NEW EUROPE...THE THOUGHT OF OPPOSING AMERICA FEELS SO GOOD.

Actually, I haven't seen one good reason for "opposing" America on this thread. Those who have done so may rue the day they did so, especially the ranting "Ameicans" who use every single thread to take a stance against everything American, using the "hate George Bush" diatribe as an excuse.

The people I see here who oppose America are (1) jealous Europeans wishing America to fall so they can creep in for the spoils (2) aging babyboomers hoping for a last hoorah, in vain, for that "collective," (3) those who are afraid of losing a particular "program" that may benefit them in some way (no chance of losing those programs with GWB, don't you see that yet?), (some disgruntled Canadians and Australians for God-knows what reason (4) athiests, who really fail at explaining why they don't "believe" there is a higher power (as if the one who is everywhere present does much of anythng about that except wait patiently for each one to come around.

Funny, how some of us see GWB and his republican administration as rescuing a people from a monster while others gossip about a "regime" that forces its ways onto others. Gee, somehow I thought that's what Saddam Hussein did. Is GWB forcing his "way" on Americans, and the world? How? To the contrary, our military is very patiently waiting for the Iraqis to get accustomed to being free.

Well, c.i., not really.

Have a look at the members of the EU parliament
EU Parliament
or at the nationality of the members of the comission
EU commission
I really don't think, the greater countries are over-represented!

Ehem, yes, Texstar, sorry that I didn't get that until now.

Say, TexStar, have you ever considered going in to the "all-natural" fertilizer business ?

Just wondered . . .

Walter, In terms of numbers, it may look fair, but that still makes the small countries small by comparison to Germany, France, and Italy. As part of the EU community, all rules and regulations adopted by the EU (most influenced by the three countries) will be the "law of the land," and all the others will be 'forced' to follow. The government of our country understood this dilemma, and established the "electoral votes" to help balance the non-populace states with the populace ones. c.i.

And that is, why the USA are against the situation in the UN???

Besides, the "electoral vote" (at least similar) is to be seen in the EU as well.

Within the next few hours (or even earlier), an essay of the German philosopher Habermas and the French Derrida will start a a new discussion with their "vision of an avangardistic Europe".
(To be published in the 'Farnkfurter Allgemeine" and "Libération".
Additionally Umberto Ecco will write about this in "Repubblica", in "Neuen Zürcher Zeitung" Adolf Muschg, "El País" Fernando Savater and Gianni Vattimo in "La Stampa".
A direct answer to Habermas will be published in "Süddeutsche Zeitung" by Richard Rorty. The FAZ will print this discussion continuently the next weeks - mostly in German, I suppose.)

This is getting good. But Walter, I have to reprimand you for not only being a "jealous European" but (much worse) an intellectual. Free and deep discussion is pretty threatening stuff...

Walter, The 'situation' in the UN during the first half of this year is unique to this administration - I hope. However, I must for this once defent GWBush for making the effort to get the UN Resolution for this war with Iraq. If the EU already has some form of "electoral vote" system in place to even the playing field, I applaud them. c.i.

A timely article I ran across in Slate:
David and Goliath in the EU
By Maureen Sullivan
Posted Wednesday, May 28, 2003, at 5:39 PM PT


The publication of the first draft of the European Union's proposed constitution Monday set off a firestorm of debate?-so much so that the second part of the draft, published yesterday, and the third part, rescheduled for publishing today, have gone largely ignored. The tussle boils down to the division of power between the EU's small and large member nations, a microcosm of which can be seen in the papers of the British Isles.


The British editorial pages are filled with charges that the proposed constitution gives the EU too much power over its members?-an opinion reflecting the concerns of the other states considered among the "big six": Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and Poland. Many of the papers are calling for a referendum for British voters to approve or reject the constitution as a protest. In smaller member states like Ireland, the debate centers not on how beholden the member states will be to the EU but on how much more power the big six will have versus the smaller states.

The Irish Independent quotes a senior German official as saying, "This is not acceptable to small member states. Do we want a directorate in Europe where the big six states decide everything? If so, it will be the end of the European Union." Officials warn that a "major showdown lies ahead." Another analysis in the Independent calls the document a "fudge," noting that while there is no "f-word" in the draft (in this case, the profanity being "federal"), it definitely sets up a federal system.

Meanwhile, the London Times sounds the major concern of the bigger powers: that even the larger countries will lose ground with the constitution as it is now. "However true it may be that some of its provisions are familiar"?-which is what the treaty's supporters in the British government argue, that it doesn't change much?-"both the broad thrust of this document and many of its detailed clauses will significantly alter the balance of power between the EU and its component states," tipping the balance of power in the EU's favor.

The Rest of the Article.

Sofia, That's been my thought all along. Thanks for sharing that revealing article. I feel vendicated. c.i.

Sofia, That's been my thought all along. Thanks for sharing that revealing article. I feel vendicated. c.i.

The article seemed to nail your comments,ci. I don't know what 'electoral' type fairness Walter alluded to, but it must not be adequate to the smaller states at present.

I still think of Chirac's threat to the smaller EE countries during the sturm and drang pre-war. They should count their blessings that disagreement arose before they all signed on. It seemed as a precourser to second class citizen status for the smaller countries. At least to me.

But that aside--insightful comments, ci. :wink:

C.i./Sofia, countries currently have veto rights - that is to say, consensus has to be reached for the major decisions to pass (in the European Council, is what I think we'd be talking about). That's an important enough safeguard for small countries. But it is one of the issues currently up for debate: can veto rights be maintained when the number of member states doubles - wouldnt they make it wholly impossible to maintain effective administration? Hence the suggestion to introduce majority voting on at least some domains.

Considering the slant of "the British editorial pages", no surprises there - there are hardly any British newspapers with even a Euro-neutral position - they are almost collectively strongly Euro-sceptic. Many have been pushing for referendum-like set-ups forever, hoping it would provide the chance to vote Britain out of the whole integration process once and for all. That's nothing new, and thus nothing specifically relevant to how the Convention is being received. The Irish press' reaction is more interesting in that respect, really. Or if, say, the German, Spanish or Belgian press suddenly came out massively against the latest proposals, that would be a serious signal.

Sofia, may I take this opportunity to invite you to the thread I opened up on this topic? Lots more there! http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8031 <smiles>

nimh, "Consensus" has a broad meaning. What specifically does it mean? c.i.

Euro retreats as rate decision looms

By Jennifer Hughes in London
Published: June 2 2003 10:59 |
Last Updated: June 2 2003 10:59

Yeap, down :wink: to 1.178 this moment in Frankfurt.

What is more significant in that article is the following paragraph: "The dollar's fall is already benefitting American manufacturers and helping calm fears over the prospect of deflation in the world's largest economy. By contrast, weaker manufacturing data from the eurozone sparked fresh concern over the problems caused by the strength of the euro." c.i.

Faster eurozone contraction likely to push ECB towards a rate cut
FINANCIAL TIMES

Mapleleaf, It's a most inopportune time for France to be going on strike to reduce their workweek from 38 hours to 35. Germany already has one of the most generous time off benefits for its employees, and the increasing value of the Euro is not helping any of their economy of the 15 countries gain in exports. Reducing their interest rates a half point isn't going to help improve their balance of trade when their currency has gained 13 percent over the US dollar in just a few months. It's going to be interesting to watch the Euro countires sink with the big three. c.i.