I'm scared to bring up WW2, mainly because it usually hijacks a thread but also because the situation was completely different but never the less the US did not opt for satelite states but real indipendant nations in europe.
Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Posts by Little Paul
I'm scared to bring up WW2, mainly because it usually hijacks a thread but also because the situation was completely different but never the less the US did not opt for satelite states but real indipendant nations in europe.
"I assure you, given the chance, the U.S. would be ruling the world. Can't blame them for that though."
I don't think so. In a large nation with a liberal* and democratic background you need a good excuse or good propaganda to start imperialistic expensians. If there wouldn't have been an enemy it would have been very hard to achieve. It would have been hard as well to justify paying a large army with no real enemy.
*liberal: not the party but the literal meaning.
Not Belgium. The division of three powers isn't as it should be. There is large interference between the 3. It is democratic in that sence that the parliament more or less has the highest power. People gonna should me for simplifying here but that is the large picture.
Not th EU. It doesn't communicate enough. People know to few about it so the control function upon their leaders gets corrupted to much.
I don't know wich country is though.
Roflmao @ that movie.
Seems like the first post in years with a lot of good input and no flaming
. Maybe we should move this thread to general. ![]()
anyway, why arabic elysian? (Or was it a joke I misunderstood)
In any case, china is a totalitarian regime with a huge centralised form of control and a lot of gov regulation on many issues. Its still a dictatorship. I think thats whats most important here in this debate.
yell,
An advice to make your plan work. If you have a lot of very rich friends you can speed up the process by letting them buy euro's or invest heavely in propaganda.
I, on the other hand, hope that the dollar won't go down to hard. A low dollar has a few negative points, but also the potential to boost the US econ. A total crash on the other hand might seriously damage us and global economy on the long run and cause total chaos.
@pvp,
don't worry, it was only a joke. ![]()
But if we use esperanto, it needs a second version i.m.o. It can be made even more easy. Then again I'm not an expert in esperanto, I can hardly communicate in it.
Another option is to use a simplified version of english for foreigners. Adjusting a few rules would surely make it a whole lot easier. Tough this will create a lto of resistance.
seems like most people here don't have problems with english, but we should ask ourself how many posters come from france and ask why.
there is only space for one motherlanguage in your brain. At least, that was what I always heared. Is there a new theory?
In any case you can't compare it to a second language avo.
maybe with free trade agreements...:D
paul valter pihlo:
But it need a lot of energy to make biofuels. Is it really profitable? Some studies I red show a huge energy input, sometimes even higher as the output.
Should we have a unified European language or better keep it the way it is? Should it be english,french,german, spanish or an artificial made language?
I'm in favor of having one second language in common everywhere. The troubles I see however are:
*the germanic/romanic language difficulties. Eg, english will be more difficult for spanish, italians or french people.
*some people will always disagree, whatever the option.
*some nations learn a second language at school standard and then often later on a third. This is different for different nations
Then you have an artificial one as otion:
*some people will always disagree, whatever the result.
*it won't fit for all languages the same.
*it need to be created.
*it need to get of the ground really good or it will die out.
Still its in my mind as a good thing.
Comments?
All in all, and as a complete atheist, convinced non-catholic, I think that, despite the sometimes rediculous phrases this is a good thing I think. They are trying to modernize and that is absolutely necessary.
"I am NOT learning esperanto, it is a horrible clunky, inefficient language."
second version
Confusing...Or confucius?
"What I mean is, what if the EU army becomes a toothless tiger because of the unwillingness of the major players like France and Germany to commit to offensive actions? I fear it will be only a peacekeeper army"
Seems like you want action for no reason. War is very very costly. What good can a barking dog do if its only a few cm tall? The Belgian army is a joke and the dutch army really isn't that much of a difference. Next to that, having national armies might exactly be the reason why they are less eager to wage one. Everybody feels like their armies should chick out and the others should do it.
"You can't can't compare the EU to the US. The EU military would have to find a compromise between all the different martial philosophies of it's member states, and will end up being less offensive minded than some would like. The USA does not have this problem."
There should be no veto's if thats what you mean. Then you don't have to compromise much more. The US army is also less offensive as some would like. Same problem. No difference. But I don't understand what you are saying. The dutchies aren't all that bloodthirsty anyway so its exactly the same for the dutch army as it stands.
European PoliceforceBecause when a nation's military joins the European military it has to abide to and follow European foreign policy. At times doing so could not be in a nation's best interest. It would be in EU's intrests, and you would be part of it. I.o.w. others are slaved to you to.
uk is left out. Military is military. They can be organised proparly but yes it might cost time and money.
"You'll see soldiers from certain EU memberstates doing all the heavy fighting, whilst others will sit on their hands. Just like the current situation in NATO."
Thats what happens now. But in the US, they lack this kind of problem. So its another point for instead of against.
You make a lot of sence east. Stop it. You are at the IC politics forum remember? ![]()
@fokker&just:
me and just and wfs are here for a very long time. Thats what I ment. I'm also only 25.
@big man:
everyone could have guessed from your name you would try to advocate the exact opposit of my opinions
. On a more serious note I'm intrested but you have to provide me with more info about it.(I can't read the whole book).
@BiefstukFriet:
Why not? As about the european army, they can join a qualition 2.
@Psychogenesis:
The un is very different from what a european defence institution would be.
@justinian:
it is an option though I prefer a EU-policeforce as the UN lost much of his feathers anyway. Its a far to weak organisation. Eu has far more power as an instition. Maybe in the future the EU becomes even more powerfull and national institutions disapear over time. A policeforce would surely do much good to that.
To their defence you have to admit there is a big difference between childsplay or a suicide bomber. In belgium a person who put paint on somebodies house is a vandal, not a terrorist. Also, if it is clear its not going to harm anyone people tend to call it differently. Its all vague everywhere I admit that, but not just in the US.
What matters however is what happened and maybe who did it. As long as your facts are correrct you can draw the right conclusions.
lol, but he is an oldtimer and a metalhead so I was 75% right.:p
Imperial Forum → Posts by Little Paul
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.