Difference between revisions of "Debate:Does the European Union pose a threat to the United States?"

Latest revision as of 12:58, April 10, 2019

A federal Europe would be the most powerful political entity in the world. So, yes.

Much more powerful will be Eurabia, The European Union and Arab League alliance. Check out this book [1]. Jaques 17:25, 12 April 2007 (EDT).

Curses! Our evil joint European-Arab plans for world domination have been discovered! AKjeldsen 19:33, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

It'll be United States of Israel Vs. Eurabia.Jaques 19:55, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

But minus Britain, which will become an american millitary base called 'Airstrip One'. And will be on the frontline of the war. And we'll all be told that we're in a perpetual state of war against an enemy we never see. Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, George Orwells 1984, (not to mention George Bush's 2007!). Eyupdutch 11:29, 13 April 2007 (BST)

Those cursed Europeans, with their Declaration of Human Rights, and their culture, and their advanced standards of social security! Of course they're a threat to national security: all our best scientists, writers, and thinkers might migrate there. Wikinterpreter

The EU is wimps, they need America for protection. Hamtandrus16:26, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Need america for protection? Maybe. Need protecting from America? Almost certainly.

Wuh? Plurals and singulars all over the place! Anyway, Hamtandrus, is this really the case? The way geopolitics is shaping up, even if Europe will clash economically with Russia, at least its not going to get mauled by China. Wikinterpreter

EU is being swallowed by Arab League.Jaques 16:32, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

You keep saying this. What does it actually mean? Oh, and don't cite that book again. It's so riddled with errors:

'There are three forms of jihad (sic), the military jihad, the economic jihad and the cultural jihad.'

Such a statement represents a fundamental ignorance of Islamic philosophy - all of this would be laughable, if it wasn't indicative of such dangerous hate and bigotry. Wikinterpreter

studies[2] have shown that 2nd-3rd generation immigrants in Europe are even more radicalized than new immigrants, probably due to fear of loosing cultural identity.Jaques 15:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

What exactly do you fear from your theorised Arab-European union? eyupdutch 16th April 2007 10:44 (BST)

"We are at war with Eurasia; we have always been at war with Eurasia..." Now get back to your Victory Gin. Human 00:47, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Jaques probably means the rise of fundamentalist Islam in Europe due to immigrants, I'm a European myself and I believe European governments sometimes don't take the affirmative action they should. However, the same could be said about the rise of Christian Fundamentalism in the US, actually, when you think of it, fundamentalist Christian and Muslims have a lot of beliefs and values in common, hopefully they keep hating each other though, cause if they would join forces, both Europe and the US would be finished.

Middle Man

Name on common belief shared by radical moslems and these so called "Christian Fundamentalists". European governments shouldnt have to take any "affirmative action" at all, its not their responsibility. Maybe you should move to saudi arabia and bask in their "affirmative action".Bohdan

That, to quote someone on this very site, 'Christianity and the Bible superior ... are ... to other religions and scriptures', but replace 'Christianity' and 'Bible' with 'Islam' and Koran? Was it Botha's responsibility that black South Africans were obscenely treated as second-class citizens? Wikinterpreter^talk?

Alright, here's a list of beliefs Muslim and Christian fundies share:

1) Same God (the God of Abraham), both the Koran and the Bible contain the old testament.

2) Abortion is bad.

3) Gays are bad.

4) Sex outside a marriage is bad.

5) The state should actively support their religion (prayer in school, etc...).

6) Nonbelievers should be "saved" by converting them.

7) Holy books should be interpreted literally, even if they contradict science.

8) Modern western society has become an immoral Soddom and Gomorra.

9) No matter how nice, or good you are, you'll go to hell if you don't belief in God.

10) Religious law should be introduced (yes, some Christians actually want this).

11) Vaccinations are a bad thing, especially if they help save lives of "promiscuous" people".

12) For some reason women should not be equal to men.

13) Overall obsession with topics regarding sexuality and women, while their respective prophets mainly focused on social justice.

I could go on, but I think I've made my point clear.

And with "affirmative action" I don't mean going off to fight Muslim countries, I simply meant more measures should be taken against radical imams and groups within Europe, instead of doing the overly political correct thing of denying the problem exists.

Middle Man

I guess i misinterpreted your statement. My mistake. Bohdan

how do these beliefs make you a "fundy"? The big difference is that one side believes in killing non-believers. The other doesnot.Bohdan

Also,most "fundamentalist" Christians dont hold these views you have stated. Ive never heard of religious law from Christians.Bohdan

You're right, most Christians don't hold these view, a lot of Muslims don't either, only the fanatics do.

There are plenty of evangelicals who would wish to see a judicial system based on biblical law.

Fundamentalist Muslims don't want to kill everyone, just a few, to set an example of what happens if you don't convert, besides President Bush, and many others actually do believe God is on their side in the war.

Middle Man

and here are similarities between Islamic fundies and liberal fundies.

1) believe Israel is bad

2) believe US is bad

3) believe zionism is racism

4) believe in higher taxes

5) support illegal immigration

6) support political correctness

7) against globalization

8) support universal health care

9) support more government regulation

10) support affirmitive action

11) modern western society has become capitalistic

12) capitalism is evil Jaques 19:43, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

I wasn't aware Al Quieda had an official stand on immigration, taxes, government regulation, healthcare (what's so bad about that one anyway?), globalization and affirmative action, I've never seen a video of Osama Bin Laden explaining his plans for tax reforms, have you?

And liberals don't believe American as a people are bad, they just believe some of the (recent) actions of its government are wrong, the same goes for Israel.

Middle Man

Not Al Qaeda, Hezbolla and Hamas. Besides, there are lots of liberal fundies who do not just believe Israel government is bad, they believe Israel is a racist state and should not exist at all[3]. Jaques 20:19, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

They're recruiting people by doing what the governments of their countries neglect to do: provide health care and education, which on its own is a good thing, but like I said, those organisations only use this to increase their popularity with the people.

And in a way Israel has a system of Apartheid, between Jews and non-Jews, they have separate legislation for the two groups, something which doesn't belong in the 21st century, again, not the fault of the Israeli people in general, but nevertheless wrong.

Middle Man

Yes, they provide free education, but what do they teach the people? they teach them to blow themselves up, that's why you cannot give the government a monopoly in education. And Israeli people are being blamed for their system, because the Israeli people have voted to support the system.Jaques 21:06, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Israeli arabs dont believe Israel has a right to exist. They should not even be able to be citizens.Bohdan 21:09, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm not just talking about those Arabs, everyone who isn't Jewish has less rights in Israel, including Christians and moderate Arabs.

About the Hezbollah schools, the reason that these schools exist is that the government doesn't provide education, so the solution would be that the government (which is secular and independent in Lebanon) provides these services, people are less likely to become a terrorist if they enjoy a proper education and health care.

Middle Man

Health care and education would make no difference. Do you have any support for this?Bohdan

Yes, I do: most revolutions and wars are preceded by poverty, economical problems and such (Germany before WWII, Russia before 1917, etc...), as long as the people have it good, they won't be so quick to rebel, and it is a well known fact that many guerilla and Jihad fighters around the world originally joined up because they were promised 3 meals a day, shelter and protection.

Of course there would always be a few idiots left who would still fight holy wars, but there would be a lot less of them.

Middle Man

YES IT IS A THREAT!

All one has to do is look at the HISTORY of the Unification of Europe and WHO the agitators and players were and are today to see that it is a threat to not just European countries and their own populations but ours!

The Socialist movement has made the UNIFICATION of the Continent one of the KEYSTONES of the global Socialist agenda. With Karl Marx and the Internationals along with international finance on one (controlled)hand and agitated rabblerousing masses and maleable and obedient press on the other(controlled)hand, the unification of Europe began in earnest at the turn of the Century and has not stopped since.

The World Parliamentarians and the Socialist International itself have been at the forefront of first demanding and then operating the machinery of the unification.

With the American schemers of Col. House's Inquiry at Versailles , the Socialist march to the unification stepped up speed. The PLANNED Financial draining of the European middle class through banking redistribution(through the central bankers Central Bank-the Bank for International SettlementsBIS) and inflation of currencies predictably layed the groundwork for yet another demand for strong(CONTROLLED) "leaders" and another controlled conflict to justify further installation of the United Europe.

