|
|
Post by dannyc on Jul 29, 2010 11:14:12 GMT
well if they let turkey join why not russia too there more european than turkey .
|
|
|
|
Post by edgecam on Jul 29, 2010 11:30:34 GMT
I though they were going to sort this out. Now they are saying everyones welcome. Simple view I know but European law means they will be able all come over if let in the European union.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agadoo on Jul 29, 2010 12:46:11 GMT
Why don't we let USA, Africa and Australia join?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fat Andy on Jul 29, 2010 21:29:32 GMT
Cammo is spot on, here. Turkey is being refused accession talks on the basis of petty nationalism and racism.
Turkey, and any other country within the European/Meditteranean spheres should be welcome to join the EU.
Provided they meet proper accession criteria (which, incidentally, a large number of Eastern European states didn't).
1 - adhere to all conditions of European court of human rights
2 - no border disputes
3 - per capita GDP above 80% of EU average
4 - debt and deficit levels meeting Maastricht criteria
5 - no internal civil strife
etc, etc.
Turkey should absolutely be allowed to join. But it's going to take a bloody long time until they reach reasonable accession criteria.
They should not, though, be refused on the basis of their religion or location.
|
|
|
|
Post by broncobullfrog on Jul 30, 2010 7:53:23 GMT
If they do join I think more of them will come here than the Poles that came here unless we have restrictions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ricky Otto on Jul 30, 2010 9:06:21 GMT
If they do join I think more of them will come here than the Poles that came here unless we have restrictions. 1 - adhere to all conditions of European court of human rights 2 - no border disputes Erm......Armenian border disputes? Cyprus border disputes? Human Rights of the Kurds? |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cannell on Jul 30, 2010 10:55:28 GMT
1 - adhere to all conditions of European court of human rights 2 - no border disputes Erm......Armenian border disputes? Cyprus border disputes? Human Rights of the Kurds? Armenia? Britain's in, Germany's in, Belgium's in; I don't think historical disputes mean anything. Kurds? Don't mean much unless you consider the separation of parts of Iraq & Syria - I can't see the EU getting into that. Cyprus - afaik there are very few of the original inhabitants of northern Cyprus: the Bubbles got moved and all the Turkish Cypriots ran for Istanbul when the Anatolians started coming. It's academic anyway; the Turks won't join. Not any more. And the EU won't have them, never would. Just the usual Cameron trick of saying what sounds nice with no intention of backing it up; smooth oily bastard that he is. |
|
|
|
Post by Tony W on Jul 30, 2010 11:40:20 GMT
1 - adhere to all conditions of European court of human rights 2 - no border disputes Erm......Armenian border disputes? Cyprus border disputes? Human Rights of the Kurds? Think you missed FA's point there. It's not a matter of saying that Turkey should be brought into the EU fold now regardless. It's a matter of giving them a list of criteria for membership, and then bringing them into the EU if and when they adhere to those criteria (should they choose to do so). And that's going to be a long time from now. But certain countries - particularly the French it seems - seem to be reticent to engage in the process at all. Whether that's down to worries over European control, or simple racial or religious discrimination, it's wrong. And it's that which Cameron is quite rightly railing against. |
|
|
|
Post by Ricky Otto on Jul 30, 2010 13:06:54 GMT
1 - adhere to all conditions of European court of human rights 2 - no border disputes Erm......Armenian border disputes? Cyprus border disputes? Human Rights of the Kurds? Think you missed FA's point there. It's not a matter of saying that Turkey should be brought into the EU fold now regardless. It's a matter of giving them a list of criteria for membership, and then bringing them into the EU if and when they adhere to those criteria (should they choose to do so). And that's going to be a long time from now. But certain countries - particularly the French it seems - seem to be reticent to engage in the process at all. Whether that's down to worries over European control, or simple racial or religious discrimination, it's wrong. And it's that which Cameron is quite rightly railing against. Agreed. Having re-read the post I got the exact polar opposite of his point. |
|
|
|
Post by Yellow River on Jul 31, 2010 9:07:23 GMT
Cameron is like an estate agent......telling you what you want to hear.
In Turkey he tells his audience (the Turks) that they deserve to be part of the EU.
In India he tells his audience (the Indians) that Pakistan are not doing enough to combat terrorists.
In USA he tells his audience (the Americans) that Britain was the junior partner in 1940.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ricky Otto on Jul 31, 2010 17:22:50 GMT
Cameron is like an estate agent......telling you what you want to hear. In Turkey he tells his audience (the Turks) that they deserve to be part of the EU. In India he tells his audience (the Indians) that Pakistan are not doing enough to combat terrorists. In USA he tells his audience (the Americans) that Britain was the junior partner in 1940. Your theory would of course work but for: 1. Delivering a very tough budget and delivering some huge cuts as reqiured) 2. Telling Pakistan to buck up their game |
|
|
|
Post by Barmy Army on Aug 1, 2010 8:35:26 GMT
Cameron is like an estate agent......telling you what you want to hear. In Turkey he tells his audience (the Turks) that they deserve to be part of the EU. In India he tells his audience (the Indians) that Pakistan are not doing enough to combat terrorists. In USA he tells his audience (the Americans) that Britain was the junior partner in 1940. Your theory would of course work but for: 1. Delivering a very tough budget and delivering some huge cuts as reqiured) 2. Telling Pakistan to buck up their game Doesnt look like telling the indians that Pakistan have to sort out terrorism in their country has gone down to well in Pakistan. Hardly a wise thing to say. |
|
|
|
Post by Ricky Otto on Aug 1, 2010 10:54:38 GMT
Your theory would of course work but for: 1. Delivering a very tough budget and delivering some huge cuts as reqiured) 2. Telling Pakistan to buck up their game Doesnt look like telling the indians that Pakistan have to sort out terrorism in their country has gone down to well in Pakistan. Hardly a wise thing to say. Disagree. The Pakistani intelligence service need to get their act in order. Elements have been assisting the Afghans. Why shoudn't Cameron call the out on it? their response is a smokescreen to try and deflect attention |
|
|
|
Post by Barmy Army on Aug 1, 2010 11:15:57 GMT
Doesnt look like telling the indians that Pakistan have to sort out terrorism in their country has gone down to well in Pakistan. Hardly a wise thing to say. Disagree. The Pakistani intelligence service need to get their act in order. Elements have been assisting the Afghans. Why shoudn't Cameron call the out on it? their response is a smokescreen to try and deflect attention Tell Pakistan, not India. |
|
|
|
Post by dabigfella on Aug 1, 2010 12:34:50 GMT
Disagree. The Pakistani intelligence service need to get their act in order. Elements have been assisting the Afghans. Why shoudn't Cameron call the out on it? their response is a smokescreen to try and deflect attention Tell Pakistan, not India. Don't be silly. Cock up Cameron doesn't want to upset Pakistanis now does he. Too many of them over here vote Tory!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Ricky Otto on Aug 3, 2010 8:20:42 GMT
Interesting to see the protests in Pakistan against Cameron with the 'Loo Mouth# sign.
THey then burnt an effigy. On closer inspection I had never realised how similar Cameron looks to Tony Blair, George Bush, Salman Rushdie and the Danish Cartoon artist.
|
|
|
|
Post by edgecam on Aug 3, 2010 8:32:25 GMT
They should not, though, be refused on the basis of their religion or location.[/quote]
Surly location is very important when joining the European Union.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barmy Army on Aug 3, 2010 8:42:15 GMT
This is not my specialist subject but i believe Mr Cameron and his party have a policy to reduce immigration. Im not sure of the figures but believe that 80% of our immegrants come from within the EU and there is nothing he can do to stop these. He has pledged to cut the remaing by 20% (i think), meaning a reduction of 4% in total. Im not sure this policy is worth shouting about or anyone will notice the difference.
He then wants Turkey to join the EU and they will be free to enter the country, surely this would bring in more than the 4% he has stopped? All sounds very hippocritical to me, not sure i should expect anything else from a politician.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cannell on Aug 3, 2010 11:52:43 GMT
The Pakistani intelligence service need to get their act in order. Could be the understatement of the year. The ISI has been engaged in a number of relationships over the past decades, with regard only to the Afghan situation an incomplete list would include: - supporting the 'mojehaddin' (who became the Taliban and Al Qaeda) against the Russians
- supporting client leaders against the mojehaddin
- supporting client leaders for the Taliban
- supporting our War of Terror against the Taliban
- supporting the Taliban against our War of Terror
- helping 'Islamists' set up camps in Pakistan
- opposing islamists in Pakistan
- helping the Mericans carry out extra-judicial murder and torture in Pakistan
- opposing their own client leaders in the Swat valley
- (allegedly and quite feasibly) shortening Benazir Bhutto's last taxi ride
Who controls the SIS? Who knows? Are they a single entity that can be controlled? I doubt it. Of course the outrage is a smokescreen, the question is who's blowing it? The only thing that can be asserted with any confident is that the egregious Mr Smooth has demonstrated that he can only talk in catch-phrases and doesn't have any understanding of nuance. |
|
|
|
Post by Lone Gunman on Aug 3, 2010 15:46:07 GMT
Cameron is like an estate agent......telling you what you want to hear. In Turkey he tells his audience (the Turks) that they deserve to be part of the EU. In India he tells his audience (the Indians) that Pakistan are not doing enough to combat terrorists. In USA he tells his audience (the Americans) that Britain was the junior partner in 1940. Absolutely spot on, you took the words right out of my mouth. In pakistan he'll probably criticise indian policy over kashmir! On the turkey issue, I think the difficulties go beyond petty racism or religious issues, and even beyond turkey's dodgy human rights record and interesting style of 'guided democracy.' For me it boils down to the fact that the EU is struggling to organise and engage with the nations which are already a part of it. The last thing it needs to do, at the moment, is to admit another large and populous country. Once the EU has sorted out the serous problems already hamstringing it, and got the countries it has to form some kind of consensus and harmonous relationship it should look to admitting more nations, but not before this has occurred. |
|
