What's the use? - Page 3

Wynonie Harris · 05-11-2009, 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by jules58

I hope we do join the euopean union

Where've you been for the last 30-odd years?

Eric · 05-11-2009, 21:39

Just read that the Lisbon Treaty becomes effective on my birthday .... that sucks ... and only one day after Churchill's birthday ... I bet he's spinning in his tomb right now.

Eric · 05-11-2009, 21:43

Also, just read the Berlin Declaration .... what a crock of horse manure

Eric · 05-11-2009, 22:51

Has anyone considered that one can make the argument that the UK is not really a European country in the sense that continental European countries are? Britain is an island nation, with lots of peculiarities that this insularity confers. Throughout much of your history, Britain's best interests have been served by a divided Europe ... Britain supported France when it suited them; and fought against them when it was in her best interest. Is it possible that this insularity, combined with a maritime outlook and an Imperial past has made Britain unique. Britain has always had a much wider world view than continental Europeans ... (wherever I go in the US or Canada I communicate in English (ok, maybe in parts of Quebec I need French)) .... the only significant difference between the parliament that represents me, and that which represents you is the flag flying over the building. If I posed the question: "Which country do you feel you have most in common with, Germany or Canada?", what would be your answer?

MargaretR · 05-11-2009, 22:53

The Norwegians are not full members and only have a trade agreement.
They had 2 referendums and said NO twice.
They seem to manage very well without the political interference

cashman · 05-11-2009, 22:53

Well it sure wouldn't be the Krauts Eric.

garinda · 05-11-2009, 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by jules58

YOU talk the same dribble as the parties in this country do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! get to the point, looking after this country is very simple, we do it I mean the people, or someone else, eg europe. who do you think................

You might not agree with what she says, but Margaret certainly doesn't 'dribble'. Which if we weren't so generous, you being a new member and all, we could accuse your posts of being 'dribble', as well as incoherant, due to their lack of capital letters, and punctuation.

But we wouldn't be so rude.

Certainly until we knew the lie of the land here.

By the way, bad language isn't allowed on this family site.

Rule Britannia.

garinda · 05-11-2009, 23:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric

Has anyone considered that one can make the argument that the UK is not really a European country in the sense that continental European countries are? Britain is an island nation, with lots of peculiarities that this insularity confers. Throughout much of your history, Britain's best interests have been served by a divided Europe ... Britain supported France when it suited them; and fought against them when it was in her best interest. Is it possible that this insularity, combined with a maritime outlook and an Imperial past has made Britain unique. Britain has always had a much wider world view than continental Europeans ... (wherever I go in the US or Canada I communicate in English (ok, maybe in parts of Quebec I need French)) .... the only significant difference between the parliament that represents me, and that which represents you is the flag flying over the building. If I posed the question: "Which country do you feel you have most in common with, Germany or Canada?", what would be your answer?

Canada, then every other Commonwealth country, then every country which ever belonged to the British Empire, and lastly Germany.

The only close tie we have in common with the Germans, is that we have one on the throne.

I'd vote B.N.P. myself, if they'd guaramtee to send her back.

webglynne · 06-11-2009, 00:02

Someone on question time this evening, a member of the audience, made the point about M P s pay that since so much has been given over to the EU they should be paid less!

And not included in that was the question “Do we need as many as there are now?”

Margaret Pilkington · 06-11-2009, 06:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR

The Norwegians are not full members and only have a trade agreement.
They had 2 referendums and said NO twice.
They seem to manage very well without the political interference

Spot on Margaret....the Norwegians have not been bamboozled into accepting this Super State....and the super bit only refers to size.

It seems to me that the other members of the EU follow only the EU rules that suit them, whereas we follow them slavishly.

I do despair for the future........I am just glad that I am at the butt end of my life.

Stumped · 06-11-2009, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by MargaretR

The Norwegians are not full members and only have a trade agreement.
They had 2 referendums and said NO twice.
They seem to manage very well without the political interference

And therein lies the answer. I recall the furore among Commonwealth countries when we signed the so called 'Common Market Agreement'. It was seen as a betrayal -and who am I to disagree!

Eric · 06-11-2009, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Spot on Margaret....the Norwegians have not been bamboozled into accepting this Super State....and the super bit only refers to size.

It seems to me that the other members of the EU follow only the EU rules that suit them, whereas we follow them slavishly.

I do despair for the future........I am just glad that I am at the butt end of my life.

Future looks bright over here ... I'm just glad I live at the butt end of Lake Ontario.

But I do agree that Norway provides a good example of what Britain could still do ... Norway seems to be doing just fine ... one of the most desirable places on the planet to live.

SPUGGIE J · 06-11-2009, 19:36

Now that this has been stuck on us how long before we lose our own parliament and all that it does pass to the MEP's we elected?

Mancie · 07-11-2009, 01:09

you lot make me laugh.. there has been treaties signed since the Tories took us into this ...no out cry in those days so why do you tories all get upset about this treaty?

steeljack · 07-11-2009, 01:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric

All I see here, hon, is defeatism in another guise.

In any struggle, or battle if you want a more combative image, the chance of defeat is always there ... but as the British have shown throughout their history, you can lose a helluva lot of battles, and still win the war. Conversely, you can win a lot of battles and still lose the war ... this latter is the German way

Although it sometimes crosses my mind that Germany lost the war, but seems to have won the peace.

Seems to me Germany won the peace thru one thing .....hard work , rebuilding a country that had been bombed flat ,had lost over 1/2 its population , any piece of equipment worth a penny was shipped back east to Russia as 'reparations' ,and 90% of its female population aged over 12 yrs old in the eastern half of the country raped by the advancing Russian armies .
OK the Marshall plan did help in preventing famine ( it also did the same in other countries) and the fact that the UK and the US occupying powers also forbade the 'New Germany' from spending any of its budget on defense costs.
If anyone wants to know what helped the "German economic miracle" it was the mis-guided greed of British Govts and British businessmen .....yep the German Steel industry (Krupps etc.) had been bombed flat ....so what did the Brits do ...they sold/gave them brand new efficient steel plants which had been built in inefficient 60 year old British steel mills to create employment for British workers and then wondered why they couldn't compete ..... similar story with the British textile industry , how much modern state of the art equipment did companies like Bulloughs and Northrop sell overseas only to have the buyers turn round and bite the British textile manufactuers on the ass .