Grendel
Well-Known Member
If you think she’s corrupt look at Legarde
The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (22 Viewers)
- Thread starter jimmyhillsfanclub
- Start date
If you think she’s corrupt look at Legarde
Astute
Well-Known Member
I didn't say she is corrupt. We don't know if she is incompetent or corrupt. But is certainly one of them at least.
What I pointed out was they are still willing to ignore the EU rules and regulations to appoint somebody after saying that it would never happen again.
She hasn’t been appointed as they alone cannot appoint her. She has been nominated. Parliament has to appoint her. The EU army she wants is what most countries have already signed up for, or at least for a shared defence force. Even Ireland, which is a neutral country. Ireland says it is in for sharing resources, but would need to reconsider if it went further. That is the current position and all countries have an opt out. I am not in the slightest bit worried. It makes sense to share resources and have e.g. joint regiments. If countries want to go further, then it’s up to them.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Share resources does not mean have an EU army.
How about showing evidence of most countries wanting an EU army.
Yes, I’ve read it. The phrase is „long term goal“. Short term it is defence cooperation. Fine by me. Long term as well. We don’t know what the next generation will want. Maybe the World powers will look different long term. Deal with that when we get there.
The dispute is now between the EU Parliament and Leaders of the Sovereign States. In actual fact, exactly the people you keep saying should have more power. Now they are trying to use their powers to get the person they want and you are saying that is wrong.
I have already said that most EU countries have signed up to an EU defence force to share resources. It’s happened. No one is proposing an EU Army in the short term. The question doesn’t arise. Ireland, though, already answered it before it has been asked. They are only committed to sharing resources as a defence force.
Sharing resources is the current thinking. There is no EU army. And no immediate plan for one.
https://ec.europa.eu/epsc/sites/epsc/files/epsc_brief_defenceunion.pdf
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Merkel and macron want them appointed so everyone will fall in line especially the smaller states as they will be frightened of the consequences if they rebel
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If there ever was an EU army we’d still be involved. Unless we go completely rogue and leave NATO.
In the article it says that the smaller states were behind Von der Leyen. It even quotes V4 saying that they are growing in influence. Merkel abstained because she doesn’t have approval from her coalition partners.
Astute
Well-Known Member
And trying to twist everything as usual I see.
EU army a long term goal? Yes because they couldn't do it overnight. Most countries would rebel. Germany and France hold all the cards. But even they couldn't do it quickly. Now the French PM wants a German put in place that even most of the Germans don't want because they k ow all about her. But the Germans in charge don't want to rock the boat with France so they abstained from the vote.
Would you like to call any of this wrong? You have lived in Germany most of your life so you can't play at being clueless here.
And yes those running the EU should tell Macron that he can't have who he wants as she doesn't have the qualifications and isn't a 'clean' candidate. I am not changing my mind to suit as you do. I am being consistent. Someone without the set out qualifications within the rules shouldn't get a top position.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Didn't go as smooth as planned. But moving my family and all pets was always going to be a bit difficult. But they have been there a week now and are loving it. And I am enjoying the peace and quiet :smuggrin: Will be with them in 3 weeks for nearly 3 weeks. The wife is now busy trying to keep one of the dogs out of our lake. And also suffering in the heat. Coolest day so far has been 35 degrees. But she was lucky. It was 44 degrees the day before they arrived.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Does that make it right? That is my worry.
Tony Bliar took us to war wrongly. Then look at it from an EU perspective. We are about to maybe have another wrong person appointed to a top job with the EU. She wants an EU army. So if we have an EU army who would choose if and when we go to war? Which countries would we want to defend? Which countries would piss them off that run the EU? Because if there was an EU army we wouldn't have any choice on going to war if someone decided it was the way to go. Yet you make out that it is OK.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Merkel abstained because she doesn't want her ti get the position. And she also knows there is another Selmayr event that would happen if she is appointed. And it goes against those who didn't want Selmayr again. And Merkel also doesn't want to upset Macron as she wants to tie up the power in the EU between France and Germany.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Make what right? Elected members of a joint democracy forming a joint army? What would be exactly wrong with that? Might have actually stopped us going into Iraq. Have you ever thought of that? What war do you think we’d be dragged into against our will exactly? How are we going to be dragged into a war we disagree with? Are you seriously saying that that battalions of British soldiers, the British navy and the British airforce are going to enter into a war without the say of the British government? We’re already in joint armies with the UN and NATO. In the former Yugoslavia British forces were under direct control of American commanders, James Blunt has a very famous story about this and refusing a direct order from an American commander. Same in Iraq and same in Afghanistan. If America decides to invade Mexico do you think we’re honour bound to join in because we have joint forces through NATO and the UN? You’re talking assumptions, you’re assuming that you’ll know the makeup of things that don’t actually exist will be and you’re assuming that they’ll operate outside of the controls and barriers already in place under NATO membership which should there ever be an EU army it almost certainly will be part of.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
If we’re against dodgy appointments being pushed through, are you also in favour of leaving the UK once Boris is crowned?
Astute
Well-Known Member
This was nothing but a rant to say why we should be in an EU army.
So you think it is good that we could be sent to war by people who get elected by those not following the rules and regulations set?
