Veto all the way. If the EU is stupid enough to expect an increase in budget when most of Europe is in recession then they aren't fit to make any decisions on our behalf.
I'm slightly past caring what the other EU nations think of Britain. I'm past caring that we, as a net contributer to the EU, get criticised by nations that take more than they give back. Let them moan.
Sorry, but I was replying to a comment made in this thread.
Yugoslavia wasn't a member state, and the Yugoslavian Wars could broadly be termed wars of secession and/or civil wars; and as such, they are out of scope.
Eh? - the claim was that the EU kept the peace in Europe, not just in the EU!
Sorry, but I was replying to a comment made in this thread.
Don't start. I was merely making an observation, and went on to explain anyway, so there's no need for that.
Eh? - the claim was that the EU kept the peace in Europe, not just in the EU!
Actually, it wasn't. I suggest you go back and re-read the thread. What AZZURRI 06 originally said in #16 was "Europe (sic) has kept the peace since 1945" - not "the EU kept the peace in Europe". That particular form of the claim was inserted into the discussion by MTUK1 (in post #28), and as such, was itself a straw man (or more charitably, as above, a forgivable lazy generalisation) and not the original claim.
And what is this 'out of scope' thing?
Out of scope = not within the boundaries of the original claim.
Actually, it wasn't. I suggest you go back and re-read the thread. What AZZURRI 06 originally said was "Europe (sic) has kept the peace since 1945" - not "the EU kept the peace in Europe".
So you dont think that Azzurri was talking about the EU?
Way to misinterpret my point totally. AZZURRI 06 did not say "...in Europe". That was an insertion by MTUK1.
Sorry but now you have totally lost me - post 16 seemed a quite straightforward claim about unity within the EU preventing conflict in Europe until you decided to 'explain' it.
Do you agree with MTUK then that the only organisation that has managed to keep any semblance of peace in Europe is NATO? - because at the moment it is hard to distill what you are actually saying?
Sorry but now you have totally lost me - post 16 seemed a quite straightforward claim about unity within the EU preventing conflict in Europe until you decided to 'explain' it.
I have no idea how you would confidently get that interpretation from the bare phrase "Europe (sic) has kept the peace since 1945". It's too vague, absent some context. The context I provide - which, if one is evaluating claims made on behalf of the EU, is I would suggest the most obvious one to apply - is the stated goal of the ECSC's founders themselves. The claim is occasionally overstated, though, and had it been so overstated in this case I would have been happy to join MTUK1 in picking the poster up on it.
Do you agree with MTUK then that the only organisation that has managed to keep any semblance of peace in Europe is NATO?
No. As I've said, NATO could barely maintain the peace between its own members (Greece and Turkey) and it's somewhat doubtful whether mutual defence pacts really prevent wars or are a proximate cause of their escalation (see also World War I and the current situation in Afghanistan). It couldn't prevent the Yugoslav Wars from happening, any more than the EU could. It helped to put the lid on the Bosnian conflict thereby paving the way for diplomacy, but NATO isn't a diplomatic mission. It can force a ceasefire, but it cannot maintain the peace.
- because at the moment it is hard to distill what you are actually saying?
What I've said is that the ECSC and its successors (the EC and EU) have established a framework whereby war between its member states is next to unthinkable - which was the goal of the ECSC's founders. On the wider European front, as I've already commented on this thread, obviously NATO helped in putting the lid on the Yugoslav wars, but one cannot keep the peace at the barrel of a gun: it has been diplomacy, partly under the EU's enlargement programme but also through organisations such as OSCE and the Council of Europe, that has provided the framework that helps to maintain the peace. Once a state has acceded to the EU, it is largely the EU that provides that framework.
EU Budget negotiations have broken down. I'm sure we'll soon here what happened as the leaders start talking and information comes out.
Sounds like David Cameron stuck up for tax payers which is great. Also sounds like the poorer nations wanted more and the richer nations said no. Quite a few nations apparently also sided with out position, so much for "Britain is Isolated" malarky.
EU Budget negotiations have broken down. I'm sure we'll soon here what happened as the leaders start talking and information comes out.
According to Cameron the commission didn't offer to make a saving of one single euro by looking at inefficiences in the budgets - what planet are they on? DC came out with a list of things they could have looked at that would have saved billions. That might be so much small beer as far as the EU budget goes but anyone who treats those kinds of figures with near contempt needs reminding whose money they are wasting and who's suffering - certainly not them on their all inclusive gravy train.
well done Dave its time someone finally stuck up for our interests instead of just giving whatever outrageous sum is asked for. It is ridiculous to pay hundred of millions of pounds more each year when we have deep cuts and high unemployment at home.
He needs to say that he wants sight of the signed off EU accounts up until 2011. Understand that the last EU accounts signed off - John Major was PM & John Smith leader of Labour Party. Ye Gods what the hell did we let them get away with for last nigh on 20 years. If not able to be signed off - why not. What are the specific issues? GBP & in fact wider EU population need to know.
Need a whistleblower to expose it all. Come on Telegraph go get the info. If you have to pay for it - so be it. There is no way public would ever let anybody be prosecuted for releasing this info!!!!
the UK also had the support of Germany, Sweden and Holland in cutting the budget
. . . . . . and according to the BBC Finland and Denmark too. We are not alone.
It is easy for the other countries that take everything out and put nothing in, of course they do not want cuts, but they will have to accept it is the payer who should be calling the tune.
the UK also had the support of Germany, Sweden and Holland in cutting the budget
Also Finland & Denmark. Just watching CNBC & they were talking to Finance person from Croatia. Interesting that they are part of the group that want spending to be maintained BUT seemed more concerned about funds being about getting them to a position to trade more effectively. Concern that this would be cut rather than the central admin costs. So my take is that by going for the bloated central costs DC & the others may not be as isolated as some think. France were never going to be on side due to ridiculous farm subsidies & pulling out of Strasbourg to one centre in Brussels. Asia CNBC were saying last night that cattle in Europe subsidised per head more than many in folks in third world live on.
The UK, Germany, and other net contributors should all band together and enforce a real-terms cut. If we are having to cut public spending by x% then the eu budget payments should also be reduced accordingly.
We won't (shouldn't) pay! .. and if attempts are made to reduce rebates or introduce penalties, we should reduce our contribution to match whatever was taken away. I'm tempted to say to reduce it on a 2:1 basis to discourage such tactics.
well done Dave its time someone finally stuck up for our interests instead of just giving whatever outrageous sum is asked for. It is ridiculous to pay hundred of millions of pounds more each year when we have deep cuts and high unemployment at home.
According to Balls he is weak & isolated! He of Labour who gave away half of our rebate for little or nothing in return. Predictable script written before DC left UK :rolleyes:
According to Balls he is weak & isolated! He of Labour who gave away half of our rebate for little or nothing in return. Predictable script written before DC left UK :rolleyes:
Does anyone take the slightest bit of notice anything that Balls says? One thing he certainly does is talk a lot of Balls that fact nobody can deny.
I just wonder how damn weak Balls would be if he way there, the whole of Europe would be laughing at him as the Labour clown he is.
I'm slightly past caring what the other EU nations think of Britain. I'm past caring that we, as a net contributer to the EU, get criticised by nations that take more than they give back. Let them moan.
I have to say, some of the comments about the UK by Polish ministers (and others) beggars belief. It's like they're living in an alternate universe.
I just have to sit back and laugh every time there's any EU summit or meeting. You couldn't make it up in a script.
i bet they miss out the 1914-1918 and 1939-1945 bits
You don't need a house - go to the trenches & Auschwitz it is all to 'real'. As you say you can guess the perspective on European history that they'll have.
well done Dave its time someone finally stuck up for our interests instead of just giving whatever outrageous sum is asked for. It is ridiculous to pay hundred of millions of pounds more each year when we have deep cuts and high unemployment at home.
The debate over the actual size of the budget is almost irrelevant because countries like the UK and Germany will never accept a huge increase, and other countries will never accept a huge cut. There is no possibility, whatsoever, of the EU budget substantially increasing and causing any real impact on UK finances.
The debate is purely about politics. It's about Cameron being able to go home and pretend he achieved something, when in reality all he did is kick the can down the road.
The debate over the actual size of the budget is almost irrelevant because countries like the UK and Germany will never accept a huge increase, and other countries will never accept a huge cut. There is no possibility, whatsoever, of the EU budget substantially increasing and causing any real impact on UK finances.
The debate is purely about politics. It's about Cameron being able to go home and pretend he achieved something, when in reality all he did is kick the can down the road.
Van Rompuy is the one with the can on the end of his foot.
Van Rompuy is the one with the can on the end of his foot.
So, it will be interesting how it goes for Cameron during Ireland's Presidency of the EU from Jan 1st 2013, He might even have to come to Derry in it's UK Culture year, [heaven forbid]. The EU is a mystery even to itself. I can't see the bloc coming together even under Enda Kenny's tutelage.
Comments
I'm slightly past caring what the other EU nations think of Britain. I'm past caring that we, as a net contributer to the EU, get criticised by nations that take more than they give back. Let them moan.
Sorry, but I was replying to a comment made in this thread.
Eh? - the claim was that the EU kept the peace in Europe, not just in the EU!
And what is this 'out of scope' thing?
Don't start. I was merely making an observation, and went on to explain anyway, so there's no need for that.
Actually, it wasn't. I suggest you go back and re-read the thread. What AZZURRI 06 originally said in #16 was "Europe (sic) has kept the peace since 1945" - not "the EU kept the peace in Europe". That particular form of the claim was inserted into the discussion by MTUK1 (in post #28), and as such, was itself a straw man (or more charitably, as above, a forgivable lazy generalisation) and not the original claim.
Out of scope = not within the boundaries of the original claim.
So you dont think that Azzurri was talking about the EU?
How can a continent keep the peace?
Oh boy, this is like wading through treacle...
Way to misinterpret my point totally. AZZURRI 06 did not say "...in Europe". That was an insertion by MTUK1.
Sorry but now you have totally lost me - post 16 seemed a quite straightforward claim about unity within the EU preventing conflict in Europe until you decided to 'explain' it.
Do you agree with MTUK then that the only organisation that has managed to keep any semblance of peace in Europe is NATO? - because at the moment it is hard to distill what you are actually saying?
I have no idea how you would confidently get that interpretation from the bare phrase "Europe (sic) has kept the peace since 1945". It's too vague, absent some context. The context I provide - which, if one is evaluating claims made on behalf of the EU, is I would suggest the most obvious one to apply - is the stated goal of the ECSC's founders themselves. The claim is occasionally overstated, though, and had it been so overstated in this case I would have been happy to join MTUK1 in picking the poster up on it.
No. As I've said, NATO could barely maintain the peace between its own members (Greece and Turkey) and it's somewhat doubtful whether mutual defence pacts really prevent wars or are a proximate cause of their escalation (see also World War I and the current situation in Afghanistan). It couldn't prevent the Yugoslav Wars from happening, any more than the EU could. It helped to put the lid on the Bosnian conflict thereby paving the way for diplomacy, but NATO isn't a diplomatic mission. It can force a ceasefire, but it cannot maintain the peace.
What I've said is that the ECSC and its successors (the EC and EU) have established a framework whereby war between its member states is next to unthinkable - which was the goal of the ECSC's founders. On the wider European front, as I've already commented on this thread, obviously NATO helped in putting the lid on the Yugoslav wars, but one cannot keep the peace at the barrel of a gun: it has been diplomacy, partly under the EU's enlargement programme but also through organisations such as OSCE and the Council of Europe, that has provided the framework that helps to maintain the peace. Once a state has acceded to the EU, it is largely the EU that provides that framework.
Sounds like David Cameron stuck up for tax payers which is great. Also sounds like the poorer nations wanted more and the richer nations said no. Quite a few nations apparently also sided with out position, so much for "Britain is Isolated" malarky.
According to Cameron the commission didn't offer to make a saving of one single euro by looking at inefficiences in the budgets - what planet are they on? DC came out with a list of things they could have looked at that would have saved billions. That might be so much small beer as far as the EU budget goes but anyone who treats those kinds of figures with near contempt needs reminding whose money they are wasting and who's suffering - certainly not them on their all inclusive gravy train.
Need a whistleblower to expose it all. Come on Telegraph go get the info. If you have to pay for it - so be it. There is no way public would ever let anybody be prosecuted for releasing this info!!!!
. . . . . . and according to the BBC Finland and Denmark too. We are not alone.
It is easy for the other countries that take everything out and put nothing in, of course they do not want cuts, but they will have to accept it is the payer who should be calling the tune.
Also Finland & Denmark. Just watching CNBC & they were talking to Finance person from Croatia. Interesting that they are part of the group that want spending to be maintained BUT seemed more concerned about funds being about getting them to a position to trade more effectively. Concern that this would be cut rather than the central admin costs. So my take is that by going for the bloated central costs DC & the others may not be as isolated as some think. France were never going to be on side due to ridiculous farm subsidies & pulling out of Strasbourg to one centre in Brussels. Asia CNBC were saying last night that cattle in Europe subsidised per head more than many in folks in third world live on.
We won't (shouldn't) pay! .. and if attempts are made to reduce rebates or introduce penalties, we should reduce our contribution to match whatever was taken away. I'm tempted to say to reduce it on a 2:1 basis to discourage such tactics.
According to Balls he is weak & isolated! He of Labour who gave away half of our rebate for little or nothing in return. Predictable script written before DC left UK :rolleyes:
Does anyone take the slightest bit of notice anything that Balls says? One thing he certainly does is talk a lot of Balls that fact nobody can deny.
I just wonder how damn weak Balls would be if he way there, the whole of Europe would be laughing at him as the Labour clown he is.
I just have to sit back and laugh every time there's any EU summit or meeting. You couldn't make it up in a script.
i bet they miss out the 1914-1918 and 1939-1945 bits
You don't need a house - go to the trenches & Auschwitz it is all to 'real'. As you say you can guess the perspective on European history that they'll have.
Civil wars, apparently.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2131484/House-European-History-museum-EU-serious.html
The debate over the actual size of the budget is almost irrelevant because countries like the UK and Germany will never accept a huge increase, and other countries will never accept a huge cut. There is no possibility, whatsoever, of the EU budget substantially increasing and causing any real impact on UK finances.
The debate is purely about politics. It's about Cameron being able to go home and pretend he achieved something, when in reality all he did is kick the can down the road.
Van Rompuy is the one with the can on the end of his foot.
So, it will be interesting how it goes for Cameron during Ireland's Presidency of the EU from Jan 1st 2013, He might even have to come to Derry in it's UK Culture year, [heaven forbid]. The EU is a mystery even to itself. I can't see the bloc coming together even under Enda Kenny's tutelage.
Van Rompuy's job is to try and bring every state to an agreement. If states refuse to move on their position then there's not much he can do.