currently sits on Copenhagens City Council. El Mousti claims it is impossible for Muslims to disavow sharia in its entirety.

"Sharia is a part of our identity - part of being Muslim. It's unreasonable to ask us to swear off our religion - but demanding that we accept the values of Denmark is fine," said El Mousti, emphasising that he in no way condones the stoning of adulterous women or amputation of hands to punish thieves.
Perhaps the Tet offensive in Iraq everyone predicted would actually be a general offensive across Europe.

I'd advise observing how France dealt with the Muslim riots. They didn't.
My advice would be for all to stock pile food water and what weapons you can as the authorities will do little to protect you.
What complete garbage you produce this time ATG and linking to 2 online newspapers on the complete opposide of your own believes to prove a point, in this case a cheap point to get Europeans to stockpile weapons against the muslim tet-offensive that`s right around the corner !

France: That wasn`t a muslim riot ! .... it had nothing to do with religion and that particuar riot could have been avoided with just a tad better integration and city planning!

And to quote only radical muslims is a grave mistake to get across a point how muslim behaviour works in general when most muslims are not radicals !
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2007-02-27 08:11:10
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6531|Global Command

Varegg wrote:

ATG wrote:

Europe, enjoy your peace. While you can.

The general pussification and disarmament of the population, combined with a continental weariness of war, combined with a lax immigration policy is simply fattening you up for the slaughter.
http://tmq2.wordpress.com/2007/02/01/is … s-suicide/

Should the united States fail in Iraq at the insistance of the democrats the Islamo-extremists will be emboldened and attempt to carry out their well stated and publicized intentions to institute Sharia Law across Europe.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/a … 004051.php

debate from Swedish Parliment wrote:

On Monday, Social Democratic immigration spokeswoman Anne-Marie Meldgaard issued an ultimatum to Muslim party members, demanding that they condemn sharia in order to remain in the party.
Party leader Mogens Lykketoft has so far declined comment on the ultimatum, and Meldgaard has since modified her original remarks.

"Of course it's OK to fast. As long as an individual is not acting in violation of the constitution, Danish jurisprudence, principles of equality or democracy, we can accept it. But I still maintain that people have no business with us if they place Islamic law above our democratic system, or support execution by stoning," said Meldgaard.

Social Democratic party member Hamid El Mousti, a Moroccan by birth, currently sits on Copenhagens City Council. El Mousti claims it is impossible for Muslims to disavow sharia in its entirety.

"Sharia is a part of our identity - part of being Muslim. It's unreasonable to ask us to swear off our religion - but demanding that we accept the values of Denmark is fine," said El Mousti, emphasising that he in no way condones the stoning of adulterous women or amputation of hands to punish thieves.
Perhaps the Tet offensive in Iraq everyone predicted would actually be a general offensive across Europe.

I'd advise observing how France dealt with the Muslim riots. They didn't.
My advice would be for all to stock pile food water and what weapons you can as the authorities will do little to protect you.
What complete garbage you produce this time ATG and linking to 2 online newspapers on the complete opposide of your own believes to prove a point, in this case a cheap point to get Europeans to stockpile weapons against the muslim tet-offensive that`s right around the corner !

France: That wasn`t a muslim riot ! .... it had nothing to do with religion and that particuar riot could have been avoided with just a tad better integration and city planning!

And to quote only radical muslims is a grave mistake to get across a point how muslim behaviour works in general when most muslims are not radicals !
I  utterly disagree with your points. Profoundly even.
2007-02-27 08:26:56
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6558
I have to say that ATG's post is rather misguided this time, more so than usual. The Paris riots were as a consequence of North African legal immigrants being treated as second class citizens and discriminated against when it came to education and employment - much like the blacks in the USA pre-60s. It was not some 'jihad' or whatever you believe it to be.

