Why? Because they can, at least in the case of the EU. No other answer to that.Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
@Loki, yeah they have a majority in the GA, but they also happen to be the countries recieving most aid.
Why? Because they can, at least in the case of the EU. No other answer to that.
@Loki, yeah they have a majority in the GA, but they also happen to be the countries recieving most aid.
Congratulations America
Do you have a single logical, non-realpolitik reason?
Bribery will only get you so far. And EU member states will probably not want to sacrifice their relationships with the third world countries just to get this through.
Hope is the denial of reality
Plus there is a difference between the priorities of the EU Commission and the governments of the EU member nations. The UK may give a lot of aid, as does France, Germany etc ....
The UK government has no interest is this going through, so Cameron will not propose cutting our aid if this does not go through.
France obviously cares more about the EU project, but still has France's interests as her #1 concern. Sarkozy won't use up all his political capital to force this through.
Germany has bigger fish to fry and Merkel has bigger fights to fight.
For Ashton and Rompuy this may be a major issue, for Cameron, Sarkozy and Merkel etc it is not. What proportion of international aid is the Commission responsible for? Had this been such a priority for them the vote would never have been lost in the first place.
But then again how typical of the EU attitude that if a vote goes the "wrong" way, then keep re-casting the ballot until we get the "right" answer: Eg Nice and Lisbon in Ireland.
Yes Randblade, we have known for a long time you have some warped idea about the EU not being democratic because it doesn't let Ireland decide for all of the memberstates. It's an utter nonsense argument since the EU is not a single country and the other members have the right to not respect a decision of the Irish people that potentially affects their own national policies. Democracy in Ireland doesn't trump the democratic process in Germany or anywhere else. If the two are not congruent then the simple calculations of power politics apply (If Germany and Ireland don't agree, Germany has a small problem, Ireland has a humongous headache. How do we know this to be so? Every time Ireland gives the wrong answer i.e. an answer different in a referendum than the one Germany gave, it is told to hold another one. Germany has never been asked to vote again and get it right this time) . If you want a fully fledged democracy in the EU then go ahead with your plans. You shouldn't be surprised if that means you're building a federal superstructure.
Unless you don't want that you should really shut the fuck up about any democratic deficit in the EU. The rest of your post is the typical bla bla bla of somebody who can't accept that Lisbon has gone into force.
Last edited by Hazir; 09-20-2010 at 01:18 AM.
Congratulations America
Except it was just demonstrated that they can't.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
It was a bit of a surprise, it caught them off guard. And Surinam was pissed off because the Dutch government is reconsidering its aid to that country. I seriously doubt Surinam will have as many supporters next time the issue comes up.
Congratulations America
UN votes don't come as a surprise to anyone. Countries make sure they have a pretty good idea about how everyone will vote in close votes. I also really don't think that anyone voted against this resolution just because Suriname asked them to.
Hope is the denial of reality
Riiiiight, so tell me how the Dutch referendum went on the Constitution/Lisbon? Or the French one?
You still haven't named a single non-realpolitik reason why the EU should be in the GA as well as the member-nations.
You know, I am pro-EU but I don't really see a legitimate reason why the EU should get a vote in the GA, even if they could. The entire principle behind is that every country, no matter how big or small, has the same vote in there, isn't it? If they want an 'EU vote' why not simple organize the representatives of EU countries to vote the same? Just because the EU is a big and powerful bloc doesn't mean they should get an extra seat.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
They can't. The CFSP, which is what General Assembly activity would fall under, is usually the area where the member-states cooperate least. Oddly enough, the other primary aspect of foreign policy, international trade, is probably the area where they cooperate and create cohesive policy the most. While trade does come up sometimes in the UNGA *there is a permanent commission on international trade law* I don't believe it is one of the major focuses, it being mostly dealt with by more specialized entities under the UN umbrella.
Hmm. Looking deeper, I suppose there is a reason that might justify including the EU, since most of the field of economic activities is overseen by ECOSOC which, while technically its own body in the UN, has its member states elected by the UNGA. ECOSOC does focus most of its attention on issues other than trade though.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Which is why it would be bizarre to have a GA vote for the EU not only because each member nation may have already voted, but may have voted in different directions! If they all voted the same, there's no need for a 28th vote.
Ok, get this in your thick skull. I don't care about whatever justification you need to accept any action by the EU.
Congratulations America
I don't need any justification and this is about action you expect from the UN not the EU.
Still not a single non-realpolitik reason why.
I.e. its only purpose is institutional aggrandizement.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
In this case I would say it's 98% of the why. The thing is, I am not going to lose any breath over answering any of Randblade's 'o look how evil/silly the EU is' pseudo questions. For the rest I think the EU will indeed force this through on the basis of pure and ugly power politics. And they won't even allow it to create a precedent.
Congratulations America
I've not once claimed the EU is "evil/silly" and hand-on-heart I have no intention of doing so in this regarding this.
The only people I accused of being "evil/silly" are hypocritical Labour members and that's domestic politics.
As far as non-Labour people are concerned:That's hardly calling him evil/silly, "consistent" is not an insult.I have no problem with eg Rompuy saying it should be recognised, he at least is consistent.
I also said that the Commission will have an interest in seeing this through (but I doubt its such a priority even for europhiles like Merkel) but again no evil/silly question.
God, you can't write two sentences about the EU without saying something deeply stupid.
Congratulations America
Go on, what did I say which was "deeply stupid"?
Sorry, I have given up. I'm not going to change that any longer.
Congratulations America
Right, you've done nothing in recent posts but make insults without any intention ever of backing them up.
That would be a correct conclusion.
Congratulations America
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote