‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
Could we see a new Government formed? The Social Democrats, Freedom Party and Greens would between them have a majority in the Austrian Parliament but it's hard to see a stable coalition.
The last poll I saw had the People's Party still well ahead of the opposition with a solid 33-35% of the vote.
I dislike Kurz. He's my age but has already been leader of his country for years, while I'm beginning to suspect I'll never lead mine.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
I do have to say: I am not one for rigorous dress codes, but if pubbing in downtown Torry, probably less with the blazers, already. Painting a target on one's back...
'There are three things that smell o' fesh, one o' them is Torry'
Think there are a tiny amount fish houses left in Torry nowadays, but it still smells a touch fishy.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
I do have to say: I am not one for rigorous dress codes, but if pubbing in downtown Torry, probably less with the blazers, already. Painting a target on one's back...
'There are three things that smell o' fesh, one o' them is Torry'
Think there a tiny amount fish houses left in Torry nowadays, but it still smells a touch fishy.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
However you can see the logic. Who decides if Warsaw has broken the EU Treaties. The ECJ. That's who. The ECJ, which is not an independent court at all but a self-aggrandising, power-grabbing arm of the EU, always finding in favour of the EU, and always trying to extend EU powers further and wider, until the final goal of a Federal Europe is achieved. Hopefully by stealth
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
Could we see a new Government formed? The Social Democrats, Freedom Party and Greens would between them have a majority in the Austrian Parliament but it's hard to see a stable coalition.
The last poll I saw had the People's Party still well ahead of the opposition with a solid 33-35% of the vote.
I dislike Kurz. He's my age but has already been leader of his country for years, while I'm beginning to suspect I'll never lead mine.
This has to be the best Scottish performance in the last 10 years, way better than when they played England off the park in the Euros. And they could still lose.
I was enjoying watching the match in my new local - but the SNP types were threatning to cut my foreskin off so I thought it best just to leave.
What a nightmare Nippy and Eck have created.
Seriously? Jesus.
It was quite scary. But that's Scotland nowadays
An 'anecdote' by some PB rando is half way round the heads of the gullible before the truth has put its boots on.
The reason I believe it Divvie is that so many see so much of this sad, pathetic crap. Of course many supporters of independence are not like this but there are too many that are.
Since I'm probably the only other person on here who has drunk in Torry bars (more often than the persecuted JBriskin3 by the sounds of it) I can quite believe that if some twerp in a blazer started going on about 'SNP types' and betting against Scotland is the value during a Scotland match, he may very well get short shrift. I also note that those who love getting exercised by this type of unverifiable anecdote were largely unmoved by thousands of racist, sectarian unionists shitting (in some cases literally) all over the centre of Scotland's largest city, twice.
Still, I would be most interested to know the tell tale signs of 'SNP types' to help me in my efforts to blend in to normal society.
One also wonders why tthe subject of Mr Briskin's foreskin came up. It's not a subject that has great prominence (no pun intended) in general Sc ottish discourse. He wasn't waving it, was he?
One suspect people may have associated supporting Israel with a desire to be circumcised
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
May be you could call it the Austro-Hungarian Republic?
Great idea. Suggest it. They might Magyar an offer to help set it up.
I’m sure I could Finn-aigle something
Although you have to start at the Krakow dawn every morning.
You just Lviv for these puns, right? You used to Lvov them, but then stuff happened
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
Sorry, I was conflating the Treaty - which speaks in broad terms - and the Aquis, which are the conditions that countries have to meet to joint the EU.
The words "independent judiciary" may seem fairly innocuous, but they refer to a specific thing. That the government cannot simply choose to fire judges at will. Sure, you can have processes for stripping judges of their power (as we do in the UK), but what you cannot have is the executive able to fire judges for giving inconvenient rulings.
Could we see a new Government formed? The Social Democrats, Freedom Party and Greens would between them have a majority in the Austrian Parliament but it's hard to see a stable coalition.
The last poll I saw had the People's Party still well ahead of the opposition with a solid 33-35% of the vote.
I dislike Kurz. He's my age but has already been leader of his country for years, while I'm beginning to suspect I'll never lead mine.
Still considerably older than the Younger Pitt.
On leaving office?
Well, on entering it actually - 31 as against 24. Although Pitt came very close to being removed in 1789 when still only 29.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
However you can see the logic. Who decides if Warsaw has broken the EU Treaties. The ECJ. That's who. The ECJ, which is not an independent court at all but a self-aggrandising, power-grabbing arm of the EU, always finding in favour of the EU, and always trying to extend EU powers further and wider, until the final goal of a Federal Europe is achieved. Hopefully by stealth
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
Of course. This is one of the reasons why we chose to leave. The CJE is a farce of a court and their judgments are often incomprehensible as our Supreme Court pointed out on several occasions. It is politics by law without democracy. We are very well out of it. But so long as you are in these are the rules of the club.
Greece was amazing. Sad to not be on holiday but nice feeling to be home again. Definitely a real sense of relief when we touched down in Stansted, got in the car and drove back to my parents' house.
Food wise, Greece has got great herb game but very poor spice game. Bit of cinnamon in some stuff but otherwise a real lack of spice and therefore flavour. Italians have clearly got the superior cuisine, probably Span and Portugal as well. Some Greek food is really good when it's done well but it's not got enough variety to really challenge the top European cuisines. The best dinner was the tasting menu at the resort but really that was just Modern Mediterranean rather than anything specifically Greek. As a North Londoner I'm going to upset a lot of Greeks by saying our Greek food in North London is better than what I had in most greek places, just a lot more flavour.
We even went to a random taverna recommended by the waitress when one of our party asked for the name of where the locals eat and the menus aren't available in English. She sent us there and in terms of Greek food it was really very good but I think I've discovered that it just has a very low ceiling, like English food. I enjoy it when it's done well but traditional English food has got a low ceiling as well.
You need to try Athens. That is where a new Greek cuisine is being made and it is maybe as good as modern British (from a similarly basic level!)
