tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12553047.post111921419039246926..comments2024-02-14T09:53:39.365+01:00Comments on cleppe.be: Now is the timePieter Cleppehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02734540537594484016noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12553047.post-1119442148506300492005-06-22T14:09:00.000+02:002005-06-22T14:09:00.000+02:00The European Union is a bureaucratic monster, I'm ...The European Union is a bureaucratic monster, I'm very sorry. I can testify of the many complaints in the academic world against the tendancy of the European Commission bureaucrats trying to harmonize everything they can, assuming they are needed in order to create order out of chaos, but in fact just doing the opposite.<BR/><BR/>It's also undemocratic. Moreover, the whole purpose of the EU is to reduce democracy. Politicians want to get rid of the controll of those annoying citizens, that never allow them to do what they want. Therefore they want to centralise as much as they can. <BR/><BR/>The EP doesn't even have a right to initiate legislation. Well, in fact, I don't mind about that, I rather mind about the fact that the EC has. <BR/><BR/>China is a military threat, sure, and I'm more concerned with China than with the EU. The best garantuee to have a nice war with China is to build a European Army. Europe can defend itself now. 2 countries have nuclear weapons. The only purpose of a EU army will be offence, not defence. <BR/><BR/>Moreover, trade will stop China from attacking. The EU is blocking trade. 25 independant nations wouldn't be so protectionist. <BR/><BR/>The US have the most ethical standards in their policy, because there is nowhere so much opposition against government power than in the US. Cheering governments will lead them to abuse their power.Pieter Cleppehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02734540537594484016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12553047.post-1119440905645788842005-06-22T13:48:00.000+02:002005-06-22T13:48:00.000+02:00Pieter: Michael, I know your position, but you are...Pieter: <I>Michael, I know your position, but you are not aware of the big danger a European superpower poses to our liberties and even to world peace in general.</I><BR/><BR/>There we go again. I am puzzled at the number of references to the perceived "unemocratic dark bureaucratic monster" which the EU purportedly is.<BR/><BR/>I simply don't understand it. Those 742 EU MPs, haven't we <B>ELECTED</B> them???? What undemocratic??? The whoe political spectrum is present. NEVER will a USE, when it is controlled by a strong EP, act as some kind of dictatorship. How COULD an EU with a functioning Parliament ever be a danger to world peace???<BR/><BR/>Funny that you are more concerned about a potential USE being a threat to world peace than a VERY REAL emerging superpower like China. THAT is a threat!<BR/><BR/><I>If there is a European superpower, be sure of that, they won't have the same ethical standards in foreign policy the Americans have. They will be even worse.</I><BR/><BR/>I hope you are not referring to the Club Med for Jihadis, aka Gitmo. If all countries on this planet would have the same ethical standards as the USA, we should all thank God on our bare knees.<BR/><BR/>More later, have no time now.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12732720581603826464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12553047.post-1119438918767906202005-06-22T13:15:00.000+02:002005-06-22T13:15:00.000+02:00Michael, I know your position, but you are not awa...Michael, I know your position, but you are not aware of the big danger a European superpower poses to our liberties and even to world peace in general. <BR/><BR/>If there is a European superpower, be sure of that, they won't have the same ethical standards in foreign policy the Americans have. They will be even worse. <BR/><BR/>Concerning your reference to the 80ies. I have to admit that David Stockton, Budget Minister under Reagan, was against the hawks that wanted to spend and spend in the 80ies (a battle he lost), but now he changed his mind and says that Reagan was right to spend against the USSR and that Bush is right now to spend against terrorism and for democracy. http://slate.msn.com/id/2087957/<BR/><BR/>But one should even dare to question Reagan. He was a great communicator, but his words weren't in accordance with his acts. Also Reagan was big government, just as Bush. Sadly. And one should dare to ask the question if gradual liberalisation of the USSR wouldn't have been better, as in China now? The nineties were chaos for the East Block. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, you have to see government growing in proportion to world wide gdp. Then it's not all that bad. Government is in fact becoming part of the private sector. It's becoming more efficient, also in its wars, as the Iraq war was fairly clean for a war, historically spoken. <BR/><BR/>However, the Iraq war doesn't convince me. Wouldn't the benefits have been greater to have lift the embargo against Saddam? And then there wouldn't have been big costs as now.Pieter Cleppehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02734540537594484016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12553047.post-1119395161858901522005-06-22T01:06:00.000+02:002005-06-22T01:06:00.000+02:00Pieter, I have noticed before, when discussing Bus...Pieter, I have noticed before, when discussing Bush's policies, that you have no grasp whatsoever of hte sheer necessity of the current US policy in the Middle East. It is clear that in generations to come, historians will marvel at how deluded people were not to encourage the liberation of Iraq, rather than chastize it. I for myself, have been proven right by history before, with the placing of US tactical nuclear weaponry in Western Europe in the eighties. Well, as for Bush's Iraq policy, it's the same all over again.<BR/><BR/>And now I'm baffled again at how you are unable to see how NECESSARY a United States Of Europe is. How can you be so blind and ignorant of history not to see the benefits of a thorough unification, when the results of walking down the path towards a USE have hitherto proven to be so real?<BR/><BR/>I'm amazed, it's unbelievable. In a way, depressing too. I can only hope that narrowmindedness will in time yield to realism.<BR/><BR/>MichaelMichaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12732720581603826464noreply@blogger.com