<strong>It's interesting you should say that... Bush has done more than any other president to cut down on the number of nuclear weapons.</strong><hr></blockquote>
He's promised to cut down the number of US nuclear weapons. But you know, those aren't the ones we should be worried about. The fact that he has decided to ignore the treaty banning nuclear testing will encourage other countries, like China, to test further and expand their arsenal. We can do anything we want on our own. A treaty helps us to get others to do the same.
[quote]Which do you prefer: A president that is up front and honest about which treaties will move forward and which will fail or a president that gives political handjobs to everyone and never acts on his words?<hr></blockquote>But Bush doesn't seem to select. He just torpedoes them all. And one thing the world needs more of is handjobs. Bush just backhands everyone else. I don't think it's smart.
[quote]Clinton had 8 years to move forward with Kyoto, but it was doomed from the start and he knew it. So he sat on it and talked about its importance while doing nothing to help it along.<hr></blockquote>I think the Kyoto meeting was in 1998, so it wasn't 8 years. But the point is that Clinton was doing something by being involved in the negotiations over the treaty, rather than simply ignoring them.
[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>And a treaty would have stopped them in their tracks? You don't really believe that, do you?</strong><hr></blockquote>A tad patronizing there, spaceman. No I don't think a treaty would have stopped the ongoing anthrax attacks. But the attacks should have made us more aware of the problem, and driven us to try to prevent future similar problems in whatever way possible. Even if that meant <gasp> coming to agreements with other countries.
The EU jealous of the US CULTURAL POWER?!?! OMG Thats just too damn funny.<hr></blockquote>
Name the top 5 TV shows, movies, or songs in Europe. I bet a large number of them are American. Now I will name the top European ones in each of these categories ? sorry, there are none. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[quote]If you mean the ability of the US to influence the lifestyles (mostly in negative from what I have seen) of most populations and cultures of the world, then sure. <hr></blockquote>
You mean how you are sitting in front of an American computer, behind a monitor whose technology was developed in America, connected to the Internet that was created in America, powered by electrical grids that ultimately trace their creation to Americans. You sure are being affected negatively. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
American contributions so far outweigh any negative aspects that it is ridiculous and insulting to claim otherwise.
[quote]Romano Prodi is not a strong character for sure, but he seems to be doing good things too. Just kinda of a flat personality. He is a Professor first, then a politician. Guess that could explain some things. <hr></blockquote>
His being a professor explains his anti-Americanism? How? That does not make any sense.
[quote]I feel the EU is more geared 'getting along' rather than 'domination'. The French may feel they have to dominate... but the rest of Europe is pretty much over that. <hr></blockquote>
The EU is basically a power struggle between Germany and France, with the lesser countries like yours going along and trying not to get trampled.
[quote]The HOPE is that the EU WILL become a sort of controlling power for all members of the Union where ALL MEMBERS have a say. Its not THAT much more different idea than what the USA is today. 50 states run by a 'super' entity (Federal Gov) based in a 'neutral zone' (DC). And yet each State has much freedom. <hr></blockquote>
This is why you will never see Great Britain join your little group. While the EU officially claims not to have the goal of superceding the individual governments, it is easy to see that is what it really wants.
[quote]Maaaan... so much hate for the EU and half of you probably barely know anything about it.. let alone lived here! Europe is great! Give it a spin then bitch! Yeeesh.
(and why does this ALWAYS end up being a USA vs EU battle of somekind??? I was just voicing my concern that the USA appears to be making decisions that are leading it to isolation rather than collaboration!)<hr></blockquote>
I love how you use American urban street talk, byatch. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
We are the supreme, ultimate country. We are free and independent. Collaboration is for weak shits like Belgium. I believe that the US should do what is necessary to protect its interests and crush those that stand in the way, and I know others here feel the same way.
<strong> I believe that the US should do what is necessary to protect its interests and crush those that stand in the way, and I know others here feel the same way.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now, this is a little too far. I hope it is an emotional reaction, and nothing more.
(I apologize for having your handles mixed up in the original post)
Since Europe doesn't have the power it is in their best interest to team up and work together. I refuse to believe that Europe actually gets along together in happiness, what with politicians being assassinated, racism running rampant and a genocidal holocaust half-a-century ago.
The stated purpose of the EU is to make Europe a superpower once again.</strong><hr></blockquote>
omg... man... Groverat, I officially invite you over to stay as long as you want. The only time we don't "get along" is perhaps during the World Cup (soccer) when each nation is at eachothers throats. But there isnt any true antagonism. Sure, you hear the French complain about the Germans, the Brits complain about the Germans, the Germans complaining about the Fench, you still have towns throughought Europe that 'hate' eachother (Verona and Perugia, Milano and Torino, etc etc) becasue of facts thatt happened over 600years ago. You still have the Flemish revel in the Battle of the Golden Spurs where the Francophone forces were, for the first time, decimated and brutally killed... that happened something like 500 years ago) but then again, if you consider the strides made forward in 50 years since WW2 and the fact there is over 2000 years of history to mull over... I'd say we were doing pretty damn well. The US doesnt have these kinds of problems... it basically started out from the same basic types of people (of mainly European decent btw) that wanted to do away with the limitations of the time.
For those who don't know yet I am American and lived most of my life in NYC. I clearly remember the antagonism we had against New Jersey folk... how they were the provincial 'guidos'. We (USA) has North-South antagonism, NYC vs LA antagonism. I was in bording school for years and I clearly remember how we were pretty clearly divided into two groups: kids from southern states, and northern states. The international kids were either on their own or sort of recruited.
So, don't give me any shit that the USA doesn't have internal rivalry or problems as well. heck, if anything I would say racism is worse in the south of USA (y'all know them niice country folk from West hickville...) who still hunt down colored folk... and give outsiders a stare from death (and yes I have experienced this...).
To make a long thing short, the US, as the EU is too, is a far cry from perfection. We all have our 'ideal' worlds, and to be honest I think we would be WAY much worse off if we were all still divided and rivaling eachother.
Nonetheless, yes Groverat, one of the main reasons behind the creation of the EU is economic... and to be a great economic power there must be stability. I highly doubt, and I'll be the first to say it, that the EU will ever be more powerful than the US. I dont think that is the POINT of the EU. The point is to make the citizens living within the EU live better. If we collaborate and pool resources, you avoid waste, you have better understanding of one another.... and you dont have atrocities like WW1 and WW2 which still marr the countrysides of France and Belgium.... over 80 years later.
One step at a time man. And the trip is that much easier if we help eachother, not destroy.
Name the top 5 TV shows, movies, or songs in Europe. I bet a large number of them are American. Now I will name the top European ones in each of these categories ? sorry, there are none.
<hr></blockquote>
You ignorant kid. Sure, there is tons of US made media around here. US makes great superficial spectacular stuff that can easily entertain the masses.
European or non American movies, songs, litterature? Umm, Luc Besson (5th Element, Leon, Nikita, etc), Fellini (La Bella Vita, etc), the two brothers that made Lord of The Rings, Almadovar from Spain. U2, Spice Girls (oh joy), Kylie Minogue, Blur, Bob Marley, Monica Bellucci, Sean Connery... good lord... the list is just too damn long and I really dont have to waste on this crap.
[quote]
You mean how you are sitting in front of an American computer, behind a monitor whose technology was developed in America, connected to the Internet that was created in America, powered by electrical grids that ultimately trace their creation to Americans. You sure are being affected negatively.
American contributions so far outweigh any negative aspects that it is ridiculous and insulting to claim otherwise.
<hr></blockquote>
My GOD you better shut up before you look any more ignorant. My iBook was most likely designed by an English guy called Jonathan Ives, with a TFT screen made somewhere in Asia. The Internet was also developed in Switzerland (at CERN) as well as at DARPA. There are many internet connection/nodes in the USA as well as the rest of the world.
[quote]
His being a professor explains his anti-Americanism? How? That does not make any sense.
<hr></blockquote>
His being a professor (in economics) explains why he has to choose the strongest economy to rival. I have never seen actions or statements from Prodi to the effect that he hates the USA.
[quote]
The EU is basically a power struggle between Germany and France, with the lesser countries like yours going along and trying not to get trampled.
<hr></blockquote>
Belgium is far from being 'my' country. When people ask my friends and I where we live, I say "in the EU". My best friends are Finnish, Dutch, Italian, French, Belgian, Austrian, English, German... We get along incredibly well and we have all visited eachother's countries. WE are the future of Europe... the dinosaurs are on their way out. Its a great time to be in Europe.
[quote]
This is why you will never see Great Britain join your little group. While the EU officially claims not to have the goal of superceding the individual governments, it is easy to see that is what it really wants.
<hr></blockquote>
Umm, since when is Great Britain not part of the EU? The UK has been 'separated' from the rest of... anything really... since forever. Of course they feel a bit hesitant. But Blair is totally behind the Euro and the UKs involvement in EU affairs.
[quote]
I love how you use American urban street talk, byatch.
We are the supreme, ultimate country. We are free and independent. Collaboration is for weak shits like Belgium. I believe that the US should do what is necessary to protect its interests and crush those that stand in the way, and I know others here feel the same way.<hr></blockquote>
Because ya dumb mofo, if I can speak streetsmart its because I grew up in NYC. Get a friggen life.
<strong>A tad patronizing there, spaceman. No I don't think a treaty would have stopped the ongoing anthrax attacks...</strong><hr></blockquote>
It would have been patronizing had I not offered the speculation that you didn't really believe what you were suggesting.
[quote]<strong>... But the attacks should have made us more aware of the problem, and driven us to try to prevent future similar problems in whatever way possible. Even if that meant <gasp> coming to agreements with other countries. </strong><hr></blockquote>
And what if <gasp> those agreements didn't really address the problem? Is it so hard to imagine that someone who would use a biological weapon doesn't give a rat's a$$ about some piece of paper?
<strong>I think the Kyoto meeting was in 1998, so it wasn't 8 years. But the point is that Clinton was doing something by being involved in the negotiations over the treaty, rather than simply ignoring them.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Big deal. He pushed forward a treaty that had NO support in the Senate. It was feel good politics and nothing more.
Europe is not the fantasy happy land people here make it out to be. All of my immediate family has lived there for all of their lives and many have then emmigrated to the US. Good place to visit (not great, good) but I don't think I'll be returning anytime soon.
To make a long thing short, the US, as the EU is too, is a far cry from perfection. We all have our 'ideal' worlds, and to be honest I think we would be WAY much worse off if we were all still divided and rivaling eachother.
Nonetheless, yes Groverat, one of the main reasons behind the creation of the EU is economic... and to be a great economic power there must be stability. I highly doubt, and I'll be the first to say it, that the EU will ever be more powerful than the US. I dont think that is the POINT of the EU. The point is to make the citizens living within the EU live better. If we collaborate and pool resources, you avoid waste, you have better understanding of one another.... and you dont have atrocities like WW1 and WW2 which still marr the countrysides of France and Belgium.... over 80 years later.
One step at a time man. And the trip is that much easier if we help eachother, not destroy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good post ZO.
It's strange how the perception of EU from USA is different from the perception coming from EU.
First of all : the EU start as a economic treaty of free exchange. an another point of the treaty is the free circulation of goodness and people : that's mean that i am free to go in belgium to exercice my job and in the contrary the reverse is possible. When i was a student one friend of mine who was belgium use to study in France. I know there are english MD in the ski resort Val d'isere.
Now some states are member of the euro. Many people said euro is shit : it's not true : for the industry it's a very important thing when you export : imagine that you sell product in yens and then the yen go down : you waste many money just for financial conjoncture. For busisness man stability of money is very important. And the euro is much more stable than every former currency. As a citizen it's a pleasure to go in belgium or in germany and to pay with the same currency. Germans people who went skying in France where happy to pay in euro : trip in europe become much more simple for the money problems.
The eurocratia has reverse effects and everyone complains about this , but it brings good things too : better control of the quality of food all over europe, CE norm ...In generally i'lls said that europeans norms bring complexity but they bring also quality for all.
Europe is not in his final developpement at the different of US. The EU foreign policy is just in the beginning stage of developpement like the policy of defense. So for the moment there is no comparison possible between US and EU it's too different systems.
Concerning our history and our quarrels : europe is an old world with a two milleniums history (if we start the modern history with the romans). The more old you are , the more quarrel we have. But now we have learned to leave peaceffully together. Saying that there will be now a new war between germany and France for example is an absolute joke. EU has bring one thing to us and to the world : stability and peace. Only for this reason , EU is gold for me. And i will go further , EU is good thing for USA : europe is a peacefull aera now, USA do not have to do the policy here has in the past during the two last WW. And you know how many americans people dye during this.
So even if some of you say that EU is a bullshit i'll say that EU is a good thing for the world.
PS : EU is not perfect : but who is perfect ? What is perfection for a community of nations ? what is not perfect ? : war certainly : war destroy people and goodness, anything that prevent war is a good thing.
<strong>Europe is not the fantasy happy land people here make it out to be.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, but Europe's also not the backward communist economically depressed nightmare that American conservatives make it out to be.
On many quality of life stats, Europeans are on average better off than Americans. Sure, the US has more rich people. We're great at making rich people. And with Bush, we're going to make even more rich people. That's a good thing. But it's not the only measure of quality of life in a country.
<strong>It would have been patronizing had I not offered the speculation that you didn't really believe what you were suggesting.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm really not interested in the highly personalized, sour pissing matches that threads to which you post have seemed to degenerate into over the past few weeks.
[quote]<strong>And what if <gasp> those agreements didn't really address the problem? Is it so hard to imagine that someone who would use a biological weapon doesn't give a rat's a$$ about some piece of paper?</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's not hard to imagine, but I can also imagine lots of situations where that piece of paper might prevent terrorists from getting their hands on stuff like anthrax in the first place. My understanding is that anthrax is not like a pipe-bomb that anyone can make in their garage. It requires the type of high-tech labs that govts fund. I even understand why we don't support the land mines treaty; I think there are probably ways to work within it, but I understand it. But this one doesn't make sense. Why do we want to continue producing this stuff, when it was probably our own govt anthrax that was being used against us?
The US has the highest standard of living in the world. Period. The largest group of people in the nation are middle class Americans....and they live better than many middle class europeans. This is because we aren't totally sapped by taxation and liberal/socialist programs yet....though we're getting there.
Now on Bush: Anyone that could argue against a missle defense system after something like 9/11 has got to be kidding himself. There are nations out there that would launch a nuke at us right NOW if they could....and it is only a matter of time until they can. The ABM treaty would prevent us from DEVELOPING (yes, I know it isn't ready yet) a missle defense system. And, it was crafted in an era when the main threat to the US was the Soviet Union. It is outmoded, obsolete if you will.
Kyoto has many provisions which would cause harm to US interests, from what I understand.
I am with the President on both of these issues. And saying that "he is pulling out of treaties [left and right]" is insane. As if the administration just says "**** it!....we're gone". .....give me a break.
<strong>With the number of treaties and international agreements that Bush has either withdrawn from or not signed, it appears to be a pattern. It doesn't seem like he evaluates them on a case-by-case basis; he's just against the principle of international agreements. More evidence of this is that he tends not to propose alternatives to the treaties he pulls us out from. It's not that he doesn't like the specifics, and proposes changes to those specifics - he just doesn't like international cooperation.
What's the down side? It's that if we say "screw you" to other countries, they're going to be more inclined to say "screw you" right back. Right now we need cooperation because of the war against terrorism. And there are plenty of other issues that need international cooperation, like global warming, nuclear non-proliferation, trade, and on and on. We withdrew from a biological weapons treaty at the same time we were being attacked with anthrax. WTF?
Of course we don't like global warming, biological weapons, nuclear proliferation, etc. So why don't we work within the frameworks and try to make these international agreements more like we want them?
