I know - historical discussions here

I've been wondering about this...

Question: Considering the past history and reasons for the formation of the UN, does the creation and strengthening of the EU (and perhaps a future EU Defence Force) make the old UN structure obsolete - and NATO with it? If no, then how is the EU represented in the old UN body and how does an EUDF co-exist with NATO?

Gunnie

I think the UN was doomed since the mid 1950's. I can't see too many examples after that when they were very effective at doing much of anything. Having Gaddafi as the chair of the United Nations Commitee on Human Rights was pretty much the last nail in the coffin for me.
Since NATO was tasked to be a foil for the Warsaw Pact, which no longer exists, I think NATO's days are numbered as well. As far as the EUDF is concerned I see this as a political counter to the United States military. Is anyone standing ready to invade the EU?

Just a couple of early morning thoughts...

Shaun

/puts on his asbestos drawers...

i agree with your points on the UN and NATO,
however, the EU is not a unified or even friendly group of nations.

there is much animosity (is that spelled right) between the nations that go to make up the EU.

i believe i speak for the majority of Britons when i say we as a nation have a deep mistrust for the EU, a few countries in particular that i wont mention.

if given the choice we would almost definately vote to pull out of it.

the majority of us feel very passionatly that our government should not be surrendering our sovereignty and power to the most corrupt organisation on the planet.

i dont know if much of it is publisised over your side of the pond, but there is enormous hostility towards the european single currancy. and i am certain it will never be voted in by the british public.

i have made this point many times before, but it seems like the political rift between the US and europe is being widened, with us being stuck in the middle.
our 'special relationship' with America is favoured over europe, but mr blair doesnt seem to think so

cheers

joe

I think the problem with the EU came when the old Common Market as it was called turned towards intigrating the countries politically. Historically Britons have been tribal and never trusted the other european countries [for most of our history we have been at war with them] and the fact that the countries making up Britain seem to want less government from London and more autonomy should give the politicians a clue to the general feelings of the people regarding European intigration.
Independence for Yorkshire!

hehe, ill move over the border,
after all its only 10 miles, and my family are yorkshire born and bread!

although u know what they say about yorkshire men:

yorkshire born,
yorkshire bread,
strong int arm,
think int ed!

hehe

cheers

joe

Yes greatbrit - it is mentioned over here - but not in headline news. I distrust our media machine over here in America and often watch BBC America and Japanese news to get a different angle and viewpoint. Invariably, I see and hear things that are "glossed" over here in the States.

I asked about the EU because I've been trying to learn and understand the negative sentiments against President G.W. Bush from a European perspective. I have no use for idol pratting that goes on in chat rooms - so I try to listen to what journalists say and read what they write.

It seems to me that his "political persona" rubs Europeans the wrong way - kinda like Prime Minister Thatcher did when she was in office. I find the corollary interesting and wonder if there is a "personality" connection. He is very much the type of politician that makes up his mind and doesn't give a rat's butt what others think - even in his own party. I think that scares a lot of people - but for differing reasons...

I do catch on to some mighty powerful anti-EU sentiment in the UK - but elsewhere too. It gives me the impression that other nations aren't comfortable with the leadership and aims of the Franco-German union. I even read that the Germans as a group aren't too pleased economically with the Euro/German Mark conversion and how their currency seems to have been undervalued by some 50%. If true - that's a big bite in the paycheck - how can anyone pay their bills?

I also watch because I consider both Canada and the UK our brothers - in a literal sense - and I'm genuinely concerned about how our brothers "feel" about us across the pond. Canada's leadership is scary (to me) - heck we just got used to William Shatner and Shania Twain! I like watching BBC News because they don't seem to pull the punches - good and bad - and the perspective causes you to think. Here in the US, you just get the "bubblehead" newsspeak and cuties feeding you the news during the primetime hours. I'd almost call it "BubbleGum News"...

Gunnie

yes i agree about the american media, not saying ours is great but yours is laughable!

i also agree with the point about the US, canada and britain, after all we 3 nations are probably the most alike, culturally, in the world. after all we created both of the other two! (joking)

also dont mention that bloody name again please! you know who i mean

cheers

joe

Oh I can't resist this one....

First things first... All this talk of a 'European Army' seems to have caused a bit of a stir in in the U.S. media. The real debate within Europe is not defence policy, but rather a E.U. constitution. Certainly, defence is a key element of the 'Constitution', however the real debate lies within the ceding of national sovereignty to Brussels. It is also useful to be aware of a dramatic re-alignment which is taking place within the E.U.. On one side are Rumsfield's 'Old-Europe', France and Germany along with one or two minor nations such as Belgium. The real 'Bloc', which is developing is led by Britain, Spain and counts on the support of many of the emerging economies of Eastern Europe (Poland, Czech Republic etc.). This group have a very pro-american foreign policy, most radically in Spain, where anti-american 'chic' is de rigeur amongst the chattering classes... More of that in a moment..

The EUDF is little-more than a hollow shell, driven by the same dogma that has led much of European (leftist) politics over the last 3 decades, it offers little which is new and serves as yet one more smokescreen to cover the failed (command-economies) of France and Germany... Spain is a more interesting case study. Under the socialists, very much within the orbit of the euro-socialists, since Aznar took over, a new (some would say the first) coherent foreign policy has been developed, very much pro-american and more in line with Blair in Britain. Whether it is a coincidence or not, the Spanish economy is the fastest growing in Europe, Spanish unpopularity with the war in Iraq, has only served to strengthen the current (conservative) government in the opinion polls and everything suggests, the socialists will get wiped-out (again) in the next general elections.... Politically, participation in the war against terrorism has been a positive asset....Jim

Hmmm...

I'm getting a clearer picture. If the EU survives, say for another 10 years, what would it look like geopolitically? I think the average American, who watches their local and national evening news, is still a bit mystified on what the "EU" is.

The "Old Europe" tag was a bit of a shocker when it was uttered, but we had the "Old Japan" tag tossed around in the mid-80's, so it didn't garner a lot of uproar here when "Rummy" said it. How does that come across in Europe, though?

Gunnie

Gunnie, what I think you might not realize is that 95% of the people in the States get their "/news" from the big three networks. Go to the mall and ask the first 20 people that you run into what a "Euro" is. I am fairly certain you know how many of them will actually know. Most people I know are generally clueless, don't vote (thank God) and would never move or think about current events if a major crisis wasn't staring them in the face. Sad but true, from where I'm sittin...

Trick questions to ask the folks at the local food court:

Who won last years Super Bowl?
Who is the PM of Great Britain?

Shaun

It seems to me pretty obvious what many of the EU founders want to accomplish. No trade barriers. Single currency. Single voice (government). All these things equal a nation to me. A nation of nations. Seems rather obvious that one of the parts of this development would be a single army.

I am not really pro or con the idea of the EU. There would be obvious benefits to such a united European nation, there would be certainly some loss of national pride and identity in the process. Just ask the Texans. They are still sore they are not an independant nation.

Jim

Not all Texans...just the free staters who think they can do whatever they want.because the laws don't apply to them. They are part of the same group that lives in little communites in Montana .

the idea of a single european nation is rediculous at best!

the european nations even the major ones, are so culturally, politically and socially different it would be impossible to merge them into one.

one thing that a lot of people seem to forget is language, within the EU there are dozens of different languages, how can one country be operated like that?

if the leadership of a country that ruled the world for over a hundred years (not saying thats ok) want to surrender sovereignty to another country then im emigrating.

if it comes to that id rather britain became another state of america. at least then we might have a government with some back bone!

im mad now!

Here I go again, God I love this thread :-)

Gunnie, I know what you are trying to say with your comments about the U.S. media, however. I would disagree with you on one or two points... The BBC is frankly not what it once was. Nowadays, it is also following its own agenda, I honestly don't think it can be considered the fair and objective arbiter it once was. Many times in the last few months it has let its 'Editorial' position shine through, rather than its prime function, NEWS.. I am lucky. in the sense, that through a very complete satellite/digital package I have access to most of the major news outlets. The worst, by a long shot, is CNN, its editorial content is subject, to becoming more and more anti-american and seems more concerned with battling Al-Jazeera for ratings. Fox News, which is frequently very silly but also funny, is a channel which I watch a lot, mainly for its analysis of domestic issues (albeit with a strong conservative bias). I like the car chases thru the streets of L.A. as well....
The best, though with too much of a domestic bias for my liking, is SKY NEWS. During OIF, their coverage was sober, non-sensational and in a word, superb, if you can find it anywhere, give it a shot, it covers the euro-debate in an incredibly detailed manner.
Next post, I'll get back to the EU constitution.... Jim

Interesting thread...
My thought of the European desire for a 'common union' i.e. the European Union, is that a single economic bloc would have a much better economic bargaining position vis- a- vie the United States.
As a small example, the EU threatened tariffs against US goods if W did not repeal the tariff on steel imports. And interestingly- the EU targets goods from W -voting Republican states. Bush repealed the tariffs, now whether it was a direct result of EU action, or from a combination of actions from the EU and anger from stell consuming states, that remains to be seen.
But, I do think the EU as a bloc was more effective that a single European nation threatening tariffs against oranges.
Peter

well i have to agree the idea of a eu constitution makes me nervous.right now there was a proposal for the eu to control the oil reserves in the north sea at least of eu countries personally i think the eu is one of the worst things britain ever signed on to.and i'm not even a tory!