Our security forces are monitoring radical groups very carefully - thanks for your concern ATG but we've got it covered.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-27 08:27:39)

2007-02-27 08:29:21
Skorpy-chan
Member
+127|6347|Twyford, UK
What the HELL have you been smoking? Europe is not peaceful. The only thing stopping them from declaring war and going at each other over the last few decades has been Russia right next door. The EU is unstable, and it will not last. They are jealous of the British empire, Germany still hates France, everyone hates Germany, eastern europe is joining in droves and bringing out everyone's inner racist, and France is still a bunch of assholes. It cannot last.
Unless, of course, we get a competent leader and help them all into the British empire. In THAT case, they will be united under the flag of the Commonwealth, and enough of an economic power to engage in an economic replay of the American War of Independence and actually win it this time.
Then, with the world's largest millitary, a fair chunk of the world's natural resources, and most of it'a population, Russia, Japan, and China will capitulate, join up, and we can spread to the stars, taking the Empire to the universe.
2007-02-27 08:35:58
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6531|Global Command

CameronPoe wrote:

I have to say that ATG's post is rather misguided this time, more so than usual. The Paris riots were as a consequence of North African legal immigrants being treated as second class citizens and discriminated against when it came to education and employment - much like the blacks in the USA pre-60s. It was not some 'jihad' or whatever you believe it to be.

Our security forces are monitoring radical groups very carefully - thanks for your concern ATG but we've got it covered.
I see war on the horizon, and hear the drums in my head.
Can't help it.

Never before has the world been so unstable and on such a precipice. Unstable hungry countries like NK and Russia sell weapons to whomever. Religious fanatics will be the ones that eventually detonate a nuclear weapon somewhere, not a government.

     If Los Angeles were nuked tomorrow I honestly cannot think whom we would retaliate against.
2007-02-27 08:39:48
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6292|Éire

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

For all we know, France could bomb Algeria and spawn a whole new ruckus.
You know you're right... and those crazy Germans might try and take on the Jews again and Prussia might even try and get itself back on the map too.

autopilot wrote:

Call it western europe. I think letting Turkey into the EU would contribute to a possible Muslim vs. All other war in europe...
You think allowing a Muslim nation the opportunity to integrate with us on an equal level will ENCOURAGE a sectarian attitude? Anyone else find this a little contradictory?

I think ATG makes some good points, we should scrap the Lisbon Agenda and pile all of our money into weapons and brace ourselves for the inevitable Muslim led apocalypse, which is just around the corner if the US don't hold out in Iraq!

Last edited by Braddock (2007-02-27 08:40:26)

2007-02-27 08:42:50
ShowMeTheMonkey
Member
+125|6704
What if Iran thinks we need a regime change and invade us?
2007-02-27 08:50:59
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6812|Nårvei

Skorpy-chan wrote:

What the HELL have you been smoking? Europe is not peaceful. The only thing stopping them from declaring war and going at each other over the last few decades has been Russia right next door. The EU is unstable, and it will not last. They are jealous of the British empire, Germany still hates France, everyone hates Germany, eastern europe is joining in droves and bringing out everyone's inner racist, and France is still a bunch of assholes. It cannot last.
Unless, of course, we get a competent leader and help them all into the British empire. In THAT case, they will be united under the flag of the Commonwealth, and enough of an economic power to engage in an economic replay of the American War of Independence and actually win it this time.
Then, with the world's largest millitary, a fair chunk of the world's natural resources, and most of it'a population, Russia, Japan, and China will capitulate, join up, and we can spread to the stars, taking the Empire to the universe.
Wow, just wow

@ATG: Never before has the world been so unstable ? ... and who are to blame for this ?

*Diplomacy ?
*Moderates ?
*USA ?
*Europe ?
*Segregation ?
*Fear of other religions ?

What has your government said that makes you so damn afraid ?

But then again you are clearly in your right to say Told you so, if your truth is the real one

Last edited by Varegg (2007-02-27 08:52:53)

Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2007-02-27 08:53:58
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6292|Éire

Skorpy-chan wrote:

They are jealous of the British empire
Britain doesn't really have much of an empire anymore, Britain has lost India, conceded 26 counties (and counting) back to Ireland, Hong Kong has been handed back to the Chinese, the United States have their independence (they're doing quite well I hear too) and power has been devolved to Scotland and Wales.

ATG wrote:

I see war on the horizon, and hear the drums in my head.
Can't help it.
I think that says more about you than Europe.
2007-02-27 08:54:58
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6531|Global Command
I listen to what the extremist Muslims say, and the lack of concern of the general population and I am afraid.

I observe how governments respond to natural disasters and gage that as to what it would be like with a mushroom cloud in my rearview mirror, and I'm fucking terrified.

I sincerely wish for nothing but world peace and prosperity. I have said before Iran should have nuclear power if they want it, but WMD's in the hands of religious fanatics will be the death of our civilizations.
2007-02-27 09:01:31
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6292|Éire

ShowMeTheMonkey wrote:

What if Iran thinks we need a regime change and invade us?
What if? How would they logistically attack us here in Europe? Look at the planning the US had to do to invade Iraq, they had to strike deals with nearby nations like Turkey to provide bases to plan and launch the attacks from. They had to mobilise their military forces to that part of the world with a lot of difficulty and accommodation from their allies. Who would assist Iran in an attack? Are they gonna fly direct from Iran to Europe to hit their targets (and then have enough fuel to make it back) or are you suggesting they have long distance missile technology already created?

France have nukes, all we'd have to do is point one them at them and I think you'd find they'd be happy to leave us with our current regime.
2007-02-27 14:05:46
UGADawgs
Member
+13|6323|South Carolina, US

CameronPoe wrote:

superfly_cox wrote:

Let me preface this by saying that I am a European/American hibrid.  I was born in Europe, grew up in the US and have been back in europe the past 5 years.  I actually like both places very much and feel i understand them both very well: good and bad alike.

Regarding the post, I must say that I've got big issues with Europe as a model of peace and stability:

Seems to me that the US reached this level of maturity and peace on its continent in 1900.  The US had wars between their states and with neighbors but all has been peaceful and stable for a really long time. Nothing really special about europe getting close to this 100 years later.

Uhm, europe is facing economic difficulties.  Unemployement is huge problem.  Growth in the EU15 is poor.  Worker productivity is lagging way behind targets .  The Lisbon Strategy has become a joke in the EU.  We can debate why this is so but how productive is your working population going to be when you're paying around 50% of your salary to the state?  In any case the numbers don't make a case for Europe as an economic model of success.  Btw:

Study by Timbro: A Swedish Think Tank wrote:

http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/

New study compares GDP and growth: EU versus USA

If the European Union were a state in the USA it would belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a grave critique of European economic policy.

Stark differences become apparent when comparing official economic statistics. Europe lags behind the USA when comparing GDP per capita and GDP growth rates. The current economic debate among EU leaders lacks an understanding of the gravity of the situation in many European countries. Structural reforms of the European economy as well as far reaching welfare reforms are well overdue. The Lisbon process lacks true impetus, nor is it sufficient to improve the economic prospects of the EU.

EU versus USA is written by Dr Fredrik Bergström, President of the Swedish Research Institute of Trade, and Mr Robert Gidehag, until recently Chief Economist of the same institute and now President of the Swedish Taxpayer's Association.
I agree with this.  EU environment regulations are very strict and will become even stricter.

The EU's common security and defense policy exists only in theory.  The Bosnian/Kosovo conflict will forever be a black eye for Europe's security policy.  I won't get into the iraq debate except to say that if europe thinks that the US is the real enemy, then they have a very short memory and are bound to see history repeat itself...in their disfavor.

conclusion: if you want to make a case for europe as a model for the world, aside from the environmental arguement, I think you've picked the worst possible areas for your arguement.  Europe, for all its wonderful virtues, is from a global perspective in a period of decadence: they are complacent, indifferent, have weak leadership, and just don't have the competitive drive of a world power anymore.  After many hundreds of years of being the center of global power, europe is content to take it easy.  Unfortunately history tells us this is not a good thing: China, India and Russia are rising.  Islam is the world's largest relgion (and we know the problems there).  We are far from becoming a planet that is governed by Utopian principles as some europeans would see.  We live in a world with conflicts, wars, dangerous ideologies, unscrupulous government, fierce competition from economic globalization, mass migrations and most dangerously the technologies so advanced that it can be used to kill millions at time, possibly even destroy the planet.  Seems to me that europe is ignoring human history by minimilizing these issues.
Some of the points you raise as being bad points are exactly what I believe to be Europe's strong points. By choosing the socialist path Europe has automatically ceded the competitive edge and lives with that in the knowledge that the chosen path leads to a higher standard of living and quality of life albeit lower levels of growth. As a consequence unemployment is higher - but unemployment in Europe is not quite the struggle it is in USA: free healthcare, dental care, welfare payments, subsidised housing, etc. - no real cause for complaint: a basic guaranteed quality of life, which is comfortable but not luxurious thus encouraging the unemployed to seek gainful employment and to better themselves, secure in the knowledge that if they fail they will always be able to bounce back given the safety net underneath them.

You speak of weak leadership. I do not want Europe going down the path of centralisation of power, one of the major flaws in the American political system. Devolution of power provides true democracy - centralisation of it breeds corruption and silences the voice of the little man. The sovereignty each of our constituent governments still retain means that we get truly representative government and that our leaders remain answerable to the people for their actions.

I don't measure the success of a society in terms of GDP or stock market indices. People matter, not money. The system we have in place today here in Europe provides most Europeans with an average standard of living and quality of life over and above the average standard in the rest of the world. You're right - Europe is content to take it easy and that's exactly what I hold up as the way forward. We have chosen slow and steady growth as opposed to rampant cut-throat growth (regardless of who loses out and by how much given the unavoidable winner-loser nature of pure capitalism). Norway, with one of the highest standards of living in the world and one of the best economies, has taxation rates of circa 80% and yet you offer up high taxes as an example of an economic flaw?

We have the military resources to defend ourselves as well - something you seem to allude to us not having. We will defend ourselves when necessary, when provoked - we have the means and we have the deterrents to prevent others from attacking us.
So if I have no real reason to complain about living off of welfare (since it's not that bad of a life), what incentive do I really have to work hard for a good job? You can talk about trying to get a better life, but if the unemployment benefits give a "basic" living standard, a lot of people will be perfectly happy in mediocrity. Unemployment should be something that people want to get out of as quickly as possible, not some phase that they can pass through with ease. I'm not saying that we should cut all welfare, but I'm saying that welfare should only be the minimum amount necessary to keep a person afloat while he finds a job.

The US government has gotten stronger in the last century, but a lot of stuff here is still decided by the states or local governments. We've got a large federal government, but there's still the 10th amendment that guarantees the states considerable leeway in many issues.

I think someone else hit the nail on the head when they said that Europe wants to have a strong economy but doesn't want to work for it. You even admit that Europe tries to take the "easy" way. I was shocked when I found out that most Europeans have such a low GDP; I knew that countries like Greece and Portugal were somewhat poorer, but I was very surprised to find France lagging behind states like Mississippi and Georgia.

The biggest problem that Europe will face due to its social programs, though, will be an aging population that will eventually put too great a strain on the social services. That and the fact that China will only pump out even more cheap goods mean that Europe will find it harder to stay competitive when they have to not only give benefits to current workers but to a large and growing elder population that will not be able to replenish government funds.
2007-02-27 14:32:47
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6292|Éire

UGADawgs wrote:

So if I have no real reason to complain about living off of welfare (since it's not that bad of a life), what incentive do I really have to work hard for a good job?
Living off welfare - in my country anyway - is not what I'd describe as "not that bad of a life", I don't know about you or the majority of Americans but I like to buy the finer things in life and I like to be able to spend money enjoying my life and believe me you can't do that if you have welfare as a career. If you work and have moderate savings from your work welfare affords you the ability to comfortably live while you seek new employment should you find yourself out of work all of a sudden but if you have no savings and refuse to look for work then you'll have to live a fairly average lifestyle, one that I'd never aspire to.
2007-02-27 14:41:19
UGADawgs
Member
+13|6323|South Carolina, US

Braddock wrote:

UGADawgs wrote:

So if I have no real reason to complain about living off of welfare (since it's not that bad of a life), what incentive do I really have to work hard for a good job?
Living off welfare - in my country anyway - is not what I'd describe as "not that bad of a life", I don't know about you or the majority of Americans but I like to buy the finer things in life and I like to be able to spend money enjoying my life and believe me you can't do that if you have welfare as a career. If you work and have moderate savings from your work welfare affords you the ability to comfortably live while you seek new employment should you find yourself out of work all of a sudden but if you have no savings and refuse to look for work then you'll have to live a fairly average lifestyle, one that I'd never aspire to.
I admit, I don't have experience living on so little that I qualify for welfare, but all the Europeans here have described it as "basic, average," etc. It seems like your welfare is enough to live on a small budget, so I don't see why lazy people wouldn't see your program as a free meal for the rest of their lives.
2007-02-27 14:46:33
superfly_cox
soup fly mod
+717|6784

UGADawgs wrote:

The biggest problem that Europe will face due to its social programs, though, will be an aging population that will eventually put too great a strain on the social services. That and the fact that China will only pump out even more cheap goods mean that Europe will find it harder to stay competitive when they have to not only give benefits to current workers but to a large and growing elder population that will not be able to replenish government funds.
100% corrent and i'm dissappointed I didn't bring this up.  The US system is rough because it forces people to work hard and work until older ages to ensure their financial viability upon retirement.  In Europe there are big social problems coming because the social system is not prepared for the rapidly growing aging population.  Those working in europe today are not only paying for those unemployed and unmotived workers in their society but also those who are retiring at 55-60 and will live another 25-30 years. 

Eventually socialism will catch up to you.  Worker productivity decrease while workers/retirees expect social benefits to continue.  My question is, where's the money coming from?

And don't even get me started on the dangers that China and India will pose economically to euro-atlantic ways of life.  Pretty soon there is going to be someone out there who is going to be some white collar worker able to work as well as you, but longer than you, with less social demands and at 1/3 the cost.  Corporations and stock-holders don't discriminate in this regard...
2007-02-27 14:48:36
Superslim
BF2s Frat Brother
+211|6694|Calgary

CameronPoe wrote:

It appears to me that Europe, with its bloody chequered history, has finally come to a mature and peaceful rest. Where once war was a core part of the European diet there now exists peace, co-operation, security, prosperity and progress. The last few hotspots - Northern Ireland and the former Yugoslavia - seem to be nearing resolution. Europe strikes a healthy balance between nationalism and international co-operation between member countries. Europe has developed a socialist form of capitalism providing the best of both worlds, economically speaking, - steady rates of economic growth coupled with generous social welfare (helping to keep income gaps, for the most part, relatively small and ensuring that pretty much no-one gets 'left behind'). Europe is the most environmentally aware region on earth and is taking measures to address environmental issues, even if other countries won't. Europe is viewed by many as an almost impartial arbiter in international matters - the Palestine situation being a case in point. The majority of Europe refused to endorse or engage in the Iraq war, a brave and correct decision in the face of extreme pressure from a powerful ally, with many of those that did engage in it finally coming to their senses through the pressure exerted on their governments by the people: true democracy.

Europe has many flaws but humans are flawed and nothing can be absolutely perfect. Having said that, has Europe finally reached the zenith of political and economic development?
Can I have some of what you are smoking? ..lol   J/K  Nice post but sooner or later, shit will hit the fan.

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard