Politics European Identity.

I have a mixed heritage also and have a mixed marriage. We are a dual citizenship family and it is hard when questioned where you are from, especially when you can identify with more than one place. Depending on who is asking, of course, but I've found that just giving the country of birth as an answer is easier and quicker as most people are not interested in long explanations on heritage.
Europe was born on the battleground of Trojan War which was the first war between east and west and Greeks defined what Europe is since then. Maybe crisis in Greece now could give born to a new Europe. Who knows?
 
Uhh,how about Canada and Australia?Anyway ,thank you for correction, lol.

Just because Canada and Australia or the various EU countries are allies of Britain does not mean that they automatically must do as they are told or that they cannot make their own decisions on how to handle any crisis. They will either become involved or they won't and each will do what is best for their own national interests first.
 
Uhh,how about Canada and Australia?Anyway ,thank you for correction, lol.
"Current relationsIran maintains an interests section at the Pakistani embassy in Washington, D.C.,[9] while the United States since 1980[citation needed] maintains an interests section at the Swiss embassy in Tehran.[10]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93United_States_relations


"The Iran hostage crisis was a diplomatic crisis between Iran and the United States where 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, after a group of Islamist students and militants took over the American Embassy in Tehran in support of the Iranian Revolution.[1]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis


you can read here everything about the Iran hostage crisis of 1979...
 
The current crisis has its roots on the upgrading of the sanctions against Iran for its nuclear programme. The regime blames the west for not allowing it to pursue its civil nuclear programme, because it is common knowledge the programme is used to produce military devices, and that Iran has been repeatedly threatening its neighbours and Israel. The recent leaks in the press about an imminent Israeli strike on Iranian military compounds suspected to be part of the nuclear programme has made Iran extremely nervous.
 
And not without reason, this is yet another typical western witch-hunt.

Possibly when the west abolish their own nuclear programmes and disarm warheads they will be in a position to dictate to others whether they can or cannot have nuclear anything. But right now, the finger pointing and moralising at Iran is hypocritical in the extreme.
 
In this case it's more about survival and peace dictated in western terms, than equality and morality. I hope Iran is smart enough to see it.
 
Mainly, it's a manipulation of media coverage. "They" just issue what "they" want as to know. And we will never ever know any details about this Iran conflict and nuclear weapon. This kind of making someone bad in eyes of public just results in a great support to start military operation in that region. Just remember Saddam Hussein. Actually, he was not as devilish as it was being told in media. However, people were kind of "occupied" with the mainstream media sources that daily were announcing the non-human plans of Baghdad against American people. And you all know about the result of this media manipulation. Iraq war.! I think in case of Iran the story is gonna to repeat. However, we are dealing with politics and media and I don't think about an identity in this case. Because neither British government nor Netherlands made a kind of referendum to decide whether withdraw an embassy from Iron or not. I am quite sure, many people will be against this. In this case there is no room for an identity to discuss. Everything is mainly about politics...
 
Researcher, what do you think was the main reason to attack Iraq?

I don't think Iran war is going to happen, at least with ground troops. There is no money, in size of one trillion dollars, to finance it. If it comes to worse we will see air strikes ala Libia, that's all.

If Iraq war was done old fashion way, we would see US completely controlling Iraq and it's natural resources. They would already recouped the war costs and made lot extra to have funds for next war with Iran, or someone else. Well, it didn't happen. There was no money made on this war, except for few businesses supplying military. At the end it was all financed by US taxpayer, and taxpayer is poor like never before. Next war with ground troops? I don't think so. Actually we'll see reverse. Withdrawing from Iraq, then Afghanistan, reducing bases around the world, and reducing military budgets. All US attention will be concentrated on paying debt and reviving economy.
 
And not without reason, this is yet another typical western witch-hunt.

Possibly when the west abolish their own nuclear programmes and disarm warheads they will be in a position to dictate to others whether they can or cannot have nuclear anything. But right now, the finger pointing and moralising at Iran is hypocritical in the extreme.

I think you miss the point. If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, it is the very survival of Israel that is at stake. After the Shoah (and despite Europe's passivity in the 6 Days War), Europe has a responsability towards the Jewish people. Notwhistanding that Europe will be within reach of the nuclear heads...
 
I agree with Lebrok, and it is probably why Iran keeps hard building its bomb, they know western economies are on their knees and have others problems to deal with. Implicit support from China and Russia helps too. The most important problem for Iran now is buying time before Israel decides to strike. A full-scale war is not on the books.
 
