Europe

[Tribesman]

ah, the second rule of tribesman debating; obfuscate in a cloud of nonsense the fact that you picked out point to argue about that was totally irrelevant to the argument in question, and was wrong to boot.

Wrong?
Look....

we have the second largest official defence budget

No you have the fourth, simple isn't it . And as you stated "official" then the only relevant source is the official defence budget.

and the third tactic; where you shroud your comment in derisory smileys in a effort to make your point seem so obvious that no one else need look into the matter further.

It is obvious, there is no need to look any further.
Your country has huge debts.
It cannot pay for the military it already has.
What it is buying is costing more than it allowed for and is getting delivered late.
And you want them to spend more even though they can't afford it, and buy more even though they ain't getting what they already bought??????

[Furunculus]

Wrong?
Look....
No you have the fourth, simple isn't it . And as you stated "official" then the only relevant source is the official defence budget.

It is obvious, there is no need to look any further.
Your country has huge debts.
It cannot pay for the military it already has.
What it is buying is costing more than it allowed for and is getting delivered late.
And you want them to spend more even though they can't afford it, and buy more even though they ain't getting what they already bought??????

the word "official" is there to point out that most military think-tanks believe that china massively under-reports its defence budget, so its not a little bit under or over the UK and france, it is probably about 30% higher, if not even higher.

really Tribesman, you do yourself no favours, as surely i am not the only one to notice that the majority of your debating style is to spout ridiculous and irrelevant nonsense, and smothered in smileys, in the hope that no-one looks to deeply at your 'response'.

you're intelligent enough to debate very well on your own merits, you should try it sometime. :)

[KukriKhan]

Your country has huge debts.
It cannot pay for the military it already has.
What it is buying is costing more than it allowed for and is getting delivered late.
And you want them to spend more even though they can't afford it, and buy more even though they ain't getting what they already bought??????

Is there any country, anywhere, where this is not true?

[LittleGrizzly]

Costa Rica would be one.... leading the way with military budgets...

[Furunculus]

and....................................... back on topic.

on what effect will be seen, or not seen, now that there is a mainstream anti-federalist party?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

The European Union is not necessary to ensure a greater influence on the world for the European nations. We once exercised great influence and power internationally, many of us still do, and we can do it again without unification. Ironically, unification seems to be a quick-fix solution to an individual "problem." The challenges of the modern world can be dealt with just as efficiently by the nations, at least the most powerful ones, as by the Union as a whole.

Forcing unification without holding referendums, against the will of the people, is not the action of a democratic state and is just one thing that justifies comparison to the USSR. Naturally the European Union is not in entirely the same category, but if these habits continue who are we to say that it won't be?

What is wrong with being the "foot-draggers of Europe?" I take it you also have a problem with a Parliament having an opposition or a populace dissenting on anything that the government does? Come off it. Opposing something you disagree with, something that your populace disagrees with, does not make you a bad person. The pro-unification crowd can mock and scoff all they like at the "foot-draggers of Europe," but it does not change the fact that they are both necessary and fufilling their democratic purpose - a lesson the European Union could do well to learn from.

[LittleGrizzly]

Forcing unification without holding referendums, against the will of the people, is not the action of a democratic state and is just one thing that justifies comparison to the USSR.

All member states still have national elections, if the issue was important as some make it out to be people would have voted in euro sceptic politicians whether there were mainstream parties representing that view or not...

The people of the USSR had no choice whether to remain part of the USSR, seen as individual states aren't allowed to secede by your definition of calling the EU USSR i could call the USA the USSR right ?

[Furunculus]

Forcing unification without holding referendums, against the will of the people, is not the action of a democratic state and is just one thing that justifies comparison to the USSR.

All member states still have national elections, if the issue was important as some make it out to be people would have voted in euro sceptic politicians whether there were mainstream parties representing that view or not...

if the mainstream parties continue to ignore the will of the electorate, then we all may very well find that parties like UKIP do just fine at the next elections, the recent euro-elections should be seen as warning shot across the bows.

in this light the conservative move to create an anti-federal bloc within the EU is very important.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

All member states still have national elections, if the issue was important as some make it out to be people would have voted in euro sceptic politicians whether there were mainstream parties representing that view or not...

Most people don't vote on a single issue. Established parties already have all of the money and resources. In many countries it is extremely difficult for minor parties to break through. And UKIP and the Conservatives are Eurosceptic parties.

When there is a single issue as important as this, you need a referendum and not an election. Germany especially needs to break with tradition and ask what the people want for once.

The people of the USSR had no choice whether to remain part of the USSR, seen as individual states aren't allowed to secede by your definition of calling the EU USSR i could call the USA the USSR right?

That wasn't my definition though, was it? And I believe states in America are still allowed to secede through a process, though someone will probably correct me if I am wrong.

[Adrian II]

The European Union is not necessary to ensure a greater influence on the world for the European nations. We once exercised great influence and power internationally, many of us still do, and we can do it again without unification.

Soooo, we once dominated the seas, sciences and economy, we owned North America, large swaths of Asia and Africa, and we can do it again?

Teheee

Just on the off-chance that it's contageous, I'm out of this thread.

[Beskar]

I can't think of hardly any con's to a European Federation as an idea itself, however, I can think of plenty about the way we are doing it at the moment.

So I am not opposed to the idea itself, just the way it is being done.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Soooo, we once dominated the seas, sciences and economy, we owned North America, large swaths of Asia and Africa, and we can do it again?

We can once again dominate the seas, sciences, and economy. We already have fairly strong economies and sciences at least.

I can't think of hardly any con's to a European Federation as an idea itself, however, I can think of plenty about the way we are doing it at the moment.

There are plenty.