The British attitude towards Europe?

[Invictus_88]

I find British attitude toward the EU a bit irritating sometimes because they don't seem to know what they want themselves. So for me the good question would rather be "Do the british people want their country in or out the EU ?".
It's up to you to decide if you want to be part of the family.

The problem is that the EU works well as an economic bloc, but very badly as a SuperState. We are asked if we want to be "in or out", but it is never made clear what exactly it is that we are committing to.

Yes, of course we want to fruits of the European Union. No, of course we don't want to lose our hard-defended sovereignty.
Yes, we wish to trade with you on close terms. No, we do not want to be you.
Yes, we should cooperate. No, we should not amalgamate.

If the latter conditions become necessary for achieving the former conditions, then there will be an inevitable and potentially violent collision of values.

 

[Michael Folkesson]

Invictus_88

A superstate is not a constitution, a function or a level of prowess or power. It's a description of the nature of a political agglomeration. I think you mean something else.

 

[let`s talk]

They have the worst food in Europe and they look ugly. The rest is not important.

 

[edao]

They have the worst food in Europe and they look ugly. The rest is not important.

You surely haven't tried Fish 'n' Chips then :hungry:

 

[Gwyllgi]

Maybe because we don’t eat endangered species sauch as blue finned tuna, or bribe the IWC, and our girls don’t have plastic surgery to make them look ethnically different?

 

[Minty]

They have the worst food in Europe and they look ugly. The rest is not important.

That seems a tad harsh to me. I have seen beautiful and ugly people all over Europe.

Well, they don't spend a lot of effort to create a wide range of regional foods and drinks like in France and Italy that's true...

You surely haven't tried Fish 'n' Chips then :hungry:

Um I think you didn't understand what he meant by "worst food" in Europe.

 

[Invictus_88]

Invictus_88
A superstate is not a constitution, a function or a level of prowess or power. It's a description of the nature of a political agglomeration. I think you mean something else.

All these things you list are superfluous to the proper nature of the EU as it was originally consented to - the EEC/EC - a group of close economic partners working to increase smoothness of trade.

All the rest is a pointless, undemocratic, bureaucratic, wasteful muddle which distracts from the main point; making money.

 

[Gwyllgi]

Times change, circumstances change, policies must change.

Britain now desperately needs the EU and especially to be a member of a United States of Europe.

 

[Starship]

You surely haven't tried Fish 'n' Chips then :hungry:

Or even better "Deep fried battered Mars bars" Yum:43:

 

[Vallicanus]

A senior role?, thats stretching the imagination a bit!

I think we should join with Australia,New Zealand etc.. much more compatible with our culture and heritage.

Europe has always been threat to our independence, the EU is just another threat, only a peaceful one!

This is exactly my view.

 

[Invictus_88]

Times change, circumstances change, policies must change.

Britain now desperately needs the EU and especially to be a member of a United States of Europe.

Change is inevitable. Surrender is not.

Britain needs no such thing.

 

[Gwyllgi]

Change is inevitable. Surrender is not.

Britain needs no such thing.

Maybe you would explain how Britain could now survive outside of the EU?

Let’s start with the financials?

 

[bob4john]

Hmmm... How many times has Britian been invaded by an European army?

How many times did Britian plant colonies on other people's land?

And, how many Americans died to keep the countries of the EU from trying to exterminate each other?????

You hate the USA, but love their goods and services, especially their ability to protect you.

And, why are so many people imigrating to the USA today?? Could it be to get away from the endless bickering and dangers of their 'homeland'?

How many of us would honestly say that we would not move to the USA if we could have full citizenship????????

 

[Gwyllgi]

Hmmm... How many times has Britian been invaded by an European army?

Many times in the past, and in the case of WW2, once. The Channel Isles were occupied by the Germans.

How many times did Britian plant colonies on other people's land?

Many times, part of the colonisation of the US resulted in genocide of the rightful owners of that land, in other places where the locals were not so unable to protect themselves (and the immigrants not largely uncontrolled and from the scum of the earth) the colonisation didn’t result in mass murder and land theft.

And, how many Americans died to keep the countries of the EU from trying to exterminate each other?????

Damm few. And they were the volunteers before the US saw that getting involved inn the fighting was in their national interest.

Most came over only when the US realised that one of the Axis powers, Japan, had intentions on the US, and even then out of US self interest. And let’s not even go into post war debt or the way that the Marshal plan was implemented.

Similarly WW1. Before the Zimmerman Telegram indicated that the US was under threat because of the Germans the US were content to supply arms to all sides in the war taking place in Europe.

