The European Union - Discussion.

Tenshinai wrote:

namelessfly wrote:NATO and the EU were US plots to enfeeble Europe?

I always thought that Global Warming Theology and the election of President Obama were European plots to enfeeble the US.

All those claims are rubbish.

Until you demonstrate that you can crunch the numbers on the global warming thread, your opinion has no credibility.

Why Fly?
Someone could be an expert on everything but mathematics, and have a better informed opinion than you. Personally from a distance it appears that Obama has been the best US President for some time and has done a lot for his country.

quote="namelessfly"]NATO and the EU were US plots to enfeeble Europe?

I always thought that Global Warming Theology and the election of President Obama were European plots to enfeeble the US.[/quote]

All those claims are rubbish.[/quote]


Until you demonstrate that you can crunch the numbers on the global warming thread, your opinion has no credibility.[/quote]

Now, now gentlemen.

Let's not let this thread degenerate into another America vs everyone else bashing thread.

We've had enough of them already.

Mike.

Mike,
No chance of that as he has declared me Foe & can't read my posts. I can give as much cheek as I like without giving offence.

Michael Riddell wrote:Now, now gentlemen.

Let's not let this thread degenerate into another America vs everyone else bashing thread.

We've had enough of them already.

Mike.

Tenshinai wrote:Hmmm, that´s a seriously troublesome request actually, it´s rarely discussed by itself so it tends to be difficult to find by search engine.

That's what I thought - I couldn't find anything in the same vein myself.

The following is purely analysis, not intended as America bashing, as I wrote above.

OK, if we're going to logical about this, if, and I say if, the US has sought to limit European imperial ambitions, be it territorial or economic, then it's just following on from President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen points issued in 1918.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Points

Specifically, points 2, 3 and 5.

These could be interpreted to mean that the dismantlement of the European Imperial system, thereby allowing the US access to those markets where it either had no or little access, was an ultimate aim. American economic self interest, no more, no less.

All rising powers have done this throughout history so the USA is no exception.

World War One started the process, World War Two finished it off. After the latter, the US implemented the Marshall Plan to help Europe rebuild:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

By implementing the Marshall Plan, the US was following it's own interests by stabilising Europe by both limiting Communist expansion and improving Europe economically to prevent another inter-European war. It also supported European integration to further stabilise the region. The establishment of NATO was also a tool to further greater European co-operation.

Therefore, it can be said that a stable Europe was in the US's best political and economic interests.

Mike.

Tenshinai wrote:It should be remembered however that a large part of this is thanks to the stupid implementation of the Euro.

----SNIP----

No disagreement there. They should have been more strict in trying to bring the various economies into greater sync before implementing it.

It also goes to show the different economic cultures between northern Europe and the Southern states. Greece is now getting a very painful lesson in Northern European economics.

Mike.

First I kind of appreciate this thread as it gives me some info on the European outlook on some stuff. Thank you, Mike.

Daryl wrote:Mike,
No chance of that as he has declared me Foe & can't read my posts. I can give as much cheek as I like without giving offence.

Talk about a self centered post to inflict on the rest of us. So you can't bug him you post crap to bug the rest of us. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

By the way he can still receive PMs perhaps that is a better way to address the issue.

Glad to see you are so adult about it.

Thanks a lot for offending me,
T2M

Would have sent a PM but ...

Michael Riddell wrote:
That's what I thought - I couldn't find anything in the same vein myself.

The following is purely analysis, not intended as America bashing, as I wrote above.

OK, if we're going to logical about this, if, and I say if, the US has sought to limit European imperial ambitions, be it territorial or economic, then it's just following on from President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen points issued in 1918.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Points

Specifically, points 2, 3 and 5.

These could be interpreted to mean that the dismantlement of the European Imperial system, thereby allowing the US access to those markets where it either had no or little access, was an ultimate aim. American economic self interest, no more, no less.

All rising powers have done this throughout history so the USA is no exception.

World War One started the process, World War Two finished it off. After the latter, the US implemented the Marshall Plan to help Europe rebuild:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

By implementing the Marshall Plan, the US was following it's own interests by stabilising Europe by both limiting Communist expansion and improving Europe economically to prevent another inter-European war. It also supported European integration to further stabilise the region. The establishment of NATO was also a tool to further greater European co-operation.

Therefore, it can be said that a stable Europe was in the US's best political and economic interests.

Mike.

Oh it´s not really a surprise, the REAL problem i have with it is that right hand is making it happen while the left hand and the public complains about how Europe isn´t taking responsibility or other garbage.


You could also say that the USA implemented the Marshall plan to avoid the US economy do a spectacular crash and burn. That´s what would have happened if the war economy had just been dropped.
It´s still by far one of the best ideas that govt managed.


Anyway, i think there´s a long thread about it on the axishistory forum somewhere...

thinkstoomuch wrote:First I kind of appreciate this thread as it gives me some info on the European outlook on some stuff. Thank you, Mike.

Your welcome, as they say on your side of the pond!

This thread is intended to be educational, but having a discussion between two Europhobes can be problematic as Tens and I agree on a number of issues.

What we need is a Europhile to add a little spark!

Mike.

Tenshinai wrote:Oh it´s not really a surprise, the REAL problem i have with it is that right hand is making it happen while the left hand and the public complains about how Europe isn´t taking responsibility or other garbage.

Which is an unfortunate consequence of the general insularity and partiality of the US media. Americans just aren't well enough informed, on average, on what happens outwith the USA. When they do get something, it's usually filtered to make it more palatable to the US mindset. There are exceptions of course, but the general lack of US participation in this thread is telling in it's own way.

Going back to the main discussion, one unfortunate consequence of the US's efforts to stabilise Europe is that the most EU countries are generally "Fat, Dumb and Happy". By eliminating internal strife and channeling it through peaceful means, Europe's largely lost the "Killer Instinct". Decolonisation and Germany's demilitarisation further aggravates it, leading to Euro-Isolationism.

In addition, with no external military threat after the conclusion of the Cold War, defence budgets have been slashed. The 2008 economic crash has further accentuated this trend. Hence SecDef Gate's frustration over the lack of European commitment to Afghanistan. Of course, European lack of enthusiasm for the adventure doesn't help either. Even in the UK, although there is widespread support for the Armed Forces themselves, there is no support whatsoever for their presence in Afghanistan. For those of us Brits who have historical knowledge, the UK has a long and problematic relation with the area:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Afghan_War

Mike.