Pulling out of all these international agreements may be red meat for the right-wingers in the short term, but long term, they weaken our credibility and our ability to achieve cooperation when we want it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is what I was looking for.......this is the biggest joke of a post I have seen in awhile. there are too many ridiculous parts to quote individual sections. the first part is the best, though. What unsubstantiated crap.
Hey Swiss people : what is your level of life : is it higher or lesser than the US one ?
Warning : if is ask this question it is because i have not the answer. I just think that swiss people have a high level of life. But life in swiss is very expansive too.
The real question is how do you quantify a better standard of living? Making more money? That's easy to measure and compare. But does money make a better standard of living? Can you measure someones happiness? Can you compare it to someone elses?
<strong>The US has the highest standard of living in the world. Period. The largest group of people in the nation are middle class Americans....and they live better than many middle class europeans. This is because we aren't totally sapped by taxation and liberal/socialist programs yet....though we're getting there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think it's wrong to say that we have a better system in some uni-dimensional sense, as if there's only one way to measure a country. IMO, we are better for getting rich, but Europe has higher ratings in many other quality-of-life types of measures. Yes, that's simplistic, but not quite as simplistic as "we are better, period."
Health care is one good example that's pretty representative of other quality-of-life issues, and one that I know a little about. The US excels at certain things, like hi-tech treatments, clean and private hospital conditions, not waiting, and other things. Everyone always says that foreign heads-of-state come to the US for treatment.
That's true. But the other side is that we don't compare very well at all in many other health measures - we have the costliest system, huge number of uninsured, and poor overall basic health stats like life expectancy and infant mortality.
Although Europe tends to have more social welfare policies, it's not true that they have wrecked their economies because of it. They have fewer rich, for sure. But it's not as if all of Europe is in economic depression or something.
<strong>The real question is how do you quantify a better standard of living? Making more money? That's easy to measure and compare. But does money make a better standard of living? Can you measure someones happiness? Can you compare it to someone elses?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agree at 100 %. I can't even say if i have a better living standart compared to my friends.
Health care is one good example that's pretty representative of other quality-of-life issues, and one that I know a little about. The US excels at certain things, like hi-tech treatments, clean and private hospital conditions, not waiting, and other things. Everyone always says that foreign heads-of-state come to the US for treatment.
.</strong><hr></blockquote>
France is according to OMS (world organisation of health in geneva : excuse me for the translation) first for the health. Even if France is first , we have problems with healthcare. Basically because that medecine recquieres more and more high tech, that people want to have more and more quality of life , that we live older (and old people cost more for health than the young ones) medecine is costing more and more. Worse the cost of medecine is increasing faster than the increase of our economy.
Professional of health are becoming upset to support more and more the prize of health.Our fees have been frozen by the last 10 years of governement and to get the same amount of money we are oblige to work more and more. A general practicionner in France is working an average 58 hours per week. Comparing to the official 35 hours it's a joke. Being a MD is no more money valuable in France, you will earn more money in Great Britain even if this system is not very good. (7 % of the national income is using for health , comparing to 12 % in France and 13 % in US).
If the situation will go on like that , there will be less and less doctors in France (it's the case in the campaign where people have a very low life quality : too much work night and day).
So you can be ranked first and have many problems to solve.
[quote]So, don't give me any shit that the USA doesn't have internal rivalry or problems as well.<hr></blockquote>
I didn't say that.
Can't refute the things I say so you have to make shit up for me?
Nice work.
All I said was that Europeans hate each other and kill each other like it's nothing. You chase your princesses down in cars and shoot unpopular politicans and we'll watch lots of TV and get fat, mmk?
[quote]heck, if anything I would say racism is worse in the south of USA (y'all know them niice country folk from West hickville...) who still hunt down colored folk... and give outsiders a stare from death (and yes I have experienced this...).<hr></blockquote>
You're full of shit. I was born and raised in the South and you're working from idiotic stereotypes. "Hunt down colored folk"... why don't you go shoot up a German school or assassinate a politician, peace boy.
[quote]and to be honest I think we would be WAY much worse off if we were all still divided and rivaling eachother.<hr></blockquote>
We all still are rivaling each other and that will never stop, ever. Pass all the feel-good happy shit you want now, you have that luxury, but when the shit hits the fan you people will hate each other like it's old hat.
Europeans preaching... that's freakin' hilarious.
"I know we just got through with a war that cost 50+ million lives, but it's all better now. As a matter of fact, you (the U.S.) should allow us to dictate your domestic policy and your citizens should be tried in our courts."
[quote]Nonetheless, yes Groverat, one of the main reasons behind the creation of the EU is economic... and to be a great economic power there must be stability.<hr></blockquote>
So basically what you were saying is that I was right when I said the purpose of the EU is to gain equity with the U.S.?
Thanks for confirming that.
[quote]I highly doubt, and I'll be the first to say it, that the EU will ever be more powerful than the US.<hr></blockquote>
Doesn't mean they won't try, of course. And that's fine, unite and grow, that's great. Just keep your pompous ass out of our domestic affairs and you guys can circle jerk until the cows come home.
[quote]One step at a time man. And the trip is that much easier if we help eachother, not destroy.<hr></blockquote>
So now the United States saying, "You know what... I think that subjecting our citizens to foreign trials isn't something we like" is "destroy"ing everything?
--
The EU is fine. You guys get your Euro and get all cozy and happy, pass all manner of treaties that make you rich and groovy. BUT keep it to yourselves, you aren't the world government, by law or de facto.
Once you are as powerful as the U.S. you can throw your weight around (and Europe is notorious for that), but until then know your place.
Comments
<strong>It's interesting you should say that... Bush has done more than any other president to cut down on the number of nuclear weapons.</strong><hr></blockquote>
He's promised to cut down the number of US nuclear weapons. But you know, those aren't the ones we should be worried about. The fact that he has decided to ignore the treaty banning nuclear testing will encourage other countries, like China, to test further and expand their arsenal. We can do anything we want on our own. A treaty helps us to get others to do the same.
[quote]Which do you prefer: A president that is up front and honest about which treaties will move forward and which will fail or a president that gives political handjobs to everyone and never acts on his words?<hr></blockquote>But Bush doesn't seem to select. He just torpedoes them all. And one thing the world needs more of is handjobs. Bush just backhands everyone else. I don't think it's smart.
[quote]Clinton had 8 years to move forward with Kyoto, but it was doomed from the start and he knew it. So he sat on it and talked about its importance while doing nothing to help it along.<hr></blockquote>I think the Kyoto meeting was in 1998, so it wasn't 8 years. But the point is that Clinton was doing something by being involved in the negotiations over the treaty, rather than simply ignoring them.
[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>And a treaty would have stopped them in their tracks? You don't really believe that, do you?</strong><hr></blockquote>A tad patronizing there, spaceman. No I don't think a treaty would have stopped the ongoing anthrax attacks. But the attacks should have made us more aware of the problem, and driven us to try to prevent future similar problems in whatever way possible. Even if that meant <gasp> coming to agreements with other countries.
The EU jealous of the US CULTURAL POWER?!?! OMG Thats just too damn funny.<hr></blockquote>
Name the top 5 TV shows, movies, or songs in Europe. I bet a large number of them are American. Now I will name the top European ones in each of these categories ? sorry, there are none. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[quote]If you mean the ability of the US to influence the lifestyles (mostly in negative from what I have seen) of most populations and cultures of the world, then sure. <hr></blockquote>
You mean how you are sitting in front of an American computer, behind a monitor whose technology was developed in America, connected to the Internet that was created in America, powered by electrical grids that ultimately trace their creation to Americans. You sure are being affected negatively. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
American contributions so far outweigh any negative aspects that it is ridiculous and insulting to claim otherwise.
[quote]Romano Prodi is not a strong character for sure, but he seems to be doing good things too. Just kinda of a flat personality. He is a Professor first, then a politician. Guess that could explain some things. <hr></blockquote>
His being a professor explains his anti-Americanism? How? That does not make any sense.
[quote]I feel the EU is more geared 'getting along' rather than 'domination'. The French may feel they have to dominate... but the rest of Europe is pretty much over that. <hr></blockquote>
The EU is basically a power struggle between Germany and France, with the lesser countries like yours going along and trying not to get trampled.
[quote]The HOPE is that the EU WILL become a sort of controlling power for all members of the Union where ALL MEMBERS have a say. Its not THAT much more different idea than what the USA is today. 50 states run by a 'super' entity (Federal Gov) based in a 'neutral zone' (DC). And yet each State has much freedom. <hr></blockquote>
This is why you will never see Great Britain join your little group. While the EU officially claims not to have the goal of superceding the individual governments, it is easy to see that is what it really wants.
[quote]Maaaan... so much hate for the EU and half of you probably barely know anything about it.. let alone lived here! Europe is great! Give it a spin then bitch! Yeeesh.
(and why does this ALWAYS end up being a USA vs EU battle of somekind??? I was just voicing my concern that the USA appears to be making decisions that are leading it to isolation rather than collaboration!)<hr></blockquote>
I love how you use American urban street talk, byatch. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
We are the supreme, ultimate country. We are free and independent. Collaboration is for weak shits like Belgium. I believe that the US should do what is necessary to protect its interests and crush those that stand in the way, and I know others here feel the same way.
[ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: FotNS ]</p>
<strong> I believe that the US should do what is necessary to protect its interests and crush those that stand in the way, and I know others here feel the same way.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now, this is a little too far. I hope it is an emotional reaction, and nothing more.
(I apologize for having your handles mixed up in the original post)
[ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: jakkorz ]</p>
<strong>ZO:
ALL NATIONS act in selfishness.
Since Europe doesn't have the power it is in their best interest to team up and work together. I refuse to believe that Europe actually gets along together in happiness, what with politicians being assassinated, racism running rampant and a genocidal holocaust half-a-century ago.
The stated purpose of the EU is to make Europe a superpower once again.</strong><hr></blockquote>
omg... man... Groverat, I officially invite you over to stay as long as you want. The only time we don't "get along" is perhaps during the World Cup (soccer) when each nation is at eachothers throats. But there isnt any true antagonism. Sure, you hear the French complain about the Germans, the Brits complain about the Germans, the Germans complaining about the Fench, you still have towns throughought Europe that 'hate' eachother (Verona and Perugia, Milano and Torino, etc etc) becasue of facts thatt happened over 600years ago. You still have the Flemish revel in the Battle of the Golden Spurs where the Francophone forces were, for the first time, decimated and brutally killed... that happened something like 500 years ago) but then again, if you consider the strides made forward in 50 years since WW2 and the fact there is over 2000 years of history to mull over... I'd say we were doing pretty damn well. The US doesnt have these kinds of problems... it basically started out from the same basic types of people (of mainly European decent btw) that wanted to do away with the limitations of the time.