Yeah I guess that's fair, what really made it for me was the generous spirit of the people. When we went to the Greek only taverna the guy was so amazed to have 8 foreigners eating at his place, he didn't do the free raki and free small desert you get in the tourist towns but he was a really amazing host, you could tell he just wanted all of us to have an amazing experience of traditional Greek food, which we did.
I've also discovered that German tourists are the Chinese tourists of Europe. They've absolutely overtaken us as the worst tourists of Europe. Loud, obnoxious, act as if they own anywhere they walk into. Specifically the middle aged ones, younger ones seemed pretty cool when we got chatting to some at the beach. Maybe it's a baby boomer thing across the whole world, the generation is just full of entitled wankers regardless of the specific country.
Where were you? Crete? One of the other islands?
Greece is brilliant, and yes there is a particular type of arrogant German, I know exactly what you mean. I have actually seen dust-ups between Greeks and these Germans. The Greeks do Hitler salutes to mock their strutting.
Intriguing
The Greeks I have met are also more pro-British than they used to be, because Brexit, I think (also they just missed our money during Covid). They are probably the most eurosceptic country left in the EU, for obvious reasons
Whereas in parts of France, say, you can sometimes detect a definite new chilliness, at least in officialdom
We were in Crete. We had a private chef for 5 days of the 10 and that was good but he did Modern Mediterranean food and specialised in Mediterranean BBQ which was incredible but not particularly greek, especially the use of smoking methods it felt more Latin.
Yeah the Greeks were amazing and we're a pretty European group, three English, one Swiss (my wife), two Italians, one Finn and one Dutch. But yeah, you could tell that they weren't massively impressed by the older Germans. The older German couple talking loudly in English to an older English couple about how Greeks were all lazy was definitely a low for German tourists, really quite embarrassing and cringey.
Ask them whether their grandparents had any experience in enforcing labour by workshy foreigners.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
May be you could call it the Austro-Hungarian Republic?
Great idea. Suggest it. They might Magyar an offer to help set it up.
I’m sure I could Finn-aigle something
Although you have to start at the Krakow dawn every morning.
You just Lviv for these puns, right? You used to Lvov them, but then stuff happened
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
However you can see the logic. Who decides if Warsaw has broken the EU Treaties. The ECJ. That's who. The ECJ, which is not an independent court at all but a self-aggrandising, power-grabbing arm of the EU, always finding in favour of the EU, and always trying to extend EU powers further and wider, until the final goal of a Federal Europe is achieved. Hopefully by stealth
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
Of course. This is one of the reasons why we chose to leave. The CJE is a farce of a court and their judgments are often incomprehensible as our Supreme Court pointed out on several occasions. It is politics by law without democracy. We are very well out of it. But so long as you are in these are the rules of the club.
Protecting the rule of law and independent judiciary?
No wonder the EU is so popular amongst the Polish people.
Could we see a new Government formed? The Social Democrats, Freedom Party and Greens would between them have a majority in the Austrian Parliament but it's hard to see a stable coalition.
The last poll I saw had the People's Party still well ahead of the opposition with a solid 33-35% of the vote.
I dislike Kurz. He's my age but has already been leader of his country for years, while I'm beginning to suspect I'll never lead mine.
It's I think the first case of an alleged corruption scandal hinging on bribing a pollster to show rigged results. The pollster concerned dominates the Austrian polling scene but it'ds not obvious that their findings are wildly out of line:
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
in another article I read this morning, a Polish government spokesman flat-out says "Poland would like to copy Britain and Brexit, but Poland is not as as strong as Britain"
So they REALLY do want to quit, theoretically, but in practice how on earth can they, when they are so reliant on EU trade, subsidies, free movement.
And yet now we see this double-down from Hungary. Where on earth does the compromise come from? I can't see Warsaw simply folding, but then Brussels cannot yield an inch, either
I think Poland and Hungary want to do an internal Brexit within the EU.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
May be you could call it the Austro-Hungarian Republic?
Great idea. Suggest it. They might Magyar an offer to help set it up.
I’m sure I could Finn-aigle something
Although you have to start at the Krakow dawn every morning.
You just Lviv for these puns, right? You used to Lvov them, but then stuff happened
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
However you can see the logic. Who decides if Warsaw has broken the EU Treaties. The ECJ. That's who. The ECJ, which is not an independent court at all but a self-aggrandising, power-grabbing arm of the EU, always finding in favour of the EU, and always trying to extend EU powers further and wider, until the final goal of a Federal Europe is achieved. Hopefully by stealth
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
Of course. This is one of the reasons why we chose to leave. The CJE is a farce of a court and their judgments are often incomprehensible as our Supreme Court pointed out on several occasions. It is politics by law without democracy. We are very well out of it. But so long as you are in these are the rules of the club.
Its only the rules of the club, so long as the members agree it is.
Are you saying that if the ECJ makes a ruling that it palpably has no standing to make (apologies if that's not the right legal term) then the nations courts can't do anything about that? That there's absolutely no way to say "that's not authorised by the Treaty so the ECJ has no right to rule on that"?
Since the ECJ and the EU are not a nation in their own right, they only have whatever powers the Treaties have deferred upon it. The nation's supreme courts as defenders of their own constitutions surely have a right to say "we did not grant the EU that power since its not in the Treaty" and thus rule a proviso out of order?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
However you can see the logic. Who decides if Warsaw has broken the EU Treaties. The ECJ. That's who. The ECJ, which is not an independent court at all but a self-aggrandising, power-grabbing arm of the EU, always finding in favour of the EU, and always trying to extend EU powers further and wider, until the final goal of a Federal Europe is achieved. Hopefully by stealth
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
Of course. This is one of the reasons why we chose to leave. The CJE is a farce of a court and their judgments are often incomprehensible as our Supreme Court pointed out on several occasions. It is politics by law without democracy. We are very well out of it. But so long as you are in these are the rules of the club.
Protecting the rule of law and independent judiciary?
No wonder the EU is so popular amongst the Polish people.
