European Constitution, yes or no?

[Markstar]

No. Why?

1) Mandatory INCREASED military spending for all eternity? No, this is exactly what we DO NOT need! I'm not saying to roll over and let the US handle everything, but this is definitely not the way. Especially not since the treaty is not about just defending ourselves against an outside threat, but also about military intervention against states that threaten our market interests! This sounds like the US and sorry, I can live without that attitude. Especially since a EU-states that refuses to take part in an aggression against an innocent country has to face severy sactions.
2) This "constitution" is primarily about military and economy, mostly disregarding any social and civil rights (as far as I can tell). Corporates will be even better equipped to steer political decisions.
3) Many other points, but to sum it up: This constitution should be about how we live together and not how we fight wars together. It should be about the people and focus more on social aspects of our society.
4) We are not in a rush. And there is plenty of room for improvement.

BTW, had you asked me last week I would have been pro-EU-constitution, but now that I read/talked about the issue a lot in recent days I must say that it scares me a little about what is going on there. Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely pro-EU, it's just that this needs to be more than it is now.

But in Germany the people don't get to decide about the constitution anyways so my vote doesn't count anyways.

[Kingreno]

Military. This is and always will be a subject that will be discussed and debated about. It is my opinion that any society will always have it's warriors, and also that even in this time of selfdeclared progress a moderate to large standing army has many benefits. I do utterly agree that the use of this force by the west has far too often been poor to say the least. This however does not mean the knife is to blame when it has been used by a murderer.
For starters I know quite a few people that are in the military and simply put; they are in the right place. For a plethora of reasons these people enjoy and profit from the rules and the order that is the army. I would be puzzled to see these people function in a "normal" job, that may even lead to severe trouble. Some may argue that this only ignores a deeper infection deeply inbedded in our society (the fact that those people don't function in our society?), but that does not mean we stop the medicine.
Secondly, more on Europe; As the example of the knife illustrates, misusage in the past does not mean the military as an institution is wrong! There are a vast number of area's where military intervention by European soldiers in the future is very much desired over USA/Asian presence. In general our Multi-Culti background allows a far better integration in the hazzardous area's this world has. Also, I would very much like to see Europe as a whole decide on sending troops then individual countries.
Why the increase in funds? Well, I agree to that too. European forces should be well-equiped when they perform whatever task they do. From an economic perspective, most of this funds is reinvested in our own economies, so I do not realy see that much harm done there.

quote: (by Marstar) Especially since a EU-states that refuses to take part in an aggression against an innocent country has to face severy sactions

Could you elaborate on innocent, and please do give some examples?

quoteby Swingue) I am AGAINST referenda!

I am not! It all depends on the goals it has (learned that from CQ!). If the goal is to let the masses vote on this, knowing the media will probably decide for them. I agree, then it is indeed not the perfect instrument. OTOH, the best thing a referendum does is to let the people think about the importance of an issue. If there was no refendum there would simply be a small message, perhaps not even worthy of the front page, stating the Dutch gov has voted 'yes'. Now, people (if they want) have plenty of chance to get to see this new thing in Europe. I think this is very good.


EDIT: I will vote yes, despite some flaws that will hopefully be corrected in the future.

[romeothemonk]

Speaking as a U.S. Citizen that can trace my heritage in America back to 1700, also living among many Americans I feel I can comment on the subject.
1). America will never roll over for anyone. Period. End of Story. We are probably one of the most warlike nations on the planet, and our society and culture glorifies violence and perseverence. Some other group rising up strong would just cause us to get our knickers in a twist.
2). The American military is ~10 years more advanced than any other military on the planet. (Possible expception to Isreal, and I don't begrudge them that). The EU constituion would only raise spending to the American level. To become more powerful, you need to use the money better, or throw more at it. The amount of money that you would need to throw would bankrupt the entire EU in the process.
3). Economic leverage is very important. The economy muct be fixed before war/military. Once the economic infrasturcutre can support war, then you pursue war. We see this in civ3. you build markets, then troops.
4). Americans are very independant and threatening us just pisses us the heck off. "All the Armies of Europe and Asia combined, led by Napoleon himself will never cross the Appalachians or drink from the Ohio." Abraham Lincoln. He meant it, and that was when we were busy killing each other in our civil war.
5). For all the anarchists on this site, this seems really counterintuitive. You want to make your own decisions about everything, but will add another layer of beurocracy?
It just doesn't compute.
6). Nationalism is a good thing, it is what allowed Europe and the Western World as a whole to ascend to where we are in the world today. You think U.S. Nationalism is bad, ask some middle easterners, or some North Koreans or even Chinese. I have not seen better packaged propoganda EVER than the movie "Hero".

I am not a European, but I voted no. You do not want that layer of government and the loss of local autonomy.
The American Christians do not want to take over Europe, they want to re-evangalize it. I can say that being an Evangelical Christian is one of the freest, most enlightening, best things that has ever happened to me. History has shown time and again that the more true Christianity spreads, the less government interaction and care is needed.
When bogus stuff happens, bad things occur. (See Prohibition)
Enough ranting for now, I am sure that I generated enough flamebait to last for several weeks.

[Rik Meleet]

Who has actually read the proposed constitution ?
For those that are interested: http://www.unizar.es/euroconstitucio...eaty_Const.htm

[Markstar]

Kingreno, I am not saying that military is bad. Not at all. I served in the military myself and even though I came out being MUCH more pacifistic than before, I do see the need for a military force in the world we live in today. But picking up your "knife" example and to give you the example you asked for: The EU constitution makes the EU the murderer. If the EU council decides to invade a country to protect its oil interest (just like the US) and, for example, the Netherlands decide that it is against their concience (not that the citizens will actually get to decide to go to war, this right is taken from them with the EU constitution), they will have to face severe sanctions because of not providing troops.
BTW, if you think this would not happen, the EU constitution explicitly says it can wage war to "protect its values and interests" (Art. I-40, 5). Not only that, this is done, again: explicitly, without asking the people who make up the EU because "it would take too long". This, imho, will effectively make us just as bad as the US, something I'm not very fond of to be honest (even though I love certain aspects of the US).

Another thing: Your description about the people who would not function in our society is just what scared the heck out of me. Example:
On an exercise out in the field we had an incident where a guy started pointing a gun at people for not doing what he said and totally freaking out. The thing was, he should have been under supervision of an officer as well as, of course, be aware that this is totally out of line. You know what happened? Nothing. Because not only the direct supervisor was to blaim but also the company chief (a captain). And the guys was not a "low-life" violent kinda guy, 'just' a dude who went a little crazy. Now I can imagine pretty well what's going on in Iraq right now. What I witnessed was in peace time and without any pressure and in a troop that I would rate as being A LOT more civil than the US military.

[ERIKK]

Yeah Romeo - you are prolly right on that! AFAIK this is a 'rather leftie people site'...

...but on the constitution case: the outher leftie parties are against too! Same as outher right btw. I guess all 'middle parties' are pro EU-cooperation. The EU is a thing of long breath, it will go on and on and it has been going since the 1950's! I dont see it as a bad thing and I dont care if it takes time or money...

[smalltalk]

quote:Originally posted by Rik Meleet

Who has actually read the proposed constitution ?

Well, I don't know what's in the constitution and therefore I can't comment on it.

The only thing I know is that the request to include God has not been granted. Which is great considering that the European dark age was christian dominated and the European Golden Age was dominated by secular ideas.



World Military Expenses

The West is already spending enough money on military. In fact, the West spends two-thirds of the world's military expenses.


4.7*KB

"Rest-West" are countries like Japan, Israel, Australia ...
"Rest" is the rest of the world: Russia, China, India, Saudi Arabia, Brazil ...

[Markstar]

@romeo: Spoken like a true american and I agree with every single one of your points (except maybe 5) since I think most of us are just hobby-anarchists ). And that is my greatest fear, actually.

I don't think WW3 is really going to happen, but if it is, that's how, imho, it's going down:
1) As it is already happening, the Asian market will become more and more influencial to the western world, posing not only a threat to western markets but also to America's (and the EU's constitution) "values" (communism, not being top of the class anymore, etc).
2) The US is going bankrupt due to the tremendeous debts which overwhelm their economy (actually the US is not the only state that is heading in that direction).
3) The US will ask for money in exchange for "protection" from "outside threats" (like oh-so dangerous Iraq with their mighty nuclear arsenal). The other countries who do not pay up/exempt the US from the debt will get put on the "not with us list".
4) In the end, the US will attack the countries it owns the most money to since the US government claims it is being held hostage by them.

It's fiction for now, I hope it stays that way. And romeo, before you flame me for being anti-american: I went to high school in Tucson, Arizona and loved it so much that I wanted to stay there. Had I been 6 months younger at that time I'd probably be an american citizen by now which doesn't mean I have to be blind about the things that might go wrong there. I still want to live in the states for a few years if I get the chance, but by now I know that I would not want my kids to go to school there.

[Kingreno]

quoteRik)Who has actually read the proposed constitution ?

Rik, I am not a lawyer and therefore have not read the entire constitution. I am not qualified enough to spot things like loopholes are other 'wrong' stuff. I am however influenced by a large number of media, including the regular 8-hour news, 2 papers (NRC-Handelsblad and a local that is pretty decent) and several others. This formed my opinion and it is still being formed at the moment.

I am also far less against a privatised healthsector, we tried the good'ol governementway and that was and is basicly a disaster. I think that with good regulations a private healthsector is more then able to work out just fine.

Romeo (it should indeed get some flaming, but so far it seems like pretty much ok), I do agree on several points though religion is not one of them. IMO one can live as freely as you described easily without the presence of religion in the community, though I will always respect anyone's beliefs on this.

[romeothemonk]

quote:Originally posted by Kingreno
Romeo (it should indeed get some flaming, but so far it seems like pretty much ok), I do agree on several points though religion is not one of them. IMO one can live as freely as you described easily without the presence of religion in the community, though I will always respect anyone's beliefs on this.

I have never advocated religion, as religion is man's pathetic attempts to make right with God, and is invariably rules. In Christianity, it is salvation through faith, freely given with grace, not a bunch of rules. I never advocate religion, I rather advocate each man's adherence and personal relationship with God.
Drinking is O.K., even advocated in the Bible. Getting drunk on wine, not so much. Dancing is advocated in the Bible.
If you are interested in more follow-up, I can get specific verses for y'all.
I for one never want to see a denomination runnning the country. You guys don't want the Pope running stuff in your country, even less so do I want the Southern Baptist Council (or any other "council of elders") running stuff in the USA. The leaders should be elected by all eligible voters, not from one viewpoint.
My Tagline on CFC pretty much sums up my views on the subject, and is a famous quote from the start of the revolutionary war.
"We recognize no sovereign but God and no king but Jesus."