For those who don't know yet I am American and lived most of my life in NYC. I clearly remember the antagonism we had against New Jersey folk... how they were the provincial 'guidos'. We (USA) has North-South antagonism, NYC vs LA antagonism. I was in bording school for years and I clearly remember how we were pretty clearly divided into two groups: kids from southern states, and northern states. The international kids were either on their own or sort of recruited.
So, don't give me any shit that the USA doesn't have internal rivalry or problems as well. heck, if anything I would say racism is worse in the south of USA (y'all know them niice country folk from West hickville...) who still hunt down colored folk... and give outsiders a stare from death (and yes I have experienced this...).
To make a long thing short, the US, as the EU is too, is a far cry from perfection. We all have our 'ideal' worlds, and to be honest I think we would be WAY much worse off if we were all still divided and rivaling eachother.
Nonetheless, yes Groverat, one of the main reasons behind the creation of the EU is economic... and to be a great economic power there must be stability. I highly doubt, and I'll be the first to say it, that the EU will ever be more powerful than the US. I dont think that is the POINT of the EU. The point is to make the citizens living within the EU live better. If we collaborate and pool resources, you avoid waste, you have better understanding of one another.... and you dont have atrocities like WW1 and WW2 which still marr the countrysides of France and Belgium.... over 80 years later.
One step at a time man. And the trip is that much easier if we help eachother, not destroy.
Name the top 5 TV shows, movies, or songs in Europe. I bet a large number of them are American. Now I will name the top European ones in each of these categories ? sorry, there are none.
<hr></blockquote>
You ignorant kid. Sure, there is tons of US made media around here. US makes great superficial spectacular stuff that can easily entertain the masses.
European or non American movies, songs, litterature? Umm, Luc Besson (5th Element, Leon, Nikita, etc), Fellini (La Bella Vita, etc), the two brothers that made Lord of The Rings, Almadovar from Spain. U2, Spice Girls (oh joy), Kylie Minogue, Blur, Bob Marley, Monica Bellucci, Sean Connery... good lord... the list is just too damn long and I really dont have to waste on this crap.
[quote]
You mean how you are sitting in front of an American computer, behind a monitor whose technology was developed in America, connected to the Internet that was created in America, powered by electrical grids that ultimately trace their creation to Americans. You sure are being affected negatively.
American contributions so far outweigh any negative aspects that it is ridiculous and insulting to claim otherwise.
<hr></blockquote>
My GOD you better shut up before you look any more ignorant. My iBook was most likely designed by an English guy called Jonathan Ives, with a TFT screen made somewhere in Asia. The Internet was also developed in Switzerland (at CERN) as well as at DARPA. There are many internet connection/nodes in the USA as well as the rest of the world.
[quote]
His being a professor explains his anti-Americanism? How? That does not make any sense.
<hr></blockquote>
His being a professor (in economics) explains why he has to choose the strongest economy to rival. I have never seen actions or statements from Prodi to the effect that he hates the USA.
[quote]
The EU is basically a power struggle between Germany and France, with the lesser countries like yours going along and trying not to get trampled.
<hr></blockquote>
Belgium is far from being 'my' country. When people ask my friends and I where we live, I say "in the EU". My best friends are Finnish, Dutch, Italian, French, Belgian, Austrian, English, German... We get along incredibly well and we have all visited eachother's countries. WE are the future of Europe... the dinosaurs are on their way out. Its a great time to be in Europe.
[quote]
This is why you will never see Great Britain join your little group. While the EU officially claims not to have the goal of superceding the individual governments, it is easy to see that is what it really wants.
<hr></blockquote>
Umm, since when is Great Britain not part of the EU? The UK has been 'separated' from the rest of... anything really... since forever. Of course they feel a bit hesitant. But Blair is totally behind the Euro and the UKs involvement in EU affairs.
[quote]
I love how you use American urban street talk, byatch.
We are the supreme, ultimate country. We are free and independent. Collaboration is for weak shits like Belgium. I believe that the US should do what is necessary to protect its interests and crush those that stand in the way, and I know others here feel the same way.<hr></blockquote>
Because ya dumb mofo, if I can speak streetsmart its because I grew up in NYC. Get a friggen life.
[ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: ZO ]</p>
<strong>A tad patronizing there, spaceman. No I don't think a treaty would have stopped the ongoing anthrax attacks...</strong><hr></blockquote>
It would have been patronizing had I not offered the speculation that you didn't really believe what you were suggesting.
[quote]<strong>... But the attacks should have made us more aware of the problem, and driven us to try to prevent future similar problems in whatever way possible. Even if that meant <gasp> coming to agreements with other countries. </strong><hr></blockquote>
And what if <gasp> those agreements didn't really address the problem? Is it so hard to imagine that someone who would use a biological weapon doesn't give a rat's a$$ about some piece of paper?
<strong>I think the Kyoto meeting was in 1998, so it wasn't 8 years. But the point is that Clinton was doing something by being involved in the negotiations over the treaty, rather than simply ignoring them.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Big deal. He pushed forward a treaty that had NO support in the Senate. It was feel good politics and nothing more.
<strong>
To make a long thing short, the US, as the EU is too, is a far cry from perfection. We all have our 'ideal' worlds, and to be honest I think we would be WAY much worse off if we were all still divided and rivaling eachother.
