25
   

FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION

 
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Tue 30 Jun, 2009 10:50 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Can you give me a site that explians the Lisbon treaty?
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 30 Jun, 2009 11:03 am
@rabel22,
rabel22 wrote:

Can you give me a site that explians the Lisbon treaty?


EU-website about the Lisbon treaty

BBC: Q & A about the Lisbon treaty
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Thu 24 Sep, 2009 04:07 am

Barak Obama snubs Gordon Brown.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/sep/23/barack-obama-gordon-brown-talks

So now we know where we stand in the larger scheme of things.
Thomas
 
  1  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 03:46 pm
Germany made the right decision today: It elected a coalition government between the Christian Democratis and the Free Democrats.

Sorry, Walter.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 03:52 pm
@McTag,
McTag wrote:


Barak Obama snubs Gordon Brown.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/sep/23/barack-obama-gordon-brown-talks

So now we know where we stand in the larger scheme of things.


I think you are implying more than is there. Both leaders are facing a fairly rough patch in their domestic political struggles. and what they need or want from each other doesn't appear available on either side.

Secondly, the rationalizations for the Lockarbie affair and the rather transparent denials with respect to the concurrent economic deals really didn't go down very well here.

Finally, the new governing crowd here is - ironically - a good deal more given to its own self-serving version of moral outrage than was its predecessor
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 07:50 pm
@georgeob1,
But, george, GW Bush was the moral outrage! He may have seemed like a timit, honest, soul, but look at all the crimes he committed in Iraq, torture, and breaking domestic and international laws. It's only a wonder nobody brought charges against him; even on his illegal wiretaps - that he lied about to the American people.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sat 3 Oct, 2009 05:49 am
It looks as if Ireland voted with a strong majority "Yes for the Lisbon treaty. [If they had voted 'No', I think, the UK should leave the EU, too. Mr. Green ]
lmur
 
  1  
Sat 3 Oct, 2009 05:52 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Lisbon referenda result result:
1-1.

Penalty shoot out?
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sat 3 Oct, 2009 07:30 am
@lmur,
But this time is was an away-goal!
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sat 3 Oct, 2009 08:12 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

But this time is was an away-goal!


It must be: the result [to be officially confirmed later today] overturns last June's Irish referendum rejection of the Lisbon treaty.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sat 3 Oct, 2009 08:31 am
@Walter Hinteler,
The turnout is estimated at around 58.8 per cent.
Based on results so far, the Yes side has 66.8 per cent of the vote reflecting a 20 per cent swing.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Sat 3 Oct, 2009 10:54 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
The agreement passed by a margin of 67.13 percent to 32.87 percent.

http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/

So, the Irish could be sold on the EU after all......Anyone else wonder if the collapse of the Irish economy, added and abetted by recklessness at best- malfeasance at worse, has anything to do with the attitude adjustment??
0 Replies
 
lmur
 
  1  
Sun 4 Oct, 2009 01:57 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Much of the mainstream print media abandoned all semblance of objectivity. This front page editorial from the "Irish Examiner" (dated 1/10/2009 - the day before the actual vote) is but one example:
*************************************************************
TOMORROW, we decide what kind of a country we will live in. We will decide what kind of prospects we will offer our children.

We will decide if we want to copper-fasten our place at the centre of one of the world’s most powerful trading blocs. We will decide if we wish to play a full part in the community that has brought unprecedented peace to Europe and unprecedented prosperity to Ireland. We will decide if we want to endorse the project that played a lead role in the positive advancement of this society, especially for women.

We will decide if we want to remain proactive members of the community that has done more than any other to build our infrastructure.

We will decide if we want to endorse the enterprise that, more than anything else, allowed us escape our impoverished and subjugated past as a struggling, insular, agrarian society utterly dependent on a dominant neighbour.

Tomorrow, we will decide if we want to remain a respected and vibrant part of the greatest project in European history, one based on the rejection of intolerance and totalitarianism.

We will decide if we want to continue to enjoy the full and generous support of the movement that ended the greatest Irish cancer " forced emigration.