I know I can be quite subtle about it but I am not the greatest fan of the EU as a structure. But I do not agree with @Philip_Thompson's position that they are the bad guys here. The roots of democracy in Poland are still shallow and the EU can indeed help them to thrive. I am on their side on this.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
in another article I read this morning, a Polish government spokesman flat-out says "Poland would like to copy Britain and Brexit, but Poland is not as as strong as Britain"
So they REALLY do want to quit, theoretically, but in practice how on earth can they, when they are so reliant on EU trade, subsidies, free movement.
And yet now we see this double-down from Hungary. Where on earth does the compromise come from? I can't see Warsaw simply folding, but then Brussels cannot yield an inch, either
I think Poland and Hungary want to do an internal Brexit within the EU.
I think that for all the handbags they won't be leaving or expelled. Indeed the division of powers between EU and National structures is something Barnier is campaigning on in France too. Pity we aren't still in so we can contribute to the discussion, though it may well evolve to bring forward the time that we Rejoin.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
However you can see the logic. Who decides if Warsaw has broken the EU Treaties. The ECJ. That's who. The ECJ, which is not an independent court at all but a self-aggrandising, power-grabbing arm of the EU, always finding in favour of the EU, and always trying to extend EU powers further and wider, until the final goal of a Federal Europe is achieved. Hopefully by stealth
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
Of course. This is one of the reasons why we chose to leave. The CJE is a farce of a court and their judgments are often incomprehensible as our Supreme Court pointed out on several occasions. It is politics by law without democracy. We are very well out of it. But so long as you are in these are the rules of the club.
Its only the rules of the club, so long as the members agree it is.
Are you saying that if the ECJ makes a ruling that it palpably has no standing to make (apologies if that's not the right legal term) then the nations courts can't do anything about that? That there's absolutely no way to say "that's not authorised by the Treaty so the ECJ has no right to rule on that"?
Since the ECJ and the EU are not a nation in their own right, they only have whatever powers the Treaties have deferred upon it. The nation's supreme courts as defenders of their own constitutions surely have a right to say "we did not grant the EU that power since its not in the Treaty" and thus rule a proviso out of order?
No they can't Philip because the CJE itself is the guardian of the Treaties and has been agreed by all Member States to be the body which determines what the Treaties mean. In theory all of the Member States acting together could change the treaties to change that but no one state has the right to say that a particular decision is ultra vires the Court. The German Constitutional Court has maintained it does have that right but they have never actually used it. The Poles were claiming such a right but it does not exist. These are the fundamental bedrock of the EU's very existence.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
With the departure of the UK from the EU, has France now assumed our mantle of Billy No-mates?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
in another article I read this morning, a Polish government spokesman flat-out says "Poland would like to copy Britain and Brexit, but Poland is not as as strong as Britain"
So they REALLY do want to quit, theoretically, but in practice how on earth can they, when they are so reliant on EU trade, subsidies, free movement.
And yet now we see this double-down from Hungary. Where on earth does the compromise come from? I can't see Warsaw simply folding, but then Brussels cannot yield an inch, either
I think Poland and Hungary want to do an internal Brexit within the EU.
I think that for all the handbags they won't be leaving or expelled. Indeed the division of powers between EU and National structures is something Barnier is campaigning on in France too. Pity we aren't still in so we can contribute to the discussion, though it may well evolve to bring forward the time that we Rejoin.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
No, I do not. I seriously dislike what the EU has become ("loathe" is a bit too strong) but even on the day of the referendum my vote was 50/50 until the final minute, for selfish personal reasons - I could foresee the unavoidable economic pain and turbulence of Leave, and the damage to London in particular (and I am a London property owner)
But in the end I voted for my kids, because in the long term the EU is a failing, anti-democratic project, a silly, sometimes ghastly hybrid, and we are better off out, better off being and ruling ourselves
I wrote on here the other day my many reasons for admiring the ideals that founded the EU, they remain true. Free Movement was the best one of all. And I miss it. It was perhaps a sad but necessary sacrifice which I hope can be restored, somehow, in part and in time
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
in another article I read this morning, a Polish government spokesman flat-out says "Poland would like to copy Britain and Brexit, but Poland is not as as strong as Britain"
So they REALLY do want to quit, theoretically, but in practice how on earth can they, when they are so reliant on EU trade, subsidies, free movement.
And yet now we see this double-down from Hungary. Where on earth does the compromise come from? I can't see Warsaw simply folding, but then Brussels cannot yield an inch, either
I think Poland and Hungary want to do an internal Brexit within the EU.
I think that for all the handbags they won't be leaving or expelled. Indeed the division of powers between EU and National structures is something Barnier is campaigning on in France too. Pity we aren't still in so we can contribute to the discussion, though it may well evolve to bring forward the time that we Rejoin.
But some might ask "If we could do a de facto accommodation with Poland and Hungary to keep them in the tent - why the fuck did we lose the UK?"
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
in another article I read this morning, a Polish government spokesman flat-out says "Poland would like to copy Britain and Brexit, but Poland is not as as strong as Britain"
So they REALLY do want to quit, theoretically, but in practice how on earth can they, when they are so reliant on EU trade, subsidies, free movement.
And yet now we see this double-down from Hungary. Where on earth does the compromise come from? I can't see Warsaw simply folding, but then Brussels cannot yield an inch, either
I think Poland and Hungary want to do an internal Brexit within the EU.
I think that for all the handbags they won't be leaving or expelled. Indeed the division of powers between EU and National structures is something Barnier is campaigning on in France too. Pity we aren't still in so we can contribute to the discussion, though it may well evolve to bring forward the time that we Rejoin.
But some might ask "If we could do a de facto accommodation with Poland and Hungary to keep them in the tent - why the fuck did we lose the UK?"
I doubt it would provoke an introspective reaction. And without sentiment for leaving behind them Poland and Hungary can be faced down.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
May be you could call it the Austro-Hungarian Republic?
The real concern for the Poles I know is that they see that Germany will seek to do anything but oppose Russia.
They, being reasonable people, understand that this is motivated as much by historical reasons as anything else.
But the concern is that in "seeking to do anything but oppose Russia", Germany will do for Eastern Europe what they did for Ukraine. Not as a gaol of betraying anyone, but given a choice between pushing back against Russia or not........
Quite simply, they trust the US to be un-diplomatic and a bit gun happy. The only thing they think will give Putin some pause.
I think the Labour share is just as likely to go down in Old Bexley as the Tory share. Lab could lose votes to the Greens and similar parties, while the Tories could lose votes to Reform UK, etc, probably resulting in not much swing between the two main parties.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
in another article I read this morning, a Polish government spokesman flat-out says "Poland would like to copy Britain and Brexit, but Poland is not as as strong as Britain"
So they REALLY do want to quit, theoretically, but in practice how on earth can they, when they are so reliant on EU trade, subsidies, free movement.
And yet now we see this double-down from Hungary. Where on earth does the compromise come from? I can't see Warsaw simply folding, but then Brussels cannot yield an inch, either
I think Poland and Hungary want to do an internal Brexit within the EU.
They want to have their cake and eat it too.
And since they can each respectively veto any attempted expulsion of the other, the EU is quite powerless to deal with it.
Makes me think of the early SCOTUS case Worcester v Georgia and the possibly apocryphal quote by President Jackson: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"
I think the Labour share is just as likely to go down in Old Bexley as the Tory share. Lab could lose votes to the Greens and similar parties, while the Tories could lose votes to Reform UK, etc, probably resulting in not much swing between the two main parties.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
in another article I read this morning, a Polish government spokesman flat-out says "Poland would like to copy Britain and Brexit, but Poland is not as as strong as Britain"
So they REALLY do want to quit, theoretically, but in practice how on earth can they, when they are so reliant on EU trade, subsidies, free movement.
And yet now we see this double-down from Hungary. Where on earth does the compromise come from? I can't see Warsaw simply folding, but then Brussels cannot yield an inch, either
I think Poland and Hungary want to do an internal Brexit within the EU.
I think that for all the handbags they won't be leaving or expelled. Indeed the division of powers between EU and National structures is something Barnier is campaigning on in France too. Pity we aren't still in so we can contribute to the discussion, though it may well evolve to bring forward the time that we Rejoin.
But some might ask "If we could do a de facto accommodation with Poland and Hungary to keep them in the tent - why the fuck did we lose the UK?"
I don't think they can chuck Poland and Hungary out.
There is a the "we can't abandon the liberals' argument.
There is also the geo-political argument - you'd then have a couple of countries in a mess, looking to plug a big hole in their budgets. What happens if China (say) decides to rent Hungary for a few billion a year?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I've even tried mentally putting my own punctuation into your post but it didn't help. Should I try google translate?
Perhaps not surprising that Johnson is blocking efforts to deal with harassment of women and girls. But interesting that Patel seems to be briefing against him on the issue.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I was only talking about @Leon not Leave voters en masse, and I base it his and his predecessors posts over a number of years.
Leave voters no doubt had many different reasons for voting the way they did, as did Remain voters.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I've even tried mentally putting my own punctuation into your post but it didn't help. Should I try google translate?
People who are driven by a desire for the days of Empire are a very small minority.
Ergo, blaming that tiny minority for actions (Brexit and otherwise) taken and supported by more than a small minority is extremely lazy and also incorrect.
I suspect that people like to reach for that explanation because it is simple, and it means everything is entirely the fault of a group of inherently unreasonable people.
And so avoids the need for any more meaningful analysis of complex situations.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
If the EU is not a nation state and is a trade organisation or similar then absolutely national constitutions should have primacy. Interestingly the German constitutional court has made a similar ruling, but that wasn't as controversial as the Poles saying the same thing as the Germans since the EU won't stand up to the Germans in the same way as it would to the Poles.
One irony is that the UK far more than any other nation treated the supremacy of EU law as unchallengeable. In part because we embedded the EU into our own unwritten constitution but the Poles haven't to the same extent.
Certainly in America if there's a conflict between their own Constitution and an international 'law' or agreement then their Constitution remains supreme. There's no real reason why it shouldn't be the same for the Germans and Poles and anyone else.
If that cuts the EU back down to size and makes the principle of subsidiarity actually mean something, then the EU might be better in the long-run for it.
Yeah, but when you sign the treaty to join the EU, you agree to certain things - and that includes areas where EU law is above national law.
If you don't like them, then you either negotiate to change the treaties, or you leave.
Yes but the issue is that the ECJ chooses to extend their authority into areas the treaties did not specify they are above national law.
There is nothing in the treaties to say that the EU gets a say in national courts and the ECJ ruling was extremely biased to give the EU such a say. In which case I see nothing unreasonable in national courts interpreting the treaties in their own way and saying "no, that's not in the treaty, its not your jurisdiction".
Hang on there.
In Article 2 of the fundamental Treaty on the European Union it lists obligations on the states, including an Independent Judiciary, and what it means to have one.
There is no doubt that the recent Polish moves are in contravention of that obligation, because they mean that the President can dismiss judges who give rulings that they disagree with.
I think you are conflating a perfectly reasonable objection the ECJ (that it is fundamentally expansionist in aims), with a clear breach of treaty obligations by the Poles.
Where exactly does it say that the ECJ can rule on the composition of national courts? How is it defined?
Unless I'm looking at the wrong Article 2, I'm not seeing it here.
The rule of law requires an independent judiciary. Otherwise it is just gangsterism with a warrant. See Russia.
And that being listed as a "value" gives a blank cheque to the ECJ to cast whatever judgments it feels like? Despite no powers for the ECJ of jurisdiction there being listed? Or any obligations either?
It is a condition of membership of the club to which Poland and every other member signed up and the CJE are given the task of ensuring compliance with those treaties by the Member States. If you don't like that you have the option of leaving, see Brexit.
However you can see the logic. Who decides if Warsaw has broken the EU Treaties. The ECJ. That's who. The ECJ, which is not an independent court at all but a self-aggrandising, power-grabbing arm of the EU, always finding in favour of the EU, and always trying to extend EU powers further and wider, until the final goal of a Federal Europe is achieved. Hopefully by stealth
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
Of course. This is one of the reasons why we chose to leave. The CJE is a farce of a court and their judgments are often incomprehensible as our Supreme Court pointed out on several occasions. It is politics by law without democracy. We are very well out of it. But so long as you are in these are the rules of the club.
Its only the rules of the club, so long as the members agree it is.
Are you saying that if the ECJ makes a ruling that it palpably has no standing to make (apologies if that's not the right legal term) then the nations courts can't do anything about that? That there's absolutely no way to say "that's not authorised by the Treaty so the ECJ has no right to rule on that"?
Since the ECJ and the EU are not a nation in their own right, they only have whatever powers the Treaties have deferred upon it. The nation's supreme courts as defenders of their own constitutions surely have a right to say "we did not grant the EU that power since its not in the Treaty" and thus rule a proviso out of order?
No they can't Philip because the CJE itself is the guardian of the Treaties and has been agreed by all Member States to be the body which determines what the Treaties mean. In theory all of the Member States acting together could change the treaties to change that but no one state has the right to say that a particular decision is ultra vires the Court. The German Constitutional Court has maintained it does have that right but they have never actually used it. The Poles were claiming such a right but it does not exist. These are the fundamental bedrock of the EU's very existence.
The German Constitutional Court has maintained it does have that right. The Polish has now said so too.
If the national courts claim that right and most importantly have the ability to enforce that which the CJE lack, then how can it be said that right doesn't exist after all?
If the Germans and the Poles exercise this right and the CJE has no ability to reverse this, so that ultimately its maintained that this right does de facto exist - then surely in the end it does exist?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I was only talking about @Leon not Leave voters en masse, and I base it his and his predecessors posts over a number of years.
Leave voters no doubt had many different reasons for voting the way they did, as did Remain voters.
When someone is all over the place I don't think pinning it on Imperial yearning makes sense even individually. But I cannot speak for them, admittedly.
But it is a pet peeve of mine how often it gets trotted out as an explanation for so many things.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I've even tried mentally putting my own punctuation into your post but it didn't help. Should I try google translate?
I had the same issue. Ultimately I assumed @kle4 was trying to say that nostalgia for the Empire was not the sole reason for the Leave vote, which I entirely concur with.
I suspect it (Empire nostalgia) was only a factor for a minority of Leave voters. Sovereignty, immigration, red tape, concerns about democracy, loss of identity, jobs, standard of living, and of course simple dislike of foreigners... these and others all played a part and I have some sympathy for a number of these.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is extremely real and long has been.
The AUKUS agreement is just the newest in a very long line of arrangements that are a part of the Anglosphere.
One of the most consequential and longest running is Five Eyes, which has done far, far more for our security than the EU ever could or did. More practical and more important even than NATO.
If you seriously don't think the Anglosphere is real, then it just shows you're either completely ignorant of the facts, or you're utterly delusional.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I've even tried mentally putting my own punctuation into your post but it didn't help. Should I try google translate?
People who are driven by a desire for the days of Empire are a very small minority.
Ergo, blaming that tiny minority for actions (Brexit and otherwise) taken and supported by more than a small minority is extremely lazy and also incorrect.
I suspect that people like to reach for that explanation because it is simple, and it means everything is entirely the fault of a group of inherently unreasonable people.
And so avoids the need for any more meaningful analysis of complex situations.
Agreed. But let me be quite clear: I am only talking about @Leon, based on his posts. I do not think Empire nostalgia is common nor do I think it was factor for any but a very small minority of Leave voters.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
May be you could call it the Austro-Hungarian Republic?
Great idea. Suggest it. They might Magyar an offer to help set it up.
I’m sure I could Finn-aigle something
Although you have to start at the Krakow dawn every morning.
You just Lviv for these puns, right? You used to Lvov them, but then stuff happened
A real case of Płock and Łuck
Łódź a stop, please
Can I do Hakk & Spitt the Flemish comedians here, or would it be out of place?
Poland and Hungary should leave the EU if they don’t like the rules . But the governments are happy to slag off the EU whilst taking the money . If their next elections turn into a proxy for EU membership then they could be in trouble.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
Amusingly the most unified the EU has ever been is when the UK filled that role for them.
Now that Brexit's done they're back to squabbling amongst themselves. And to quote TSE Ireland are getting pounded like a stepmom on pornhub with the changes to corporation tax.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Narnia exists! I read about it in a book and everything!
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Narnia exists! I read about it in a book and everything!
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
Amusingly the most unified the EU has ever been is when the UK filled that role for them.
Now that Brexit's done they're back to squabbling amongst themselves. And to quote TSE Ireland are getting pounded like a stepmom on pornhub with the changes to corporation tax.
I'd be wary of seeming to exult in that. It would mean the EU has incentive to kick off more Brexit wrangling, or keep the current amount going, so hardly helps us.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I've even tried mentally putting my own punctuation into your post but it didn't help. Should I try google translate?
People who are driven by a desire for the days of Empire are a very small minority.
Ergo, blaming that tiny minority for actions (Brexit and otherwise) taken and supported by more than a small minority is extremely lazy and also incorrect.
I suspect that people like to reach for that explanation because it is simple, and it means everything is entirely the fault of a group of inherently unreasonable people.
And so avoids the need for any more meaningful analysis of complex situations.
Agreed. But let me be quite clear: I am only talking about @Leon, based on his posts. I do not think Empire nostalgia is common nor do I think it was factor for any but a very small minority of Leave voters.
Do you - honestly - think I crave for the return of British gunboat diplomacy and that, moreover, this was a driving factor in my Leave vote?
I mean, I guess I do miss the days when Britain ruled the world, but only inasmuch as I miss the days when I was 18 months old and I could royally poo my pants and my mum came to change them without me having to bother with all that boring toilet business. But it is not exactly an ambition of mine to go back there, because it is absurd and unfeasible and ludicrous and mad
Fucking get a grip. Leavers were not driven by "nostalgia for the British Empire"
Are some Leavers in part driven by a desire to be closer to countries that are more naturally our allies, like Australia? Yes. Because they are a better fit. And, moreover, as we grow closer, they will not seek to impose alien laws on us via undemocratic courts and bogus parliaments
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Narnia exists! I read about it in a book and everything!
Yes. The sad thing is, CS Lewis intended the books as an allegorical proof of the truth of Christianity. Without seeing the obvious corollary that, yes, dear, the Kingdom of Heaven is precisely as real as Narnia.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
If someone wants to make themselves our enemy then fine, but the idea that we "need" one is just perverse. Didn't the Brexit 50p say that we were going to be friends with everyone? That's more in tune with my thinking. But then I'm not a tribal person.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
Amusingly the most unified the EU has ever been is when the UK filled that role for them.
Now that Brexit's done they're back to squabbling amongst themselves. And to quote TSE Ireland are getting pounded like a stepmom on pornhub with the changes to corporation tax.
I'd be wary of seeming to exult in that. It would mean the EU has incentive to kick off more Brexit wrangling, or keep the current amount going, so hardly helps us.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
If someone wants to make themselves our enemy then fine, but the idea that we "need" one is just perverse. Didn't the Brexit 50p say that we were going to be friends with everyone? That's more in tune with my thinking. But then I'm not a tribal person.
That Brexit 50p was specifically designed to be sharpened into a shuriken.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I've even tried mentally putting my own punctuation into your post but it didn't help. Should I try google translate?
People who are driven by a desire for the days of Empire are a very small minority.
Ergo, blaming that tiny minority for actions (Brexit and otherwise) taken and supported by more than a small minority is extremely lazy and also incorrect.
I suspect that people like to reach for that explanation because it is simple, and it means everything is entirely the fault of a group of inherently unreasonable people.
And so avoids the need for any more meaningful analysis of complex situations.
Agreed. But let me be quite clear: I am only talking about @Leon, based on his posts. I do not think Empire nostalgia is common nor do I think it was factor for any but a very small minority of Leave voters.
Do you - honestly - think I crave for the return of British gunboat diplomacy and that, moreover, this was a driving factor in my Leave vote?
I mean, I guess I do miss the days when Britain ruled the world, but only inasmuch as I miss the days when I was 18 months old and I could royally poo my pants and my mum came to change them without me having to bother with all that boring toilet business. But it is not exactly an ambition of mine to go back there, because it is absurd and unfeasible and ludicrous and mad
Fucking get a grip. Leavers were not driven by "nostalgia for the British Empire"
Are some Leavers in part driven by a desire to be closer to countries that are more naturally our allies, like Australia? Yes. Because they are a better fit. And, moreover, as we grow closer, they will not seek to impose alien laws on us via undemocratic courts and bogus parliaments
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
If someone wants to make themselves our enemy then fine, but the idea that we "need" one is just perverse. Didn't the Brexit 50p say that we were going to be friends with everyone? That's more in tune with my thinking. But then I'm not a tribal person.
That's why I suggested competitor rather than enemy, but the sentiment that a body needs something else to act with, against, for, etc, to sustain itself, and that applies to us, the EU, the USA, everyone, seems pretty normal to me. That's why all of us talk up what our values are, and who does not share them.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
No that's just you projecting. Never took you for a racist before but there you go.
To most of us the Anglosphere is colour blind and includes all those bits you seem so keen to deride or exclude.
The only bits we might have trouble with are the French speaking bits of Canada.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
It's a long-observed and accepted truth of both nation-building and alliance-building. Without an external enemy, there is no need to unite
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
It's not called that, but it's not far off. I heard about it on Radio 4 or 5 when a promoter of the campaign was being interviewed. It's been advertised to (and ignored by) me on social media. It seems to be something where people sign up to try their very hardest to buy everything from black owned businesses.
It made me wonder what other such ethnic or religious group campaigns would be allowed..
I doubt white, Christian or Jewish would make the list.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
The amusing thing is the French press and even French politicians are even happier to refer to the Anglosphere - or as they call it the Anglo Saxon nations.
Why is it that the five nations of the Anglosphere can formally operate together under Five Eyes and other arrangements, the French can recognise its reality . . . but certain elements in this country are in complete and utter denial and compare it to Narnia?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
No that's just you projecting. Never took you for a racist before but there you go.
To most of us the Anglosphere is colour blind and includes all those bits you seem so keen to deride or exclude.
The only bits we might have trouble with are the French speaking bits of Canada.
Although @Leon only quoted the UK, US, Oz, NZ, and Canada in his list.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
No that's just you projecting. Never took you for a racist before but there you go.
To most of us the Anglosphere is colour blind and includes all those bits you seem so keen to deride or exclude.
The only bits we might have trouble with are the French speaking bits of Canada.
Although @Leon only quoted the UK, US, Oz, NZ, and Canada in his list.
Those are the Five Eyes nations.
If you're not familiar with Five Eyes, then you should go and learn about its significance.
Narnia it isn't.
PS as far as I know all of those nations are less 'white' than the EU.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
It's a long-observed and accepted truth of both nation-building and alliance-building. Without an external enemy, there is no need to unite
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
To say that you "need" an enemy suggests that if nobody was actually threatening you then you would have to invent one. NATO isn't in that category, clearly. I do find it a bit weird that we are being dragged into a beef with China by the US (who see China trying to usurp it in the Pacific) and Australia (who also feels threatened). I don't think they are much of a threat to us and I don't understand what we're getting out of this new gang we seem to be joining. And where was the referendum where I got to express my opinion on it?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
That is such a lazy analysis though. The number of Empire nostalgists is grossly exaggerated, seemingly as it is a nice convenient explanation which puts everything that has happened entirely on British shoulders, and whilst that's where most of the focus should be, events have not happened in a vaccuum and the status quo has been a factor, not just imperial yearning.
I've even tried mentally putting my own punctuation into your post but it didn't help. Should I try google translate?
People who are driven by a desire for the days of Empire are a very small minority.
Ergo, blaming that tiny minority for actions (Brexit and otherwise) taken and supported by more than a small minority is extremely lazy and also incorrect.
I suspect that people like to reach for that explanation because it is simple, and it means everything is entirely the fault of a group of inherently unreasonable people.
And so avoids the need for any more meaningful analysis of complex situations.
Agreed. But let me be quite clear: I am only talking about @Leon, based on his posts. I do not think Empire nostalgia is common nor do I think it was factor for any but a very small minority of Leave voters.
Do you - honestly - think I crave for the return of British gunboat diplomacy and that, moreover, this was a driving factor in my Leave vote?
I mean, I guess I do miss the days when Britain ruled the world, but only inasmuch as I miss the days when I was 18 months old and I could royally poo my pants and my mum came to change them without me having to bother with all that boring toilet business. But it is not exactly an ambition of mine to go back there, because it is absurd and unfeasible and ludicrous and mad
Fucking get a grip. Leavers were not driven by "nostalgia for the British Empire"
Are some Leavers in part driven by a desire to be closer to countries that are more naturally our allies, like Australia? Yes. Because they are a better fit. And, moreover, as we grow closer, they will not seek to impose alien laws on us via undemocratic courts and bogus parliaments
That is an entirely different thing
A depressing post.
This weeks Paris fashion shows should help get rid of your desire to attach us to Australian livestock
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
No that's just you projecting. Never took you for a racist before but there you go.
To most of us the Anglosphere is colour blind and includes all those bits you seem so keen to deride or exclude.
The only bits we might have trouble with are the French speaking bits of Canada.
Although @Leon only quoted the UK, US, Oz, NZ, and Canada in his list.
Those are the Five Eyes nations.
If you're not familiar with Five Eyes, then you should go and learn about its significance.
Narnia it isn't.
PS as far as I know all of those nations are less 'white' than the EU.
It's not called that, but it's not far off. I heard about it on Radio 4 or 5 when a promoter of the campaign was being interviewed. It's been advertised to (and ignored by) me on social media. It seems to be something where people sign up to try their very hardest to buy everything from black owned businesses.
It made me wonder what other such ethnic or religious group campaigns would be allowed..
I doubt white, Christian or Jewish would make the list.
I presume that it is an extension of the attempts at this in the American political scene.
Mind you, this ended up in American politics with preferential government treatment for companies owned by the various groups. Veterans, disabled people, Native Americans, African Americans....
But don't worry. What (mostly) happens is that in the contracting shell game that is American public contracts - companies get work and contract it out to another company who contract it out to another company etc - the "special groups" get used. Their company gets a contract, but all the actual profitable work is still done by other companies, who use the facia of a minority owned company for public relations and little more.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
It's a long-observed and accepted truth of both nation-building and alliance-building. Without an external enemy, there is no need to unite
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
To say that you "need" an enemy suggests that if nobody was actually threatening you then you would have to invent one. NATO isn't in that category, clearly. I do find it a bit weird that we are being dragged into a beef with China by the US (who see China trying to usurp it in the Pacific) and Australia (who also feels threatened). I don't think they are much of a threat to us and I don't understand what we're getting out of this new gang we seem to be joining. And where was the referendum where I got to express my opinion on it?
China are the biggest threat to world peace and the newest Evil Empire. If they disrupt trade in the Pacific then the entire global supply chain of things like computer chips etc would be disrupted and our economies and the NHS and everything else related would collapse. If you don't think that affects our Defence, then what do you think does?
As for when you got to express your opinion: Thursday 12 December 2019.
You could have elected a Marxist PM who wanted to quit NATO and hates the USA. But we didn't.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
If someone wants to make themselves our enemy then fine, but the idea that we "need" one is just perverse. Didn't the Brexit 50p say that we were going to be friends with everyone? That's more in tune with my thinking. But then I'm not a tribal person.
That's why I suggested competitor rather than enemy, but the sentiment that a body needs something else to act with, against, for, etc, to sustain itself, and that applies to us, the EU, the USA, everyone, seems pretty normal to me. That's why all of us talk up what our values are, and who does not share them.
External enemies are what the boss class use to distract you while they pick your pocket.
It's not called that, but it's not far off. I heard about it on Radio 4 or 5 when a promoter of the campaign was being interviewed. It's been advertised to (and ignored by) me on social media. It seems to be something where people sign up to try their very hardest to buy everything from black owned businesses.
It made me wonder what other such ethnic or religious group campaigns would be allowed..
I doubt white, Christian or Jewish would make the list.
I presume that it is an extension of the attempts at this in the American political scene.
Mind you, this ended up in American politics with preferential government treatment for companies owned by the various groups. Veterans, disabled people, Native Americans, African Americans....
But don't worry. What (mostly) happens is that in the contracting shell game that is American public contracts - companies get work and contract it out to another company who contract it out to another company etc - the "special groups" get used. Their company gets a contract, but all the actual profitable work is still done by other companies, who use the facia of a minority owned company for public relations and little more.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
If someone wants to make themselves our enemy then fine, but the idea that we "need" one is just perverse. Didn't the Brexit 50p say that we were going to be friends with everyone? That's more in tune with my thinking. But then I'm not a tribal person.
That's why I suggested competitor rather than enemy, but the sentiment that a body needs something else to act with, against, for, etc, to sustain itself, and that applies to us, the EU, the USA, everyone, seems pretty normal to me. That's why all of us talk up what our values are, and who does not share them.
External enemies are what the boss class use to distract you while they pick your pocket.
I didn't say I liked it. But I don't think there's a national or international grouping that does not define itself against someone else as much as by anything else. Some in a less hostile way than others, but its just a question of degree.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
It's a long-observed and accepted truth of both nation-building and alliance-building. Without an external enemy, there is no need to unite
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
To say that you "need" an enemy suggests that if nobody was actually threatening you then you would have to invent one. NATO isn't in that category, clearly. I do find it a bit weird that we are being dragged into a beef with China by the US (who see China trying to usurp it in the Pacific) and Australia (who also feels threatened). I don't think they are much of a threat to us and I don't understand what we're getting out of this new gang we seem to be joining. And where was the referendum where I got to express my opinion on it?
