View Full Version : Where Luxembourg Leads, the World Will Follow!
Thank goodness, Luxembourg voted to ratify the EU constitution. (http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2005-07-10T153926Z_01_L10470009_RTRIDST_0_INTERNATIONAL-EU-LUXEMBOURG-DC.XML) Now so long as we have Andorra, Lichtenstein, Monaco and San Marino on board, Europe should become a superstate lickety-split.
Do Europeans also find microstates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_microstates) funny, or is that more of an American thing?
Byzantine Prince
07-10-2005, 18:44
Andorra, Lichtenstein, Monaco and San Marino are not in the EU. They are just tiny principalities from the old days, when Europe was made of a patchwork of those places.
Monaco is a protectorate of France so I guess it's sort of in the EU. ~:confused:
PS. Everyone finds microstates funny. They are all so cute and small. ~:grouphug:
Kaiser of Arabia
07-10-2005, 18:46
One day I will conquer Luxemborg and take over the world! löl (I love German keyboards)
King of Atlantis
07-10-2005, 18:49
I wonder if america will ever have the AU.
Crazed Rabbit
07-10-2005, 19:12
Why are EU votes still going on? Hasn't the double (triple if you include Britain) rejection scrapped the whole plan? Is the EU leadership just in denial, thinking they will just keep on making referendums until they get approved?
Crazed Rabbit
PS: Anyone see the movie 'The Mouse That Roared', where a microstate holds the world hostage with a nuclear superbomb?
Marshal Murat
07-10-2005, 19:44
There will never be a AU, because the United States of America, is essentially a EU, a constitution, and held together under a President.
Marcellus
07-10-2005, 20:31
Why are EU votes still going on? Hasn't the double (triple if you include Britain) rejection scrapped the whole plan? Is the EU leadership just in denial, thinking they will just keep on making referendums until they get approved?
Well, Britain hasn't rejected the constitution (although it would if a referumdum were to be held tommorrow).
There are arguments for and against continuing to hold referenda.
For: each country/its people should have the ability to express its opinions on the constitution.
Against: it's a waste of time and money.
Personally, I would say that countries that decide not to hold referenda are justified in doing so: referenda cost a lot of money and it wouldn't actually do anything.
Of course, Tony Blair has called off the referendum to avoid having a political headache fighting a referendum campaign. ~D
PS: Anyone see the movie 'The Mouse That Roared', where a microstate holds the world hostage with a nuclear superbomb?
I saw that on TV when I was an tiny tot. Was it funny? I don't remember much about it. I was probably more interested in toy wood blocks at the time.
Well, Britain hasn't rejected the constitution (although it would if a referumdum were to be held tommorrow).
That's what you think. Once Britannia sees Luxembourg blazing a trail to the future, however, the public will raise a hue and cry for Union! Like the saying goes, "The bulldog of Britain follows the Llama of Luxembourg." Or something like that.
Red Harvest
07-10-2005, 22:31
According to Dubya, Luxembourg's Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker's is a "piece of work." ~D So I guess it is important that Luxembourg has ratified the EU's charter. Maybe that line can be added to their tourist info.
Marcellus
07-10-2005, 22:56
Once Britannia sees Luxembourg blazing a trail to the future, however, the public will raise a hue and cry for Union!
Ah, how well you know the British people!
This (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4670333.stm) is too funny to let pass:
Luxembourg's foreign minister had a nice metaphor.
Asked if the "Yes" vote was like giving a dead person a vaccination, he said Europe had had a bad cold but the people of Luxembourg had given it a nice cup of tea with a drop of honey, and the patient was now getting better.
bmolsson
07-11-2005, 02:59
At last a country that can stand up for what it has committed earlier.....
English assassin
07-11-2005, 10:32
Asked if the "Yes" vote was like giving a dead person a vaccination, he said Europe had had a bad cold but the people of Luxembourg had given it a nice cup of tea with a drop of honey, and the patient was now getting better
Its a little known fact that Luxembourg receives over 50% of EU subsidies for bathos.