Nonetheless, yes Groverat, one of the main reasons behind the creation of the EU is economic... and to be a great economic power there must be stability. I highly doubt, and I'll be the first to say it, that the EU will ever be more powerful than the US. I dont think that is the POINT of the EU. The point is to make the citizens living within the EU live better. If we collaborate and pool resources, you avoid waste, you have better understanding of one another.... and you dont have atrocities like WW1 and WW2 which still marr the countrysides of France and Belgium.... over 80 years later.
One step at a time man. And the trip is that much easier if we help eachother, not destroy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good post ZO.
It's strange how the perception of EU from USA is different from the perception coming from EU.
First of all : the EU start as a economic treaty of free exchange. an another point of the treaty is the free circulation of goodness and people : that's mean that i am free to go in belgium to exercice my job and in the contrary the reverse is possible. When i was a student one friend of mine who was belgium use to study in France. I know there are english MD in the ski resort Val d'isere.
Now some states are member of the euro. Many people said euro is shit : it's not true : for the industry it's a very important thing when you export : imagine that you sell product in yens and then the yen go down : you waste many money just for financial conjoncture. For busisness man stability of money is very important. And the euro is much more stable than every former currency. As a citizen it's a pleasure to go in belgium or in germany and to pay with the same currency. Germans people who went skying in France where happy to pay in euro : trip in europe become much more simple for the money problems.
The eurocratia has reverse effects and everyone complains about this , but it brings good things too : better control of the quality of food all over europe, CE norm ...In generally i'lls said that europeans norms bring complexity but they bring also quality for all.
Europe is not in his final developpement at the different of US. The EU foreign policy is just in the beginning stage of developpement like the policy of defense. So for the moment there is no comparison possible between US and EU it's too different systems.
Concerning our history and our quarrels : europe is an old world with a two milleniums history (if we start the modern history with the romans). The more old you are , the more quarrel we have. But now we have learned to leave peaceffully together. Saying that there will be now a new war between germany and France for example is an absolute joke. EU has bring one thing to us and to the world : stability and peace. Only for this reason , EU is gold for me. And i will go further , EU is good thing for USA : europe is a peacefull aera now, USA do not have to do the policy here has in the past during the two last WW. And you know how many americans people dye during this.
So even if some of you say that EU is a bullshit i'll say that EU is a good thing for the world.
PS : EU is not perfect : but who is perfect ? What is perfection for a community of nations ? what is not perfect ? : war certainly : war destroy people and goodness, anything that prevent war is a good thing.
<strong>Europe is not the fantasy happy land people here make it out to be.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, but Europe's also not the backward communist economically depressed nightmare that American conservatives make it out to be.
On many quality of life stats, Europeans are on average better off than Americans. Sure, the US has more rich people. We're great at making rich people. And with Bush, we're going to make even more rich people. That's a good thing. But it's not the only measure of quality of life in a country.
<strong>It would have been patronizing had I not offered the speculation that you didn't really believe what you were suggesting.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm really not interested in the highly personalized, sour pissing matches that threads to which you post have seemed to degenerate into over the past few weeks.
[quote]<strong>And what if <gasp> those agreements didn't really address the problem? Is it so hard to imagine that someone who would use a biological weapon doesn't give a rat's a$$ about some piece of paper?</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's not hard to imagine, but I can also imagine lots of situations where that piece of paper might prevent terrorists from getting their hands on stuff like anthrax in the first place. My understanding is that anthrax is not like a pipe-bomb that anyone can make in their garage. It requires the type of high-tech labs that govts fund. I even understand why we don't support the land mines treaty; I think there are probably ways to work within it, but I understand it. But this one doesn't make sense. Why do we want to continue producing this stuff, when it was probably our own govt anthrax that was being used against us?
The US has the highest standard of living in the world. Period. The largest group of people in the nation are middle class Americans....and they live better than many middle class europeans. This is because we aren't totally sapped by taxation and liberal/socialist programs yet....though we're getting there.
Now on Bush: Anyone that could argue against a missle defense system after something like 9/11 has got to be kidding himself. There are nations out there that would launch a nuke at us right NOW if they could....and it is only a matter of time until they can. The ABM treaty would prevent us from DEVELOPING (yes, I know it isn't ready yet) a missle defense system. And, it was crafted in an era when the main threat to the US was the Soviet Union. It is outmoded, obsolete if you will.
Kyoto has many provisions which would cause harm to US interests, from what I understand.
I am with the President on both of these issues. And saying that "he is pulling out of treaties [left and right]" is insane. As if the administration just says "**** it!....we're gone". .....give me a break.
[ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
<strong>With the number of treaties and international agreements that Bush has either withdrawn from or not signed, it appears to be a pattern. It doesn't seem like he evaluates them on a case-by-case basis; he's just against the principle of international agreements. More evidence of this is that he tends not to propose alternatives to the treaties he pulls us out from. It's not that he doesn't like the specifics, and proposes changes to those specifics - he just doesn't like international cooperation.
What's the down side? It's that if we say "screw you" to other countries, they're going to be more inclined to say "screw you" right back. Right now we need cooperation because of the war against terrorism. And there are plenty of other issues that need international cooperation, like global warming, nuclear non-proliferation, trade, and on and on. We withdrew from a biological weapons treaty at the same time we were being attacked with anthrax. WTF?