We will decide if we want to remain part of the entity that has fostered democracy all the while balancing the interests of sovereign nations, large or small.

Of course the No campaigners would have us believe that we can have our cake and eat it, that we can reject this treaty and still enjoy the warm, unambiguous embrace of the European Community. They would have us believe that we can reject it and still enjoy the solidarity and protection that, in the last year, saved this small and vulnerable country from bankruptcy and all the chaos that would have brought. This astonishing, dishonest analysis ignores the realpolitik of a world struggling to re-establish economic stability. This is especially so as guarantees have been secured to satisfy the primary concerns that led to the rejection of the treaty last year.

It is tempting too, unfortunately, to reject the treaty to register the entirely justifiable anger with our Government for its failure to protect us all from the greed culture of wantonly irresponsible bankers and reckless and totally selfish property developers, and the way they have devastated our ambitions. No matter how satisfying it might be for many to defy the majority of our political parties and vote No it would be an indulgence we cannot afford. In reality it would make things worse rather than better. We must defer that judgement for another day.

One of the great scenes of contemporary television shows Bart Simpson sitting on his couch flicking through television channels asking “what did science ever do for me?”

Tomorrow, we are being asked if we want to give our children the opportunities Europe gave us. We can be like Bart and remain willfully blind to the obvious or we can confidently embrace a future at the centre of Europe.

This is a pivotal moment and tomorrow we have an opportunity to place ourselves at the very heart of things or to stand in the shadows like a forgotten and ignored half-relative at a wedding.

We should confidently vote Yes, believing that by doing so the opportunities and support we have enjoyed since 1972 will continue into the future. Our place is at the centre of Europe and we must embrace it fully. To do that we must vote Yes.

http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2009/10/01/story102300.asp

Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sun 4 Oct, 2009 03:16 am
@lmur,
I think, the EU really had got difficulties about what could go on further - if Ireland had voted 'no'.

But I think as well, Ireland would have got quite a lot of (economic) difficulties outside the EU. (Though this would have pleased all the [other] European milk farmers.]

Frontpage of today's Irish Independent

http://i36.tinypic.com/2ze9isp.jpg

We've put our anger aside but not for long

Take me to your bossom, Mama Europe
lmur
 
  1  
Sun 4 Oct, 2009 03:32 am
@Walter Hinteler,
That will save me a trip to the shop Walter, thanks. Wink Ireland had no choice, really. It was vote yes, or else...Anyway, we can now pass the euro-sceptic mantle baton back to it's rightful owner (UK Tory Party).



High Seas
 
  1  
Tue 6 Oct, 2009 03:36 pm
@lmur,
Meanwhile before the baton gets to a Tory government the Czechs are fighting a lonely rearguard action:
Quote:
The Irish may have said Yes to the Lisbon Treaty, but the bureaucrats in Brussels have not yet won. If anything, the shameful browbeating of the Irish electorate into reversing its previous rejection of the Treaty will steel the resolve of those who oppose additional centralization of power in Brussels. Czech President Vaclav Klaus has so far refused to sign off on the Treaty that the Czech parliament has already adopted. The president is officially waiting for a decision from the highest Czech court on the treaty's constitutionality. The opponents of thet reaty in the Czech parliament hope to prolong the legal challenges until the British have had a chance to vote it down in a referendum that the Conservatives, who are set to win the next election, promised to hold midway through 2010.
High Seas
 
  1  
Wed 7 Oct, 2009 05:06 pm
@High Seas,


Economist.com




Eastern Europe



Ailing fast
Oct 7th 2009
From Economist.com


Bad news from Latvia raises fears of contagion across eastern Europe

AFP
AFP


THE patient emerges from intensive care, hurls the medicine at the doctors and bites his blood donor. That may be an unfair characterisation of the recent news from crisis-stricken Latvia, but it is pretty much how outsiders see it. The prime minister, Valdis Dombrovskis, is refusing to make the spending cuts mandated by international lenders and has floated a new law that would partially expropriate foreign banks’ loan books.

