Having seen the way the French and EU leaders reacted to the meeting with Theresa May on the news
last night is it no wonder that the snubbing she was shown only went to prove there was only one
adult in that room. What these so called leaders should bloody well remember especially the French
Begiums Dutch etc was a lot of men women went to war to free these so called MEN.
There now i've said it .
Could say more, rant almost over.
Isn't one of the reasons for the EU's existence being to prevent further wars in Europe?
@Lynne - 16 dec 2016 11:24 - what, am i missing something here ? the reason, i thought we joined the commom market, was to have a good trading relationship with our european counterparts. not to be dictated to by non elected officials on our own domestic immigration policies.
The E.U. is not fit for purpose. It is run by a bunch of expense guzzling fat cats whose only priority is to squeeze more and more money out of member states, to pay for their incompetence in running what should have been a productive and worthwhile venture for Europe. Greece a case in point, how many billions!
We need to stop paying our subs to this corrupt organisation now and stop going along with their childish games.
If the E.U. wants to have trade with us let them come grovelling instead.
@DEEDOODLE - i was pointing out the origins of the eu and why it came into existence. i did so in response to the initial posting about European nation states and WWII.
Am I missing something here? Perhaps you could explain where it was that I made any any comment about how the EU functions.
I don't know, but I have always strongly suspected that the continental countries have more of an emotional affinity to the ideal idea of the EU (despite its faults) because of their invasion experiences with Germany (during WWII) and/or with Russia post WWII.
There were recent elections in Austria. One of the Presidential candidates was quite right wing. One Nigel Farage took himself off to Austria to campaign on that person's behalf. That person lost. It is thought that NF helped him lose because of NF's anti EU focus. The Austrians may have issues with immigration and other issues that ring true here but I read that NF's total focus on being anti EU actually stopped rather than encouraged Austrians to vote for the right wing candidate. They are not necessarily anti EU you see even if they are concerned about matters like immigration.
If my memory serves me and i stand to be corrected was it not the E.U. trying to expand the union near the Russian
border that caused them to invade Ukraine and Crimea. Now we have put a small amount of troops in Poland. doesn't this have smacks of
history repeating itself?
Perhaps those countries near the Russian border, mindful of their very recent post WWII history vis-a-vis Russia, wished to become members of the EU as much as the EU wished them to become member states?
The British troops in Poland is a NATO initiative not an EU one.
Are we talking about a Common Market or as you say Lynne is it a way of stopping conflict, because if that
is the case it's not very successful. I do believe that these morons will lead us into a war.
So they urge to join the E.U. for protection, not as a trading partner.
I guess they joined the EU for economic and political reasons.
Some, but not all, ex iron curtain eastern european countries are also members of NATO - which I imagine is where the protection comes in. Although who knows what might happen once Trump takes over in the White House.
But to get back to why some countries are pro the EU. The UK is made up of four countries. Two voted to leave, two to stay. Why the difference? http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/the-celtic-question-why-did-northern-ireland-and-scotland-vote-remain-1.2698630
NATO and nuclear weapons have prevented war in Europe, they existed long before the six founding countries formed the European Economic Community. The answer is in the name of the organisation. Defence has never been a part of the EEC/EU until just recently when the formation of an EU army was mooted by the President of the European Commission. Incidentally, that idea was something the Remainers absolutely rubbished in the run up to the referendum, Nick Clegg even called it a "dangerous fantasy", and here we are a few months later and it is being seriously considered. Thank goodness the referendum went the way it did.
Can we agree that both NATO (formed late 1940s) and the embyronic EU (Common Market formed mid/late 1950s* between France, West Germany, Italy and the Benelux countries) were created as a reaction to WWII and its aftermath.
* but note that in 1951, the Treaty of Paris was signed, creating the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). This was an international community based on supranationalism and international law, designed to help the economy of Europe and prevent future war by integrating its members.
It's a pity we were not informed about all this supranationalism and integration in the early 70s when we joined the Common Market, instead of being lied to and told we were merely joining a trading bloc. The result of the 1975 referendum might have been very different if people knew the truth back then, but at least we put it right in June this year.
If anything the EU has made war more likely, with its policy of expanding into the former Soviet Union countries, thus provoking the Russian bear. The granting this week of visa-free travel to Ukraine and Georgia is just another example.