Off Topic Political Debate

1) Yes the human rights of Kurds, Armenians and Greek Cypriots are EQUALLY important. I am not supporting Turkey in any way. They are a NATO member and if they wish to join the EU they have a long way to go. I have supported the rights of the Kurdish people and will continue to do so.
2) We have to negotiate to make change. If they want to be in the EU they have to change.
3) I have no doubt the machinery of the EU needs radical change.

Taking the argument further we should leave UN, FIFA, F1 etc.....

Erm Mass Genocide?
US... Native Americans
China 1 million Tibetans plus many hundreds of thousands of minority non-Han populations
Germany Jewish peoples
etc etc

 

The idea that the EU can be radically changed from within is frankly laughable. You are dealing with powerful technocrats that insist that countries vote again if they don't like the outcome.

A vote for the UK to stay in is not a vote for the status quo but something much worse down the line. They would not dare have a vote in Europe on the subject of their desired aims of a United State of Europe because they know the electorate would reject the idea.

 

No Cameron's aide lambasted Longworth then obviously pressure was applied by them on the BCC to gag him.

 

All exisiting EU Member States have to vote in favour of a new member joining. I think those who fear Turkish entry can rest easily for a while yet.

 

I thought you were against people indulging in scare stories...

 

The reality of Brexit is we DONT know what will happen if we leave...... That is more concerning than staying.... so for anyone to post scare stories about us staying is rather disingenuous (a hard word to spell!)

 

Yorkie, I am not having a go. I hugely admire the work you have done in India with the victims of Bhopal and your stance on China and Tibet. I have just found it frustrating that China has become the real bogeyman for some over the past few weeks when for me there are monsters just as bad (maybe not on the same scale), much closer to home...I think we agree more than we disagree..
Yes, I would leave FIFA and F1 - but not the UN, I actually think if used correctly, it is a force for good.

 

Not when they are unfortunately true.

This unelected bunch of fiddling Eurocrats have already stated their aim. If they try to persist with the failed Euro they have no alternative but to change the present relationship to one of monetary and political union. Although we are not part of this group it will ultimately dominate proceedings to its advantage.

 

But the scare mongering is more on what happens if we leave - which is obvious because a vote to stay in is no change, so no risk for those who vote that way and accept what the EU is and will certainly become with a rubber stamping from the British people.

 

I hav

No clutching at straws here W_Y. From the 5 Israel was created by Britain and the USA. and so there is a direct relationship there to what has happened in Palestine. Syria was a former British mandate. The invasions of Iraq created instability throughout the region - including Syria. Somalia was not one of the 4 - but, many of those from Somalia are environmental refugees in as much as their entire coastline has been poisoned from the discharge from intense container shipping, thereby removing fishing from their daily diet. Environmental refugees will become more and more, and as long as the Western World and China are producing most of the Co2 emissions then they bear a collective responsibility for this. Already 2 out of every 5 refugees Worldwide can be classified as 'environmental' ones, and this will become more due to desertification in some areas and rising sea levels in others. Britain may be a financial contributor in the middle east, but it is also a major exporter of weapons - which are the root cause of the problem.
With reference to Turkey - I appreciate that they have human rights problems (who doesn't?) but I do not think it can be expected that they take upwards of 1.83 million refugees (that's 1 to every 42 citizens in comparison to the paultry 1 in 526 in Britain) without some kind of deal being struck.
Before asking me to check up on Germany's responsibilities to ex colonies (all of them gone by 1918 in exchange for Helgoland) you might like to research a bit on Britain's past, and the collective amnesia which many British have when thinking about 'the Commonwealth`. The Concentration camps in South Africa (10% of the Boar population died in them, together with 22,000 children and 48,000 black civilians). The torture centres in Aden. The 500,000 detainees in concentration camps in Malaya - apparently Harry Roberts first learned to kill there and especially relished it when the order came through to shoot prisoners ! Maybe also the round up and torture of civilians in Cyprus between 1955 and 1959. Check up also on the first use of chemical weapons in Iraq - 1920, and, you've guessed it British. Check up also on the concentration camps in Kenya - the filling in of mass graves there. Read up on all of this and then see if you still feel you can point the finger at anyone else.

 

I caught the end of an interesting interview on the Andrew Marr show on Sunday, but was in a rush so could not see it all. Point that I thought fascinating was the role of Germany in the EU. One of the reasons for the forming of the Common Market and then the EU was to limit the rise and dominance of the larger European countries so what happened to Germany prior to WW2 could not happen again i.e. German would never again dominate the rest of Europe and in particular France. View being expressed on Sunday was that this is exactly what has happened because of the EU and the Eurozone - Germany has become a massive economic power house that is exporting far more in other EU countries than it imports and is in such a strong economic position it is also driving the political agenda. So it can override the democratic decisions of the people of Greece by economic power. Very interesting view.

 

I'm not sure the point W_Y was that these guys have human rights issues so we shouldn't deal with them... his point is that their is a hypocrisy that we should not be dealing with China because of their human rights issues when there are human right issues with all countries and we are dealing with them (one rule to suit their argument and another for when its against them).

 

DIsagree....... we can all effect change through the present structure and if we stay in any govt will further seek to change structures and to retain more autonomy as that is what people want. More influence too in than out....

 

Yes... and we should deal with all human rights issues we come across.....

 

Very admirable of you Yorkshire.

I'm of the view that we are all pawns played out by bigger powers and others who play the game. As much as I would love to save the world and hope that everyone lives happily and peacefully, I am reduced to knowing that there is going to be no change (I know if everyone made a difference a big difference can be made).

As i've gotten older this more idealistic view of life has gone and although i will help on occasions (generous to friends and family, donate to charity and occasionally give money to the homeless), i am pretty much ambivalent to trying to save the world.

 

That was my point, you can be selective in what you pick and choose as examples, but when I do you just go back into history and pick more, when do you want to stop? Of course I am aware of Britain's past, but how does they relate to the refugee crisis in the Middle East today? Also you fail to mention that Britain is the biggest contributor of aid to Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon for refugees staying in those countries, which according to all the NGO's is the best place to manage the problem - not drive them into the hands of the traffickers and criminals that the Turkish government turn a blind eye to (and the local officials taking a nice little backhander for).

...regarding Israel, it is a valid argument that Germany played the biggest role in driving the Jewish immigrants to leave Europe and head for Palestine, so perhaps it's just a population rebalance when they end up in Germany

 

Bobby

Difficult one eh......

I also agree that we are pawns in a much bigger game....

I guess we all can do our little bit..... and (try ) not condone injustices etc. I have a few causes I support and have put energy in over the years etc.

I think it is important to hold ideals as they help shape our lives, and what we do, how we treat each other etc.....

 

Breaking news.... seems to address just that.... :

What's in the EU-Turkey proposal?
The EU heads said "bold moves" were needed to tackle the crisis, and made the following proposals:

• All new irregular migrants crossing from Turkey to the Greek islands will be returned to Turkey, with the EU meeting the costs. Irregular migrants means all those outside normal transit procedures, ie without documentation. The term "illegal migration" usually refers to people smuggling
• In exchange for every returned Syrian, one Syrian from Turkey will be resettled in the EU
• Plans to ease access to the EU for Turkish citizens will be speeded up, with a view to allowing visa-free travel by June 2016
• EU payment of €3bn ($3.3bn; £2.2bn) promised in October will be speeded up, and a decision will be made on additional funding to help Turkey deal with the crisis. Turkey reportedly asked for EU aid to be increased to €6bn
• Preparations will be made for a decision on the opening of new chapters in talks on EU membership for Turkey

Although major international law issue ....

 

It took a massive effort for Cameron to achieve almost nothing, there is zero chance of stopping the mindless rush to a European superstate. The judgement on these Eurocrats decisions so far must be very worrying for the 'stay in brigade'.

 

The main reason for the foundation of the EU. was to form a counter weight to the Warsaw Pact W_Y. There was never going to be another war between western European powers precisely because all of them came under the same condition ie. American military presence. Europe woke up in 1945 to a stark reality: namely that after a millenium of Euro centred world history the main centres of decision making had shifted to Washington and Moscow - the EU. was a realization that European powers would never ever be able to dominate again on their own. It was always going to be the case that Germany would become an economic powerhouse (like West Germany was) - that was the intention of the USA. that West Germany would be a showpiece of capitalism (as against the GDR). The intention was that economic power, military power and political power should never again be concentrated in the same hands, and this has happened because Britain and France are the most powerfull military powers in the EU. Would you expect Germany to be the largest payer in to the European budget without a proportionate level of influence (which I have to say it has been very slow and reluctant in assuming) ? If you want to balance this then the best way of doing it is for Britain and France to work together within the EU.