You hate the USA, but love their goods and services, especially their ability to protect you.

Err, no we don’t. To either. And we really don’t need or want your ‘protection’ than you very much.

In fact your ‘protection, especially with bits of YOUR missile defence shield, a defence shield that has a primary function not to protect Europe but to give early warning to the US, actually increases our value as a target.

And, why are so many people imigrating to the USA today?? Could it be to get away from the endless bickering and dangers of their 'homeland'?

To start with the word is “emigrating”. One immigrates into, one emigrates to.

But in any case not many from Europe though many from other nations who see the US as a place wherein they can exploit the system.

How many of us would honestly say that we would not move to the USA if we could have full citizenship????????

I could have full citizenship based on my fathers nationality taken up from when he was working in the US but there is no way on Gods sweet earth that I would consider emigrating to the place.

I’ve worked in the US in the past, including but not limited to NC, and actually at RTP for months at a time as a specialist in my field, but for my money you can keep it and the whole of the US as a place to live.

There are a lot worse places, but many that are a whole lot better.

 

[Maciamo]

Hmmm... How many times has Britian been invaded by an European army?

Successfully four times in recorded history (Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Danes, Normans) + probably a few more times in the Neolithic and Bronze Age (Neolithic farmers, Indo-European bronze workers, then La Tène Celts).

And, how many Americans died to keep the countries of the EU from trying to exterminate each other?????

Once ? In WWI they really didn't do much. They arrived when everything was almost over. Actually Europeans only try to exterminate each others in WWI. WWII was about the Jews, Gypsies and other minorities. People weren't as free under the German occupation as before but freer than their ancestors a few centuries ago. So the answer to "how many Americans died to keep the countries of the EU from trying to exterminate each other ?" should, after consideration, be : never.

You hate the USA, but love their goods and services, especially their ability to protect you.

Yeah, American cars, American mobile phones, American TV's, American clothes, American restaurants... All very popular here. :wary2: BMW, Audi, Volvo, Renault, Toyota, Sony-Ericsson, Nokia, Panasonic, Hugo Boss, Armani, Paul Smith... all American, right ?

And, why are so many people imigrating to the USA today?? Could it be to get away from the endless bickering and dangers of their 'homeland'?

Mexicans* and Cubans ? In all fairness that's the only country where they can migrate without having to buy a plane ticket.

* Almost 1 in 4 immigrant to the US in 2010 is a Mexican. Half of all immigrants are from Latin America - mostly Central America - and one fourth from Asia - especially Philippines, China and Vietnam. (source).

How many of us would honestly say that we would not move to the USA if we could have full citizenship????????

Wouldn't even if you offered me a job and a car in the package. Why would you want to live in a country where your neighbour could sue you any day because the apple tree in your garden encroaches on his property, or because your kids make too much noise when they play outside. Even if you win the court cases every time it's just too troublesome. Then one becomes paranoiac with the idea that the government or CIA is spying on you all the time, or that the police will fine you daily for driving a few miles above the speed limit, or that some Mormon or Baptist or Scientologist proselytisers, or Jeovah's Witness or another of the hundreds of religious organization in the US come and bother you at home every odd day... Too tiresome, I tell you.

Add to all this that the USA is plagued by the elements : tornadoes, hurricanes, bitterly cold winters in the northern half, suffocatingly hot summers in the southern half, and earthquakes is the only region with an idyllic climate, California. In the States if you live in the country you are usually in the middle of nowhere, hours drive away from all conveniences. So big cities are the way to go, but crime rate is usually far worse than in Europe. Just the idea of living in a country where almost everyone owns a gun would make me feel permanently uncomfortable. I guess it's ok if you grew up with it, but not if you didn't.

 

[bob4john]

Seems that neither of you know anything about the USA. I think you are describing the countries in South America... Do you know the difference???

About two million Americans died in WW1 in Europe in one year. Ever been to Flanders Fields??

About six million died in WWII because Hitler planned to attack the USA... I Know, you dont beleive that either....

And you are right... immigration is moving to a place... and I think that is what I said... except that I might have mis-spelled it, according to your brand of English...

And as for the neighbors going to court over trivia, doesnt happen here... you apparently watch too much BBC on TV..

One thing for sure... without the help of the USA in WWI and WWII, we would all be speaking German and have a dictactorship type government... but from the history of Europe, that is apparently what most people want...

I see why Britian is so nervous about blindly going into the EU... The USA doesnt trust you either...

So, go ahead with your EU... The USA will be there to bail you out when necessary.

 

[Maciamo]

Seems that neither of you know anything about the USA. I think you are describing the countries in South America... Do you know the difference???

About two million Americans died in WW1 in Europe in one year. Ever been to Flanders Fields??

You do know that Britain is not a US state, don't you ? The US lost just a bit over 100,000 soldiers in WWI, half less than Romania.

About six million died in WWII because Hitler planned to attack the USA... I Know, you dont beleive that either....

6 million Americans ? More like 400,000 - most of them in the Pacific against Japan.

One thing for sure... without the help of the USA in WWI and WWII, we would all be speaking German and have a dictactorship type government... but from the history of Europe, that is apparently what most people want...

Speaking German ? Germanic people have invaded repeatedly Romance-speaking parts of Europe from the 3rd to the 11th century, and nobody speaks German in France, Italy or Spain. All of the new Germanic rulers adopted Latin. That's one of the curse of Germanic people that they language never survive their invasions. Even English is 70% derived from Romance languages.

It's so typical of Americans to come up with the argument "we saved your ass in WWII" whenever one criticises a bit the US. Can't find anything better to say I guess. The US only intervened in WWII because it was protecting its own interests. Otherwise Americans were not going to lift a finger, neither in Europe nor in Asia. The US completely ignored the situation until the Germans started sinking their ships or seizing their assets in Europe. They turned a blind eye on Japanese atrocities in China and only declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbour. The US actually benefited hugely from the war by taking over most of the Nazi and Japanese war loot and by imposing their policies on both continents in the aftermath of the war. Americans didn't help the Brits or the French by sympathy but by interest. This is what they don't teach you at school in the US.

Anything can be speculated of the outcome of WWII if the US had not intervened in Europe, but Germany had a serious opponent in the Russians and both countries probably would have fought to death, leaving Hitler's regime severely weakened, which in turn would have facilitated uprisings all over Europe (and in Germany itself) to overturn his regime. Dictatorships don't last long in Europe, even when there is no outside pressure. Just look at Spain under Franco and Portugal under Salazar. Both started as authoritarian, fascist-like regimes, but they became democratic with time, without war or revolution necessary.

So, go ahead with your EU... The USA will be there to bail you out when necessary.

FYI, the EU's economy is bigger than the USA's. Just the Euro-zone (16 out of 27 countries) is about the same as the US.

 

[Gwyllgi]

Seems that neither of you know anything about the USA. I think you are describing the countries in South America... Do you know the difference???

Been to both. Lived and worked in both, well Brazil and Argentina anyway.

The Argies “parillia”, a mixed grill with attitude was OK, but as for Brazil I didn’t like feijoada, even at weekends. Or cooking done in Dendê oil, the very smell makes me nauseous, and Caipirinha’s used to give me bloody awful hangovers next day.

About two million Americans died in WW1 in Europe in one year. Ever been to Flanders Fields??

Flanders Fields?

Now where might they be …….. ?

Oh yes, silly me! :grin:

That’s the areas that we drive through four or five times a year! Once on our way to the Köln Kristkindlmarkt in December, then to Goslar am Harz where we have a “timeshare” we use in early Summer, or en route to pick up the French autoroutes on our way South to the Med for an autumn break, or sometimes on an “awayday” to somewhere like Lisle just for the hell of it. And the shops of course!

The Channel Tunnel really has changed the UK for the better.

Ever been to Flanders Fields indeed! :shocked:

Bloomin’ cheek!

But back to the matter in hand.

The total US fatalities during the whole of WW1 were around 117,000 troops, that includes those killed in battle and others who died from disease and non-battle related injury. (Spanish ‘flue especially)

About six million died in WWII because Hitler planned to attack the USA... I Know, you dont beleive that either....

The total US fatalities in WW2 were around 407,000 in ALL theaters of operation but the vast majority in the Pacific.

One thing for sure... without the help of the USA in WWI and WWII, we would all be speaking German and have a dictactorship type government... but from the history of Europe, that is apparently what most people want...

Not so. You plainly have no idea about the causes or the aims of the originators of WW2. Germany did not want to declare war on Britain, they saw us as a natural ally.

Even the Blitzkrieg in Europe was much more about removing a threat from the region, as well as getting slave labour than as a deliberate policy leading to permanent occupation.

Vichy France indicates what would have been possible in many cases, and it was because Britain was effectively neutralise as a threat that it was not invaded. We simply were not worth the trouble.

It was Britain out of fear of the consequences if most of what had become Poland (as part of the terms of the dreadful and unjust Treaty of Versailles) was allowed to be returned to its rightful governments that caused us to declare war on Germany.

The concern was that it might create a precedent and so create a very real danger of the reconstitution of the Ottoman Empire under the growing influence of The Muslim Brotherhood, and all that would do to strategic resources such as the Suez canal let alone the increasingly valuable oil fields in the Middle East.

The REAL target for Nazi Germany was to the East. A demand for lebensraum, a contempt of assorted Üntermenschen, especially those in the East, and a rabid hatred of the USSR was behind what were Hitler’s primary objectives.

European history, especially in the first half of the twentieth century, is complex in the extreme. Convoluted even

And so it wasn’t the US that saved us from “The Dreaded Hun”, it was the millions of men, women, and children in the USSR who were killed fighting the Nazis and as a consequence of the fighting that saved our skins.

FIFTY MILLION people died in Russia.

We should never forget that, EVER.

Sources? Many. http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/ is as good as any.

I know first hand how little most American people know, much less understand about Europe. Or even the United Kingdom for that matter. The support for outfits such as “Noraid” and just what was happening in Northern Ireland exemplify this.

“Bob4john”, you may feel that I’m “getting at you”.

I’m not.

What I AM doing is introducing some facts that you may not even be aware of. PLEASE don’t take offence, none is intended.

“Bob4john”, you mentioned disability. Care to share?

 

[Maciamo]

Not so. You plainly have no idea about the causes or the aims of the originators of WW2. Germany did not want to declare war on Britain, they saw us as a natural ally.

That's correct.

Even the Blitzkrieg in Europe was much more about removing a threat from the region, as well as getting slave labour than as a deliberate policy leading to permanent occupation.

Vichy France indicates what would have been possible in many cases, and it was because Britain was effectively neutralise as a threat that it was not invaded. We simply were not worth the trouble.

All true again. Most Americans believe that all Europe except Britain and Russia were under Nazi domination. In fact, half of Europe was never occupied or even involved.

Why would the French be so grateful to the Americans when half of France never saw a German soldier and Germany had no intention of invading them ? The occupation of northern France and the Atlantic coast was in part strategic, and in part a way of reclaiming regions that had been traditionally Germanic (including French Flanders and Artois, and to some extent Normandy) and where people still felt more German than French (Alsace and Lorraine). Half of Poland was also historically German, and had been so since medieval times, well before Christopher Columbus.

I am not trying to justify their invasion, but Germany certainly had some historical rights to these regions. If the US had to cede all the states west of the Mississippi to Canada or Mexico there would be some discontent, but keep in mind that all this chunk has only been American for under 150 years. Germany had claims to Alsace or Pomerania going back to the late Roman period - over 1500 years ! Let's wait another 1350 years and see how Americans feel if they loose a war and are told they have to give up one third of their present territory to the winners. How will Californians feel about being annexed to China without their consent ?

So Americans think they restored order in Europe, but they never try to understand history and how people in small communities feel attach to the land that their ancestors have occupied for hundreds or thousands of years. My advice is : if you don't understand the situation don't try to intervene or force your opinion on others.

 

[bob4john]

No offense taken, as none was intended. But you are wrong about the numbers of Americans in both wars. The numbers I gave were for people lost; ie. killed, missing, wounded, either from military action or sickness... and the Spainish flue killed many more in the states than died in Europe.

The USA supplied Britian with civilian supplies, war supplies and money during both wars. Long before the US sent soldiers to war. I think that Britian would have had a hard time surviving without the help of the US... Churchill begged many months for aid and the US sent thousands of merchant ships with supplies to Britian.

I agree that the US was late in getting into the war, but, we were not under attack or threatened until the action at Pearl Harbor.

The Japanese were getting war supplies and man-power from Germany... the Zero airplane was designed and the prototype built in Italy by order of the Nazi leadership. The rockets and jet airplanes that Germany built were designed to destroy Britian, Russia and the USA.

And, without the invasion of Normandy by the Allies, Britian may not have survived.

I know that the number of US troops were few compared to the entire conflict... about 200 million troops at war is a lot.... but Russia almost perished at the hand of the Nazi army, being saved by the cold winter and cut supply lines, the Russians defeated the Nazi army within its territory.

And, remember the actions of Patton in north Africa, Italy and into Berlin. There were no European armies to do what the allies did with Patton leading them.

So, I am not saying that the US saved your ass in the war... just that it seems that no-one in Europe seems to give the US their due...

As to my disablity... I have a rare form of muscular dystrophy, which has been a bother for 23 years...

bob