I think you miss the point. If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, it is the very survival of Israel that is at stake. After the Shoah (and despite Europe's passivity in the 6 Days War), Europe has a responsability towards the Jewish people. Notwhistanding that Europe will be within reach of the nuclear heads...

IF (being the operative word) Iran is a threat to Israel. I think that is more hype to demonise Iran, via governments and through the media in order to scare populations into backing military action. This tactic has been used many times in the past (Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia the most recent), and by your post it looks like it has worked again. The Europe will be within striking distance line has also been used before, remember Iraq and Lybia?

But overall I agree with both Researcher and Lebrok.
 
Researcher, what do you think was the main reason to attack Iraq?

I don't think Iran war is going to happen, at least with ground troops. There is no money, in size of one trillion dollars, to finance it. If it comes to worse we will see air strikes ala Libia, that's all.

If Iraq war was done old fashion way, we would see US completely controlling Iraq and it's natural resources. They would already recouped the war costs and made lot extra to have funds for next war with Iran, or someone else. Well, it didn't happen. There was no money made on this war, except for few businesses supplying military. At the end it was all financed by US taxpayer, and taxpayer is poor like never before. Next war with ground troops? I don't think so. Actually we'll see reverse. Withdrawing from Iraq, then Afghanistan, reducing bases around the world, and reducing military budgets. All US attention will be concentrated on paying debt and reviving economy.

Dear lebrok,
I also hope there gonna be no war. Unfortunately, the tendency of the past several years just proves contrary. In my opinion, America will not be directly involved in the military campaign, as it was in Iraq. This is due the difficult financial situation and the bankrupt of economy. However, it can manipulate Israel to start a war. yes it sounds a bit dramatic, but it's true. just remember the Georgia campaing against South Ossetia in 2008. Tbilisi will never ever start that war which killed more than 300000 of civil citizens, without any external support. And this support was found in America. It is hard to undersand in how far America is simply manipulating the government of other "independent countries". I am just worring that the story can happen again, but in this case with Iran and Israel. I hope for the best, the political elite will be rational and try to escape the horror of a military actions.
 
I think you miss the point. If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, it is the very survival of Israel that is at stake. After the Shoah (and despite Europe's passivity in the 6 Days War), Europe has a responsability towards the Jewish people. Notwhistanding that Europe will be within reach of the nuclear heads...

Israel is not likely to be attacked by nuclear weapons by Iran. How do you aim a country half the size of the Netherlands with nuclear weapons without affecting bystanders? The fall out produced would probably contaminate the Palestinians and other surrounding Arabic countries as well... Iran would hardly win the hearts and minds of the Arabic people with this. But I agree Europe is probably a much more easier target to hit.

Nuclear weapons are mainly psychological weapons. The most annoying part to the West, Israel and allied Arabic countries like Saudi-Arabia is that it becomes very difficult to threat Iran by military means. It changes the diplomatic dynamics.

Besides Pakistan in my opinion is a far more dangerous nuclear power because of the conflicts with India and its internal instability.
 
It changes the diplomatic dynamics.

Exactly...the balance of power will shift. Because of the arabic-spring, countries in the northern part of Africa will have a major state-shift; as it can already been seen in Egypt with the elections. With these major developments and with the crisis within Europe itself, it will become harder and harder for Europe to act as one Union. ->and this has implications for the 'identity/integration-discussion' as well...
 
Dear all,
I think we shifted far away from the topic of this thread. The discussion is extremely interesting and it points out the main political as well as economic flows in nowadays world However, how do you reflect that to European Identity? Christiaan, You already mentioned, that Europe is the easiest target to hit? Could you please elaborate upon that? I mean, why Europe? You think it is not enough to resist?? I can assume that the Foreign and Security policy of EU in cooperation with NATO will preserve any attempt to hit Europe. Do you think that this "picture" of week Europe is due to the conflicts between European countries. That Greece is being blamed for the crisis on European ground. There is no unity any more? and everyone is just fighting for his own sake?
 
How about the role of religion within this 'European Identity' ? Do you feel more European if you are Christian ? Are you less European as a Jew ? What I always ask myself is whether the generations of north African immigrants that came to Europe after the 1950s, consider themselves 'European' and whether their definition of European and Europe is the same as individuals who are fully rooted from Europe...
I think the European Identity is very much a Christian Identity, and it is no surprise to see European countries unite against a country like Iran, since they are defending the European Identity (as pointed out earlier by Kgnju) but are also defending the Christian values against Islamic ones. You know how people say History is like a cycle ? Well the idea is very true isn't it ? Christian countries versus Muslim countries, takes you right back to the 11th century doesn't it ?
But on another point - European solidarity does not always mean European Identity. Remember when French President Chirac refused to enter the war in Iraq less than a decade ago ? Well he followed French interests, yet other EU countries joined this war. France 'bailing' on the solidarity did not ruin the European Identity.
 
Dear all,
I think we shifted far away from the topic of this thread. The discussion is extremely interesting and it points out the main political as well as economic flows in nowadays world However, how do you reflect that to European Identity? Christiaan, You already mentioned, that Europe is the easiest target to hit? Could you please elaborate upon that? I mean, why Europe? You think it is not enough to resist?? I can assume that the Foreign and Security policy of EU in cooperation with NATO will preserve any attempt to hit Europe. Do you think that this "picture" of week Europe is due to the conflicts between European countries. That Greece is being blamed for the crisis on European ground. There is no unity any more? and everyone is just fighting for his own sake?

First of all Iran is not intending to start a war at all. Yes it is provoking and teasing its favourite enemies as they always do. However the only difference now it is developing nuclear weapons. And of course that is a bit headache for the region and the West. Israel and the US do not want to have power shift of that kind in the region at all. Because in the end it is all about oil and stability - everything that changes this status quo is a possible threat. Who is the next country in the M.E. that wants nuclear weapons in the region ...Saudi Arabia?

If a conflict would escalate on a nuclear level, which I think is very unlikely at the moment. Israel itself, how funny it might sounds, would not make a good nuclear target because of the collateral damage to its Arabic neighbours. So even Europe, if involved, would make a better target than Israel, being not near to Islamic nations. But again I don't think Iran wants to face the consequences of a nuclear war at all as you mentioned yourself with NATO and others.

On a defence level Europe is not that divided as you might think if they lets say would get attacked by Iran. No doubt even Germany would act appropriately. But on offensive level Europe is clearly divided. Britain is not particularly known for its pacifistic foreign policy in contrast to Germany with its much more cautious nature. The economic crisis is important, but not that important for this "weakness".

Uk is I think is the most EU sceptical country of all and being an island this will not change overnight. It wants the benefits of the EU, but not its burdens. I wonder what would happen if Wales and Scotland would become independent - would they join the Euro-zone?
 
How about the role of religion within this 'European Identity' ? Do you feel more European if you are Christian ? Are you less European as a Jew ? What I always ask myself is whether the generations of north African immigrants that came to Europe after the 1950s, consider themselves 'European' and whether their definition of European and Europe is the same as individuals who are fully rooted from Europe...
I think the European Identity is very much a Christian Identity, and it is no surprise to see European countries unite against a country like Iran, since they are defending the European Identity (as pointed out earlier by Kgnju) but are also defending the Christian values against Islamic ones. You know how people say History is like a cycle ? Well the idea is very true isn't it ? Christian countries versus Muslim countries, takes you right back to the 11th century doesn't it ?
But on another point - European solidarity does not always mean European Identity. Remember when French President Chirac refused to enter the war in Iraq less than a decade ago ? Well he followed French interests, yet other EU countries joined this war. France 'bailing' on the solidarity did not ruin the European Identity.


No, it is not Christian values versus Islam at all. At most secularism against theocracy. And don't forget the oil that is at stake.
 
Israel is not likely to be attacked by nuclear weapons by Iran. How do you aim a country half the size of the Netherlands with nuclear weapons without affecting bystanders? The fall out produced would probably contaminate the Palestinians and other surrounding Arabic countries as well... Iran would hardly win the hearts and minds of the Arabic people with this. But I agree Europe is probably a much more easier target to hit.

Nuclear weapons are mainly psychological weapons. The most annoying part to the West, Israel and allied Arabic countries like Saudi-Arabia is that it becomes very difficult to threat Iran by military means. It changes the diplomatic dynamics.

Besides Pakistan in my opinion is a far more dangerous nuclear power because of the conflicts with India and its internal instability.

Well, this is true, but only under assumption that Iranian leaders are logical, smart and generally good people. If they were though, Iran would be much different country that it is now. Therefore this assumption is out the window. If you connect it to the fact that Iran is run in big part by religious clerics then situation complicates even farther.
Besides, what stops terrorists from blowing the intended target plus tens of innocent citizens in collateral damage, and even their countrymen? In their mind it's not a tragedy. The killed bad guys went to hell, but the innocent good people went to heaven. Where is the harm?
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 39275 times.

Back
Top