It would be worrying enough if the European Union’s weakest economy defaults, devalues or implodes. But what scares outsiders more is the effect of Latvia’s latest wobble on other ex-communist economies, which until this week seemed to be surviving the financial crisis with less trouble than some had feared.

In recent weeks, the news from Latvia had seemed mildly encouraging, after a year during which the country has been kept afloat thanks to an $11.1 billion international bail-out. The breakneck decline has slowed: the economy is expected to contract by 17.5% this year, but by only 3% in 2010 and to return to growth in 2011, according to a forecast by SEB, a Swedish bank (and big lender to Latvia). The current account, which showed a yawning deficit of 1.42 billion lats ($3 billion) in the first seven months of last year has been transformed to show a 581m lats surplus in the same period of 2009.

The main outstanding issue is next year’s budget deficit. International lenders had softened the target to a mere 8.5% of GDP; the government still had to push through spending cuts of 500m lats to meet this.

But this week Mr Dombrovskis startled outsiders by saying that cuts of only 225m lats would be necessary. He has pencilled in a further 100m lats in better tax revenues"counting, apparently, on a faster economic recovery than anyone expects. The hesitation has brought stern warnings. Sweden’s finance minister, Anders Borg, said outsiders’ patience was “limited”"his country is due to provide SKr10 billion ($1.45 billion) in a loan tranche in early 2010. The EU’s monetary affairs commissioner, Joaquín Almunia, has publicly rebuked the government too. Mr Dombrovskis has now backtracked, saying that if the cuts are necessary, they will be made.

But doubts remain. Mr Dombrovskis lacks the authority to push tough measures through parliament and his public wobble could be seen as an attempt to summon up another burst of international pressure on the government to do the right thing. If so, it is risky.

The same could be said about another of Mr Dombrovskis’s moves"calling for a draft law that would restructure domestic liabilities of foreign banks. Lenders would be liable only for the collateral value of their loan (eg, a house bought with a mortgage) rather than the whole amount. Banks would also be unable to evict defaulters from their homes without rehousing them. A fall in property prices of over 50% has sent Latvia’s private-sector debts to foreigners ballooning. They will need restructuring eventually. But this proposal looks unworkable, clumsy and damaging. Shares in Nordic banks, which have been the biggest private-sector lenders to Latvia, dipped on the news.

If Latvia fails, with a strike by international lenders prompting a debt crisis or a bank run, the spotlight then turns to the neighbouring Baltic states of Estonia and Lithuania. They are not in the same political mess, but both have also pegged their currencies to the euro and are facing huge and painful adjustments. Some wonder if the EU might accelerate its recognition of Estonia’s impressive progress in sorting out public finances by giving it early approval of its plans to join the euro in 2011. But where would that leave Lithuania, which is nowhere near balancing its books and borrowing expensively from private lenders instead of turning to the IMF?

An even bigger question involves the future co-operation between the IMF and EU. They worked together closely during the emergency rescue of Latvia in December. Now ties are strained: the IMF thinks Latvia should devalue its currency. EU officials are determined that it should not, for fear of the wider effect on ex-communist countries that are trying to join the euro zone. That has led the EU to squeeze the IMF into accepting softer conditions on Latvia than it would have wished for. For all those involved, in Brussels, Washington, DC, and Riga, patience is running out.


Copyright © 2009 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.

0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Sat 24 Oct, 2009 02:21 am
Here's a thread about the British National Party (fascists) and the BBC TV programme Question Time this week.

http://able2know.org/topic/137644-1#top
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Sat 24 Oct, 2009 02:41 am

I want to learn more about Turkish history and modern Turkey.

Can anyone recommend any reading material?
Francis
 
  1  
Sat 24 Oct, 2009 02:46 am
@McTag,
For a beginning, take a look here:

Ottoman Empire
 

Related Topics

THE BRITISH THREAD II - Discussion by jespah
The United Kingdom's bye bye to Europe - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
Sinti and Roma: History repeating - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
[B]THE RED ROSE COUNTY[/B] - Discussion by Mathos
Leaving today for Europe - Discussion by cicerone imposter
So you think you know Europe? - Discussion by nimh
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 05:19:59