The chaos and tyranny and horror of the European Theatre of the war, along with the rise of the SOCIALIST Soviet Union Empire and the creation and threat of nuclear weapons, was not only the impetus used to create the Socialist-engineered United Nations but also to Winston Churchill and the rest of the SOCIALIST Europeans(led by Unifier Eminence Gris French Socialist stalwart and schemer Jean Monnet) to start the Movement to Unify Europe in Geneva in '46.

With the Treaty of Rome in 1954 and the the creation of the deliberately misnamed European ECONOMIC Community , the framework and engine of the Unification of the Continent was layed. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization(NATO) was the American insertion into the integration movement. NATO being another United Nations Article 51 Treaty meant that it(NATO) was UNDER THE CONTROL AND GUIDANCE OF THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL. And it(NATO) was a POLITICAL Treaty...meaning the United States (a signer) had our legal and political systems integrated into NATO...at the dimunitization of our soveriegnty and laws.

The Cold War slogged on for 40 years....with TRILLIONS of American tax dollars spent on building up BOTH SIDES!(through DIRECT foreign aid to not only the Soviet Union itself but its proxies and controlled countries) and also potential targets of the Red Army ie Western Europe.

The installation and centralization of Socialism and Socialist Governments in postwar Europe enabled the US to subsidize the socialism there as "saving" democracy and keeping socialism in power.

With the Reagan Revolution of the 80s bringing back a "strong" American and an interventionist foreign policy, the European Socialists took the "middle ground" which usually meant opposing US military adventurism and militarism and supporting GLOBAL SOLUTIONS for peacemaking.

As socialism cannot exist without subsidies and terror, eventually it runs out of steam.. and the Socialist Soviet Empire was allowed to deflate itself.....and..to fill in the vacuum...the European Economic Community was rechristend the European

Union(correctly and boldy put forward) and the Unification was almost completed.

Recently they European Elite have allowed the voters to finally have a say in the integration and the people have rejected it repeatedly, with the snubbed noses of the Elite not listening and forcing them to vote on it again and again...

As to the United States the Transatlantic Union is a documented and real entity and goal. The EU/US legal intertwining continues unabated and grows in impact and stature.

The corresponding decrease in the soveriegnty and independence of the United States is the RESULT of the threat AND PLANNED AND DELIBERATE actions of the Socialist United Europe.

It is imperative that Americans research this agenda and see for themselves how far along the Socialist agenda of SOCIALIZING and GLOBALIZING the United States is.

And in the upcoming Presidential Election, look beyond the rhetoric and look at actions(ie VOTES) on this issue.

You will find only one candidate has the unblemished and consistant record of honoring his oath of defending and following the Constitution and our soveriegnty.

And that is Republican Congressman Ron Paul(R-Tx). Visit his campaign site

at [4] above unsigned comment left by User:Chrisbieber.

Yes it is. Lets look at a list of people who tried to unify Europe before the Union:
Caesar Augustus, Napoleon Bonaparte, Adolf Hitler, Henry VIII,
Charles V of the Hapsburgs, and oh yeah, Sulieman the Magnificent(a Muslim Jihadist).
I'd say that European Unification has always been and will always be about extending European power over non-Europe. CMacloud 22:43, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Question

If the EU is a threat to US, what are you gonna do about it?

No, unless...

I started a heading, since most of the above discussion seems to be about Islam and the Middle East.

The EU, as one large trading bloc with an internal economy that could outpace the US' (due to larger population), could be an "economic threat", in that the US would not be able to "go it alone" in terms of world trade and regulations thereof (as Britain was able to do in the 19th century). Wait, make that "already is". When the EU sets standards these days, multinational companies start to make their products to conform for worldwide distribution, since it's often easier to make only one version of something.

As far as a scary, blow us up, military threat? Why, unless we drift so far into fascism that we no longer look like a friend of what we call "the West"? Or if our militarisitc adventures start to make such a mess of international trade systems that they feel the need to intervene?

So, in randomly thinking conclusion, I'd say "no". We are on the same side and have the same interests. A continent-wide federation in Europe would complement, not threaten, a continent-wide federation in North America. Human 20:57, 4 May 2007 (EDT)