Of course we don't like global warming, biological weapons, nuclear proliferation, etc. So why don't we work within the frameworks and try to make these international agreements more like we want them?
Pulling out of all these international agreements may be red meat for the right-wingers in the short term, but long term, they weaken our credibility and our ability to achieve cooperation when we want it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is what I was looking for.......this is the biggest joke of a post I have seen in awhile. there are too many ridiculous parts to quote individual sections. the first part is the best, though. What unsubstantiated crap.
Warning : if is ask this question it is because i have not the answer. I just think that swiss people have a high level of life. But life in swiss is very expansive too.
<strong>The US has the highest standard of living in the world. Period. The largest group of people in the nation are middle class Americans....and they live better than many middle class europeans. This is because we aren't totally sapped by taxation and liberal/socialist programs yet....though we're getting there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think it's wrong to say that we have a better system in some uni-dimensional sense, as if there's only one way to measure a country. IMO, we are better for getting rich, but Europe has higher ratings in many other quality-of-life types of measures. Yes, that's simplistic, but not quite as simplistic as "we are better, period."
Health care is one good example that's pretty representative of other quality-of-life issues, and one that I know a little about. The US excels at certain things, like hi-tech treatments, clean and private hospital conditions, not waiting, and other things. Everyone always says that foreign heads-of-state come to the US for treatment.
That's true. But the other side is that we don't compare very well at all in many other health measures - we have the costliest system, huge number of uninsured, and poor overall basic health stats like life expectancy and infant mortality.
Although Europe tends to have more social welfare policies, it's not true that they have wrecked their economies because of it. They have fewer rich, for sure. But it's not as if all of Europe is in economic depression or something.
<strong>The real question is how do you quantify a better standard of living? Making more money? That's easy to measure and compare. But does money make a better standard of living? Can you measure someones happiness? Can you compare it to someone elses?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agree at 100 %. I can't even say if i have a better living standart compared to my friends.
<strong>
Health care is one good example that's pretty representative of other quality-of-life issues, and one that I know a little about. The US excels at certain things, like hi-tech treatments, clean and private hospital conditions, not waiting, and other things. Everyone always says that foreign heads-of-state come to the US for treatment.
.</strong><hr></blockquote>
France is according to OMS (world organisation of health in geneva : excuse me for the translation) first for the health. Even if France is first , we have problems with healthcare. Basically because that medecine recquieres more and more high tech, that people want to have more and more quality of life , that we live older (and old people cost more for health than the young ones) medecine is costing more and more. Worse the cost of medecine is increasing faster than the increase of our economy.
Professional of health are becoming upset to support more and more the prize of health.Our fees have been frozen by the last 10 years of governement and to get the same amount of money we are oblige to work more and more. A general practicionner in France is working an average 58 hours per week. Comparing to the official 35 hours it's a joke. Being a MD is no more money valuable in France, you will earn more money in Great Britain even if this system is not very good. (7 % of the national income is using for health , comparing to 12 % in France and 13 % in US).
If the situation will go on like that , there will be less and less doctors in France (it's the case in the campaign where people have a very low life quality : too much work night and day).
So you can be ranked first and have many problems to solve.
I didn't say that.
Can't refute the things I say so you have to make shit up for me?
Nice work.
All I said was that Europeans hate each other and kill each other like it's nothing. You chase your princesses down in cars and shoot unpopular politicans and we'll watch lots of TV and get fat, mmk?
[quote]heck, if anything I would say racism is worse in the south of USA (y'all know them niice country folk from West hickville...) who still hunt down colored folk... and give outsiders a stare from death (and yes I have experienced this...).<hr></blockquote>
You're full of shit. I was born and raised in the South and you're working from idiotic stereotypes. "Hunt down colored folk"... why don't you go shoot up a German school or assassinate a politician, peace boy.
[quote]and to be honest I think we would be WAY much worse off if we were all still divided and rivaling eachother.<hr></blockquote>
We all still are rivaling each other and that will never stop, ever. Pass all the feel-good happy shit you want now, you have that luxury, but when the shit hits the fan you people will hate each other like it's old hat.
Europeans preaching... that's freakin' hilarious.
"I know we just got through with a war that cost 50+ million lives, but it's all better now. As a matter of fact, you (the U.S.) should allow us to dictate your domestic policy and your citizens should be tried in our courts."
[quote]Nonetheless, yes Groverat, one of the main reasons behind the creation of the EU is economic... and to be a great economic power there must be stability.<hr></blockquote>
So basically what you were saying is that I was right when I said the purpose of the EU is to gain equity with the U.S.?
Thanks for confirming that.
[quote]I highly doubt, and I'll be the first to say it, that the EU will ever be more powerful than the US.<hr></blockquote>
Doesn't mean they won't try, of course. And that's fine, unite and grow, that's great. Just keep your pompous ass out of our domestic affairs and you guys can circle jerk until the cows come home.
[quote]One step at a time man. And the trip is that much easier if we help eachother, not destroy.<hr></blockquote>
So now the United States saying, "You know what... I think that subjecting our citizens to foreign trials isn't something we like" is "destroy"ing everything?
--
The EU is fine. You guys get your Euro and get all cozy and happy, pass all manner of treaties that make you rich and groovy. BUT keep it to yourselves, you aren't the world government, by law or de facto.
Once you are as powerful as the U.S. you can throw your weight around (and Europe is notorious for that), but until then know your place.