Why does America need Europe?

[PeteEU]

America "needs" Europe because they are a major trading partner and a conglomeration of fellow western democracies. However, we don't "need" Europe to tell us what to do and nor should we take their advice to action. I believe we should listen to Europe, but we shouldn't do as they say and take it all with a grain of salt.

I agree but that goes both ways. You should not come to us and tell us what to do, as the US often does.

Lately Europe has really gone done a dangerous and destructive path.

Err how exactly?

 

[digsbe]

What do you mean by that? In addition there is still a lot of diversity in Europe. We don't for instance have an EU army yet so our foreign policies can be quite diverse. So are you referring to all countries of the EU and if not which ones and what have they done which is to go down a dangerous and destructive path because I have not heard of it.

Europe is financially in trouble due to over spending and socialist programs that were not properly funded. What I mean is the unsustainable spending that many European countries put into social programs and the increasing growth of government and encroachment on personal liberty. I also fear because many European countries are beginning to oppress Islam with burkha and minaret bans (I don't think religion should be oppressed). I was talking as a generalization of European nations and the EU, mainly of the biggest nations like France, Spain, Germany, and the UK.

I agree but that goes both ways. You should not come to us and tell us what to do, as the US often does.

I agree with you on this. I think America can offer advice and offer to help European countries, but it's up to them to accept it or take our advice. European nations, as sovereign entities, should govern themselves and not be governed by other larger nations.

Err how exactly?

As I said above. Many nations in Europe are spending vast amounts of money and have unsustainable social programs. Plus the growing oppression of religion (Islam) is beginning to make me worry Europe seems to be going down an unsustainable socialist route where the state has more power over individuals and religious freedom.

 

[PeteEU]

Europe is financially in trouble due to over spending and socialist programs that were not properly funded. What I mean is the unsustainable spending that many European countries put into social programs and the increasing growth of government and encroachment on personal liberty.

That is a load of American right wing propaganda crap.

Europe is in no more financial trouble than the rest of the industrialized world and in fact some European countries are in very good condition.. those "Socialist" Scandinavian countries in particular.

Not properly funded.. give me a break. Most European countries before the crisis had budgets with slight deficits or surpluses. The US has had a deficit since before Reagan.... every single year.. and you accuse us of over spending? LOL And the only reason that some European countries like the UK and Spain are in any sort of trouble is because of the US sub-prime crisis and them following the US lead. You should stop listening to the right wing anti-European propaganda and look at the freaking facts instead.

I also fear because many European countries are beginning to oppress Islam with burkha and minaret bans (I don't think religion should be oppressed).

First off.. many? the Swiss have had a minaret ban, which is nothing but a populist xenophobic bs law any ways and does not really impact anyone since a minaret would have to get building permission and those are rarely given due to height restrictions in local areas. For example in the town I live, no building can be taller than 3 stories, hence there is a defacto ban on minarets, and any other building over 3 stories.

As for burkhas.. it has nothing to do with religion, never has been and never will be. It has everything to do with outdated traditions of suppressing women. And before you started attacking Europe for how we do things, maybe it is time for you too look at your own country where Muslims are basically hunted. The amount of anti Islam attacks is going up and now you are even banning entry to your own citizens because of their religion and where they travel.. pathetic.

I was talking as a generalization of European nations and the EU, mainly of the biggest nations like France, Spain, Germany, and the UK.

That you were, and we are 30+ countries with 30 plus economies and 30 plus legal systems and traditions.

I agree with you on this. I think America can offer advice and offer to help European countries, but it's up to them to accept it or take our advice. European nations, as sovereign entities, should govern themselves and not be governed by other larger nations.

Why? America does not have much to teach Europe... unless being greedy is a skill. Your social and economic system are in shambles because of greed and corruption and only being kept alive because there is a de facto agreement to ignore things by attacking Europe. After all that is the best way to divert attention away from yourself.. point out others problems and make them even worse than they are. Hell you cant even police your own politicians, let alone companies working in your own country. You protect your industries far more than Europe and yet you call for more liberalisation in Europe... pathetic double standard. Come back to us when you allow non Americans to own US airlines and media. You imprison more people than any other nation on the planet and have strange morality laws that would offend any one in Europe. Ups look she has a bare breast.. uproar and scandal.. but murder and guns and drugs go by unnoticed.. pathetic attitude. Your legal system is highly biased towards the rich and against the poor usual black population.

If anything America could learn a few things from Europe.. like how to run an election and healthcare system.

Plus the growing oppression of religion (Islam) is beginning to make me worry Europe seems to be going down an unsustainable socialist route where the state has more power over individuals and religious freedom.

Err what growing oppression? That we want to free oppressed women from backward practices is suddenly oppression? Then I guess you have no problem with female genital mutilation and other backwards practice.. forced marriages and worse? How about incest .. that okay with you because it might oppress some freakish traditionalist religious practice?

Seriously, using the "socialist" tag is just in poor taste and utterly wrong and seriously tarnishes your credibility. First off a majority of the countries in Europe have or just had right wing governments. Secondly just because our policies live up to the American right wing philosophy does not mean it is socialist. American conservatives are not the main stream world wide conservative movement.. they are in fact so far from main stream that is is sad.

As for religious freedom.. we have just as much freedom as American's on that front, but we do not mix politics and religion unlike Americans do. While America lets its religion dictate its laws and rules often, in Europe we have had that and found it to be a bad way of doing things so we try to have a very clear line between the two. That does not mean we oppress religion in any way or form. Religion is a personal thing and something that can not and must not be forced on others.

 

[zimmer]

That is a load of American right wing propaganda crap.

Europe is in no more financial trouble than the rest of the industrialized world and in fact some European countries are in very good condition..

(PEU continues with a defense of Eurosocialism... blah, blah, blah...)

ROTFLOL...

Baby boomers are coming into retirement, will be eating tons in medical and retirement benefits with a population dwindling and responsible for the payments and empty accounts.

Ask Germany, the Grand Wizards of socialista management about the state of their medical system alone.
Doc's are fleeing, and rationing is the buzzword.

It was this expense that sunk Generous Motors (GM)... now Government Motors... Medical.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/29/AR2005042901385.html

Who knew? Speculation about which welfare state will be the first to buckle under the strain of the pension and medical costs of aging populations usually focuses on European nations with declining birthrates and aging populations. Who knew the first to buckle would be General Motors, with Ford not far behind?

Medizin: „Welcher Patient geht leer aus?“ - News - FOCUS Online
Google translated

"Which patient gets nothing?"
Eckhard Nagel transplant surgeon from the National Ethics Council said the compulsion to rationing of medical care

FOCUS: German health politicians will assert that full coverage of the population would remain with cutting edge medicine. In contrast, the National Ethics Council now proposes a new public debate about rationing. Is this really necessary?

Nagel: Announcements, for each time was a hochleistungsmedizinische (high quality medical) treatment feasible, I think that is a dangerous suppression of reality. Rationing is part of everyday life in medicine and will increase in future. Even today patients waiting for major surgery, because about not enough places for their intensive care available. must also be decided in transplantation medicine, which patient receives a saving organ and which no seats and probably died on the waiting list. This dilemma is, however, considered too little.

FOCUS: Why has so far conducted no public discussion about rationing?

Nagel: The allocation of limited health goods from Kostengründenist an extremely sensitive issue on which our society is ill prepared. Politicians have made the experience that they prefer to conceal this uncomfortable truth. Otherwise they run the risk of being punished as a bearer of bad news - for example at the ballot box. Nevertheless, I believe it is their duty to designate the location problem clearly, even if there is no easy way out of it visible.

FOCUS: Can we avoid the limited allocation, as we raise more money for the health system?

Nagel: At the moment already. But medical progress has no foreseeable limits. We are always faced with the question of what we can afford yet. Is it possible at all, so far as to grant to all health goods under the principle of equality? Or treatment should depend on the purse of the patient, his age or his social embeddedness? Must pay an injured his therapy out of pocket when he caused the accident itself? Such scenarios must address it, and that takes an ethical debate.

FOCUS: Should 85-year-old fear that they will not receive artificial hip or heart valve?

Nagel: I think so. But of course, remain ethical dilemma decisions when conflicts are not enough. We just have to try to the best of all strategies. This decision process needs to be maximized transparent. The only way people get the feeling that they are taken into consideration, even if they do not approve of this.

FOCUS: What do you fear, when politicians and citizens continue to ignore that rationing has to be?

Nagel: This can have fatal consequences, of the patients - and we all - suffer some unnecessary. As will be discussed today about the cost of health only in the short term and with key words, the emotional appeal of the situation. This is an unfortunate way to kick start the discussion, because it causes anxiety. Citizens feel existentially delivered.

DOCTOR AND ETHICS

Eckhard Nagel, 46, health scientist at the University of Bayreuth.

The Euro-socialist system is programmed to implode, and it is in the process.

It is a time bomb. Huge socialist programs instituted when the world was milk and honey, are the straws that break the camel's back during times of difficulty, and dwindling populations.

Not only a problem, but as you see, government is the Death Panel too, as Palin noted with ObiKare.
Their goal is to cut costs... because healthcare is seen as an expense.

.

 

[Arch Enemy]

It's hilarious how willing W. Europe was to hide behind American military power in post WWII. The reason why America's defense bill is so high is because it compounded the security for Japan and Europe. Without the US, Soviets would have rolled right through Paris.

 

[PeteEU]

It's hilarious how willing W. Europe was to hide behind American military power in post WWII. The reason why America's defense bill is so high is because it compounded the security for Japan and Europe. Without the US, Soviets would have rolled right through Paris.

And the cold war has been over almost 25 years.. so what is the excuse now for the massive US military..? Feel free to leave Europe and dont let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[bennyhill]

America got pulled into world leadership, but now she has gotten use to it and has become a world control freak. American influence is widespread and topples the English Empire in comparisson. They should give up their tanks and become a moral authority. Global cop and moral authority cancel each other out.

 

[Arch Enemy]

And the cold war has been over almost 25 years.. so what is the excuse now for the massive US military..? Feel free to leave Europe and dont let the door hit you on the way out.

I'm with you on that one. I'd much rather watch the Euro Zone collapse.

 

[Arch Enemy]

America got pulled into world leadership, but now she has gotten use to it and has become a world control freak. American influence is widespread and topples the English Empire in comparisson. They should give up their tanks and become a moral authority. Global cop and moral authority cancel each other out.

Americanism is contagious.

 

[Red_Dave]

It's hilarious how willing W. Europe was to hide behind American military power in post WWII. The reason why America's defense bill is so high is because it compounded the security for Japan and Europe. Without the US, Soviets would have rolled right through Paris.

It always amazes me that this is taken as a given. Is there even any evidence that the Soviets even planned to attack Western Europe? They couldnt even occupy Finland successfully.

 

[bennyhill]

The Soviets were peace thirsty after WWII (lost some 22 million), but due to the Red Scare in the USA, America beleived their own propagand. Lots of money for nothing.

 

[ecofarm]

Yes, the threat of Russia was a US conspiracy. The whole Cold War was just make-believe and everyone in the league of nations etc went along with it. The Cuban Missile crisis never happened.

Im glad that I live far away from your planet.

That's pretty obvious.


Next, you'll be telling me how Stalin didn't really kill many people after WWII and it's a crying shame the Soviets collapsed.

 

[Ikari]

We need Europe to remind us why soccer sucks.

But seriously, America and Europe really are rather similar, Americans are essentially Europeans. With better coffee and beer. That's right. We trade A LOT with each other and we have always enjoyed very friendly relations with Western Europe. There's no reason to be anything but good friends and allies.

 

[German guy]

In my opinion, it's sad when this becomes an American/European pissing contest.

On both sides of the ocean, we have more in common than what divides us. And on the fields where we differ, we can learn from each other and inspire each other.

Europe is very anti-war and anti-military, which in itself may be a good thing, but it keeps us from doing what's necessary to defend ourselves. I don't see we could defend ourselves properly without America. Hell, we didn't even manage the Yugoslavia wars in our backyard in the 90s without the US stepping in and taking lead. Americans show us how we can profit from strength and self-confidence, from belief in the strength of free markets and our right to use force to solve problems.

In return, Europe can teach America a lot about the value of diplomacy, the value of a strong law vs. law of the stronger, and the general idea that being too trigger happy may lead into catastrophe. We can remind America how evil war is, because they don't know that, since they have never had a war on their ground since the Civil War. We can also remind America that equality is a value similarly important as the value of freedom, and that integration of a society is a very good means of solving problems, rather than expanding differences (see high US crime rates).

But we both hold dear the value of a free political system and human rights. America and Europe can be a perfect team, if we just listen to each other and respect each other. We are two sides of the same medal. We should capitalize on that.

 

[Ikari]

Honestly though, both Europe and America love war. It's one of the things we're really good at. Europe maintains a strong military and are involved in many military operations across the globe.

 

[ecofarm]

German guy, nice post. But allow me to nitpick...

strong law vs. law of the stronger

I don't think European law is any more fair than US law. Care to expand on this?

the general idea that being too trigger happy may lead into catastrophe.

Do you really think people do not know this? Let's not perpetuate the image of careless action by the US. Saddam was in violation of 17 (seventeen!) chapter 7 UNSCRs - the last of which promised "grave action" and "by whatever means necessary" for lack of compliance. If we want to talk foolhardy jumps into action, let's talk Falklands.

We can remind America how evil war is, because they don't know that, since they have never had a war on their ground since the Civil War.

War, in and of itself, is not evil. It was not evil to resist Nazis. We entered into that war voluntarily and it was not evil of us to do so. It is not evil to wage war to depose genocidal dictators.

We can also remind America that equality is a value similarly important as the value of freedom, and that integration of a society is a very good means of solving problems, rather than expanding differences (see high US crime rates).

I'm pretty sure the US has a way better history with immigrants. We are the melting pot, while Europe concentrates minorities into the urban centers and makes them sell vegetables and kabobs. And we're not the ones banning minarets.



This part I really liked:

we both hold dear the value of a free political system and human rights. America and Europe can be a perfect team, if we just listen to each other and respect each other. We are two sides of the same medal. We should capitalize on that.

Don't worry, Europe. We know you are not evil.

 

[German guy]

German guy, nice post. But allow me to nitpick...

Thanks! And thanks for your input!

I don't think European law is any more fair than US law. Care to expand on this?

I mean general ideas when it comes to international law and the UN. Americans seem often too quick with denouncing the UN, IMHO, while Europeans are too often ignoring its shortcomings. The UN is based on the idea strength of law should replace law of the stronger. The old Kantian idea of the "eternal peace" (if you are familiar with the details of Democratic Peace Theory, I suppose you know Kant's draft as well). By skipping the UN alltogether, the US may easily give up its benefits, which I do think exist. And by clinging to the UN too literally, Europeans fail to take its weak sides into account.

Do you really think people do not know this? Let's not perpetuate the image of careless action by the US. Saddam was in violation of 17 (seventeen!) chapter 7 UNSCRs - the last of which promised "grave action" and "by whatever means necessary" for lack of compliance. If we want to talk foolhardy jumps into action, let's talk Falklands.

You have a good point about the Falklands. But when it comes to Iraq, I think there is still much that didn't go well from the side of the US. If Bush wanted to spread democracy and freedom, and toppling an evil regime, he should have said so in the first place, instead of playing this WMD charade. WMD were not found and experts said before the invasion it's an exaggeration of unreliable intelligence clues at best they have. If you want a war for freedom and democracy, fine, but don't lie to the public. Also, Bush allowed UN inspectors in but ignored their reports. And then, regardless of the dealing with the invasion itself, the post-war situation was poorly planned, probably due to Rumsfeld's plan to use as few soldiers as possible (sending a much stronger occupation force in might have avoided all the years of extreme turmoil in Iraq). Some studies even claim around 650,000+ Iraqi civilians have died post-invasion until 2007, which would be 5 times the number per year than under Saddam.

War, in and of itself, is not evil. It was not evil to resist Nazis. We entered into that war voluntarily and it was not evil of us to do so. It is not evil to wage war to depose genocidal dictators.

Strong disagreement. War means killing, maiming, disfiguring people and robbing even more of them of their property and homes. War is always evil.

The instances you mention are examples for war being the lesser evil. And yes, war can be the lesser evil. But like a counterfire that's lighted against a fire, it will always destroy and leave devastation, and at best is a lesser evil. And just because it's the lesser evil, it doesn't mean it's not still evil.

I'm pretty sure the US has a way better history with immigrants. We are the melting pot, while Europe concentrates minorities into the urban centers and makes them sell vegetables and kabobs. And we're not the ones banning minarets.

Maybe with immigrants (although I wouldn't overestimate that, considering the historic situation of African "immigrants" and prejudices that existed towards certain groups like catholic Irish, or that now exist towards Latin Americans), but not necessarily with certain social groups. America makes a competition between individuals out of every social cleavage. And this strong belief in individual responsibility and blindness for collective responsibilities and solutions results in the situation that *still* the average black income is much lower than the average white income, that unemployment is higher among blacks and education lower among blacks. Yet Americans don't care or even oppose collective approaches for a solution -- because it allegedly defies the individualist dogma that nobody is shaped by his environment, but maker of his own fortune entirely.

Don't worry, Europe. We know you are not evil.

I'm glad to hear that.

And I hope Europeans know the same about Americans.

 

[ecofarm]

If Bush wanted to spread democracy and freedom, and toppling an evil regine, he should have said so in the first place, instead of playing this WMD charade.

Bush spoke of liberating the people of Iraq and building them a better future in every speech. Some people just didn't/don't want to hear it.

Also, Bush allowed UN inspectors in but ignored their reports.

This is not true. In their final report to the UN, the inspectors said that Saddam had kept them from knowing for sure what was there. They never exonerated Saddam, that is a myth.

Some studies even claim around 650,000+ Iraqi civilians have died post-invasion until 2007

And those include every single death by any cause in the country. Perhaps we should pro-rate Saddam's numbers to iclude the Iraq-Iran War, criminal events, auto accidents and natural causes.

War is always evil.

I believe in just war (serving the greater good). Not all war is evil. We agree to disagree then.

African "immigrants"

Quotes being the important thing there. Slaves are not immigrants, in our context at least if at all.

prejudices that existed towards certain groups like catholic Irish,

We had an irish catholic president decades ago.

or that now exist towards Latin Americans

There is no more prejudice againt Latin Americans than anyone else. You are seeing what you want here.

that *still* the average black income is much lower than the average white income, that unemployment is higher among blacks and education lower among blacks.

There are alot of reasons for this, and the most significant one is not "because we're racist". Europe has poor neighborhoods too. We have plenty of poor white neighborhoods; you've never heard of "trailer park trash"?

Yet Americans don't care

Oh, come on!

or even oppose collective approaches for a solution --

How DARE they!? They should take whats given to them, give what is asked, and shut up - right?

because it allegedly defies the individualist dogma that nobody is shaped by his environment, but maker of his own fortune entirely.

This is an unfair simplification and characterization.

 

[German guy]

Bush spoke of liberating the people of Iraq and building them a better future in every speech. Some people just didn't/don't want to hear it.

But that's hardly all he did. Also, in every speech he claimed Iraq is developing WMD, maybe even nukes, fearmongering the people they are about to experience another 9/11 soon by Saddam's hands. Also, every expert said that's absurd, and that if you want to be concerned about WMD and nuclear proliferation, North Korea or Iran would be the real reasons for worry, not Iraq. Also, Bush evoked the impression that Saddam had ties to the 9/11 terrorists and was partly responsible for it. That fearmongering (which probably convinced more people than the freedom argument) was a blatant lie.

I think democratic politicians just shouldn't do that, no matter how much they think they are right. Or no matter how much you agree with their stances. It damages democratic culture.

This is not true. In their final report to the UN, the inspectors said that Saddam had kept them from knowing for sure what was there. They never exonerated Saddam, that is a myth.

Well they didn't exonerate Saddam, but they hardly gave way for an invasion. I'm afraid I don't have time enough here to go deeper into this subject now, but maybe we can continue this topic some day later.

And those include every single death by any cause in the country. Perhaps we should pro-rate Saddam's numbers to iclude the Iraq-Iran War, criminal events, auto accidents and natural causes.

The huge increase to the numbers under Saddam, though, are most likely due to casualties resulting from insurgency, terrorism and rampant criminality the occupation didn't manage to effectively curb at very least until the "surge" in ... when was it? Early 2008? I think it was at very least severe negligence not to send more troops in to stabilize the situation, and to go in without good plans as for what to do after the invasion.

I believe in just war (serving the greater good). Not all war is evil. We agree to disagree then.

Agreed.

 

[ecofarm]

To be fair, no one in recent history has attempted such a feat as overthrowing a genocidal dictator in a backwards country and trying to rebuild it in the image of democracy and western values. For all we know, this is the best that can be done. There's nothing to compare it to and there no way to know how easy it could have been. To claim it was negligent or a disaster is meaningless when we have no idea how good or bad it could have been and we have nothing to compare it to - be fair.

Perhaps we should do the inspectors debate later, I'll quote their final report and we'll see if you can refute it.

 

[Awesome!]

as world cop america gets criticized for its unilateralism. So they need the eu in order to bet some world legitimacy. Militarily, they dont need europe they could go it alone, but the need europe politically, in order to deflect some criticism that there behaving like mr. Jeckel. The worst part is that the eu gets sucked into these phony wars because their all nato members and in world politics everything is complicated and hangs with everything together.

I favor abolishing nato or kicking america out of it and giving it a new name like european arm forces 2001.

we need them to help us plug that damn hole!

 

[ecofarm]

Kicking the US out of NATO!

lol

I wish. We are NATO, if we leave it ceases to exist.

 

[bennyhill]

Well maybe Europe should leave NATO like France did back in 1966! You need us as a figleaf for international legitimacy, but not our armies. So be honest and form your own American alliance of 50 states and zoom where you want and play global cop were needed.

By the way, Utah just killed a con by firing squad! The whole world stood by as you killed a man like our ancestors did with sticks and stones. Thats exacty the kind of marketing America doesnt need. We dont understand why you love executing your own people. It sounds like a preevil thirst for justice that is nolonger social acceptable among most of us outside the USA. Change your ways.

 

[zimmer]

And the cold war has been over almost 25 years.. so what is the excuse now for the massive US military..? Feel free to leave Europe and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

What was that screeching sound we heard during the Iraq war?
America's military was spread too thin?

A little history lesson: You stay vigilant... ever prepared to deter war.
Remember what happened to the Brits post WWI? They falsely believed in world peace.
Peace in our time?
Luckily they had one minister, of the Navy, who built their Navy against the general wishes at the time.
They had one man that saw future threats. He stayed vigilant, and they were lucky he did.
A certain man named Churchill.

If you fail to learn history, you are doomed to repeat it.

.

 

[obvious Child]

What was that screeching sound we heard during the Iraq war?
America's military was spread too thin?

A little history lesson: You stay vigilant... ever prepared to deter war.
Remember what happened to the Brits post WWI? They falsely believed in world peace.
Peace in our time?
Luckily they had one minister, of the Navy, who built their Navy against the general wishes at the time.
They had one man that saw future threats. He stayed vigilant, and they were lucky he did.
A certain man named Churchill.

If you fail to learn history, you are doomed to repeat it.

.

LOL. Apparently you missed the history lesson where Chamberlain ordered the largest military build up in UK history. Furthermore, Chamberlain knew the English were not ready for war.

Hit your textbooks, you're rusty.