Astute
Well-Known Member
Explain how Boris is being pushed through without it following the correct procedures.
He is a dodgy person to have as PM. But the correct procedures have been followed.
Maybe it is the procedure that is wrong. Or it could be as I have continually said and our MP's are not fit for purpose.
But as usual with this thread because I don't suck up to the EU it is said that I am anti EU. Yet strangely enough my family now live in another EU country.
Look at the rubbish spouted on here. It is supposed to be good that rules and regulations are being broke again to appoint someone to a top position in the EU. It would be good to have an EU army that would take us to war if they wanted.
I only have one question for myself. Why did I bother looking at this thread again. Nothing but agendas and twisting of words still.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You could just as easily be talking about any British government in my lifetime. Not being in an EU army didn’t stop our government producing a dressed up dossier based on a students theoretical thesis to send soldiers into Iraq under the command of a foreign nation from a different continent did it?
I’m not saying that we should join a EU army at all, I’m saying that we’re already in a UN and NATO army where foreign nations make decisions for our armed forces.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Less than one percent of the country are about to vote him in as PM.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
And we’re probably the same people so upset when Brown became PM
I was upset when Brown became PM (never rated him personally, but then again compared to Boris) but at least Labour were voted in at a general election under the knowledge that Blair was stepping aside and Brown was taking over.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Being in the UN and NATO would be different to being in an EU army. And you know this. But the truth is in short supply in this thread.
If we were a part of an EU army we would lose all say on our armed forces. Or would you like to put your spin on this?
Last edited:
Astute
Well-Known Member
So the system is wrong maybe. But at least the rules are kept to.
Maybe one day you will admit the major faults with the way the EU is run instead of making excuses for it or will stop making out that the UK is at least as crooked as the EU. But I am not going to hold my breath.
Or are you going to ask Mart about why he knew that all appointments would follow all rules and regulations in the EU but they fail on the very next one yet the same people never question them once. Again I will not hold my breath. Yet they are supposed to be trusted if they take full control of our armed forces. And no agenda is being followed. Yeah OK.
There is no chance of an EU army as a separate entity at the moment. So it is a long term goal.
The reason why Merkel abstained has nothing to do with not rocking the boat. She backed Von der Leyen without consulting with the coalition partners. Now the SPD are up in arms and the CDU have said if the SPD don’t vote for V d L, then there will be far reaching changes in the coalition.
Most of the Germans would be happy enough with a German after 50 years without one as president.
There are 27 heads of state, so it’s not just Macron‘s vote that nominated V der L.
On the plus side:
She is an experienced politician, was brought up in Brussels and speaks several languages fluently.
On the negative side:
The Bundeswehr is in disarray and there is an investigation into why so much was spent on Consultants.
She has been nominated not appointed.
There are no set out qualifications as it is a political position, not a career civil servant position.
Apart from that you are right.
What are you on about? If everyone in EU Europe is in the same army, there won’t be any war in the EU Europe. Seeing as the EU is a trading bloc and not a country, there is no one person who has the power to decide on a an aggressive war. Most EU countries are in NATO anyway. 27 countries would have to agree on an army and if it could go to war if the EU was not being attacked.
Who would that be? Selmayr? The President of the EU Commission? The EU army would be a defence force. I would be in favour of an EU army in NATO. With no mandate to act as aggressor in other countries. As the Bundeswehr is. It only takes part in NATO or UN peacekeeping missions.
There are 2 different things. 1. the civil service system of appointments, and 2. political appointments.
We are talking about political positions here. There was no formal rule. The Spitzenkandidat was applied for Juncker as it was seen to be more transparent.
The elected heads of sovereign governments overrode the Spitzenkandidat rule, which they can as they are the real power in the EU. Which is what you say you want.
The parliament sees that as less transparent and less democratic, especially as V der L didn’t stand innige EU elections.
I am not happy about how this is going myself, and in favour of the parliament becoming stronger.
V der L has been nominated, and if I was a party in the Parliament, I would be trying to block her appointment out of principle.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
No I “don’t know this” and for one very simple reason. It doesn’t exist. It’s you doing the justsoposing. You’re the one spinning. You already know what an EU army would look like when there’s not even been a motion to have one. Maybe you can tell us what Mars will look like when we’ve colonised it, seeing as you can see into the future.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I see the unions are losing/lost their appetite for Brexit Labour affiliated unions agree Brexit vote stance
We wouldn’t lose our day as one of the top 3 countries in the EU and with veto rights.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The country doesn’t vote for changes in PM that’s not our constitution - the comment is irrelevant
Astute
Well-Known Member
You are funny.
So if those who keep breaking the rules and regulations start up an EU army and then start a war there won't be a war in Europe?
If Bliar can start a war the crooked ones who run the EU could easily do the same.
And you keep saying that this EU army is a thing for the future so nothing to worry about. But it wasn't that long ago when you were telling me and others how wrong we were for saying about the aim of having an EU army.
Astute
Well-Known Member
OK you know but I don't. And your lapdog agrees with you. I get you.
So nothing has changed on here. The aim is to defend everything wrong the EU does and make the UK look as shit as you can.