Al Khalifah
07-11-2005, 10:51
European microstates
The European microstates are those microstates located in Europe...
Brilliant
InsaneApache
07-11-2005, 11:11
It looks like the elite are gearing up to sneak in the EU constitution by the back door.
Following his victory in this referendum, he has said that a majority of EU countries have now backed the constitution.
I fell of my chair laughing at this, well I would if it was funny. These arrogant fools just do not know when they are beaten and they have to stop this nonsense. Again and again if a vote does not go their way they say 'it wasn't REALLY a vote against the EU, they were voting against their governments.'...Err hello!!! it was a vote against the EU, it's just that the elites who rake off a forune from this gravy train won't/can't accept the fact.
Meneldil
07-11-2005, 12:01
The vote in France was not a vote against the EU. It was a vote against Chirac and Raffarin, just as all other votes that happen in France. You never vote on the given topic but for or against the current gvt.
InsaneApache
07-11-2005, 12:22
and there was I thinking that it was a vote to ratify the EU constitution.
If you hate Chirac that much ....you must have a mechanism to get rid of unpopular leaders, (we have a vote of no-confidence in the UK), if so...why not use it?
Marcellus
07-11-2005, 13:34
we have a vote of no-confidence in the UK
But it can only be called by parliament, and only parliament can vote in it. 'The people' can't call for or vote in a vote of no confidence.
Sjakihata
07-11-2005, 13:51
technically, yes, it is the poeple who calls the vote of no confidence, since the people in parliament represent the people - this is always the problem with representative democracy instead of direct democracy.
Marcellus
07-11-2005, 13:55
technically, yes, it is the poeple who calls the vote of no confidence, since the people in parliament represent the people - this is always the problem with representative democracy instead of direct democracy.
Parliament is supposed to represent the people, but it does not really represent the people. For example, only 36% of people votes labour in the last election, yet they have a majority in parliament.
Red Harvest
07-11-2005, 19:19
The vote in France was not a vote against the EU. It was a vote against Chirac and Raffarin, just as all other votes that happen in France. You never vote on the given topic but for or against the current gvt.
That's very interesting to know. I can't say that I see it being a particularly pragmatic way to deal with one's elected officials. Sort of confusing the messenger for the message.
The vote in France was not a vote against the EU. It was a vote against Chirac and Raffarin, just as all other votes that happen in France. You never vote on the given topic but for or against the current gvt.
didn't the same happened in the Netherlands a vote against Balkenende?
if so they schouldn't give it much attention but why do you let people vote about something they know nothing about? I think they schould inform the people much better cause now only "the bad things" are known.
-GG
Taffy_is_a_Taff
07-11-2005, 20:13
shouldn't the constitution be dead in the water now? I thought it had to be ratified by every single state in the E.U.
However, I do not know how legally binding the lost referenda were.
Marcellus
07-11-2005, 20:30
shouldn't the constitution be dead in the water now? I thought it had to be ratified by every single state in the E.U.
However, I do not know how legally binding the lost referenda were.
The constitution, as it stands, is dead. I don't think that the referenda were legally binding, but I think that both the governments have said that they will not go against the will of their people. It would be polictical impossible for Chirac to say that France is going to ratify the constitution despite the referendum.
indeed it is dead I thik all of the leaders must see that and all know that they can start over again. But in the other hand I think it will fail again unless everybody is well informed and if they wouldn't vote against their government. And I think it's dead without it should be. perhaps a few changes but I don't think it was that bad at all...
now why can't I write proper English :furious3:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia on European Microstates
European microstates
The European microstates are those microstates located in Europe...
Brilliant
I still got lots of love for the Wikipedia, even when it has infelicitous prose. I'm a total sucker for the free dissemination of information. And the girl I know who works for Britannica hates her boss, so, um, that's plenty of reason for me to wish hellfire and Chaper 11 on those leather-tome-selling fools.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.