China are the biggest threat to world peace and the newest Evil Empire. If they disrupt trade in the Pacific then the entire global supply chain of things like computer chips etc would be disrupted and our economies and the NHS and everything else related would collapse. If you don't think that affects our Defence, then what do you think does?
As for when you got to express your opinion: Thursday 12 December 2019.
You could have elected a Marxist PM who wanted to quit NATO and hates the USA. But we didn't.
I already said that I 100% understand NATO, pay attention. And I hate the USA so much that I lived there for 5 years. I didn't sign up to get dragged into some pointless conflict on the other side of the world against a country that has never threatened the United Kingdom.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
It's a long-observed and accepted truth of both nation-building and alliance-building. Without an external enemy, there is no need to unite
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
To say that you "need" an enemy suggests that if nobody was actually threatening you then you would have to invent one. NATO isn't in that category, clearly. I do find it a bit weird that we are being dragged into a beef with China by the US (who see China trying to usurp it in the Pacific) and Australia (who also feels threatened). I don't think they are much of a threat to us and I don't understand what we're getting out of this new gang we seem to be joining. And where was the referendum where I got to express my opinion on it?
China are the biggest threat to world peace and the newest Evil Empire. If they disrupt trade in the Pacific then the entire global supply chain of things like computer chips etc would be disrupted and our economies and the NHS and everything else related would collapse. If you don't think that affects our Defence, then what do you think does?
As for when you got to express your opinion: Thursday 12 December 2019.
You could have elected a Marxist PM who wanted to quit NATO and hates the USA. But we didn't.
I already said that I 100% understand NATO, pay attention. And I hate the USA so much that I lived there for 5 years. I didn't sign up to get dragged into some pointless conflict on the other side of the world against a country that has never threatened the United Kingdom.
Again I repeat: "If they disrupt trade in the Pacific then the entire global supply chain of things like computer chips etc would be disrupted and our economies and the NHS and everything else related would collapse."
You think our Defence being aimed at preventing that is "pointless"?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
It's a long-observed and accepted truth of both nation-building and alliance-building. Without an external enemy, there is no need to unite
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
To say that you "need" an enemy suggests that if nobody was actually threatening you then you would have to invent one. NATO isn't in that category, clearly. I do find it a bit weird that we are being dragged into a beef with China by the US (who see China trying to usurp it in the Pacific) and Australia (who also feels threatened). I don't think they are much of a threat to us and I don't understand what we're getting out of this new gang we seem to be joining. And where was the referendum where I got to express my opinion on it?
China are the biggest threat to world peace and the newest Evil Empire. If they disrupt trade in the Pacific then the entire global supply chain of things like computer chips etc would be disrupted and our economies and the NHS and everything else related would collapse. If you don't think that affects our Defence, then what do you think does?
As for when you got to express your opinion: Thursday 12 December 2019.
You could have elected a Marxist PM who wanted to quit NATO and hates the USA. But we didn't.
I already said that I 100% understand NATO, pay attention. And I hate the USA so much that I lived there for 5 years. I didn't sign up to get dragged into some pointless conflict on the other side of the world against a country that has never threatened the United Kingdom.
Again I repeat: "If they disrupt trade in the Pacific then the entire global supply chain of things like computer chips etc would be disrupted and our economies and the NHS and everything else related would collapse."
You think our Defence being aimed at preventing that is "pointless"?
What have they done to disrupt trade in the Pacific?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
The Anglosphere is shorthand for the white bits of the Empire plus the lost colonies of America.
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
There's a pretty obvious distinction between nations which are our direct offshoots and nations that we happened to have administrative control over during the imperial era, and you don't need to invoke racism to find the answer.
It's not called that, but it's not far off. I heard about it on Radio 4 or 5 when a promoter of the campaign was being interviewed. It's been advertised to (and ignored by) me on social media. It seems to be something where people sign up to try their very hardest to buy everything from black owned businesses.
It made me wonder what other such ethnic or religious group campaigns would be allowed..
I doubt white, Christian or Jewish would make the list.
I presume that it is an extension of the attempts at this in the American political scene.
Mind you, this ended up in American politics with preferential government treatment for companies owned by the various groups. Veterans, disabled people, Native Americans, African Americans....
But don't worry. What (mostly) happens is that in the contracting shell game that is American public contracts - companies get work and contract it out to another company who contract it out to another company etc - the "special groups" get used. Their company gets a contract, but all the actual profitable work is still done by other companies, who use the facia of a minority owned company for public relations and little more.
Isn't it insultingly patronising and racist to say to black people that they need a special race based campaign to appeal for people's business?
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
Is it? Seems pretty standard for tribes and nations, as part of the self identity - what are we, and what are we not. Call it 'competitors' if enemy is stronger than it needs to be.
If someone wants to make themselves our enemy then fine, but the idea that we "need" one is just perverse. Didn't the Brexit 50p say that we were going to be friends with everyone? That's more in tune with my thinking. But then I'm not a tribal person.
That's why I suggested competitor rather than enemy, but the sentiment that a body needs something else to act with, against, for, etc, to sustain itself, and that applies to us, the EU, the USA, everyone, seems pretty normal to me. That's why all of us talk up what our values are, and who does not share them.
It is a defining feature of nationalism that there has to be an external threat, real or imagined.
Otherwise the poor might notice that they are being fleeced by the rich.
‘PM Viktor Orbán has signed a government resolution which supports the decision of the Polish constitutional court about the primacy of national law above EU law.
The resolution also calls on EU institutions to respect national sovereignty.’
Is there another domino to fall? Poland and Hungary really is rounding up the usual suspects.....
French domestic politics is a tinderbox. The risk for the EU is that the mainstream candidates might end up being forced into a Cameron style demand to renegotiate the treaties.
It's already coming, you can feel it. The issue for the EU is that the precedent of Dave's renegotiation is set. Maybe the French will do better than Dave, I'm not sure bit France doesn't have many friends in the EU either and Germany see them as a needy subordinate much in the same way the US views the UK.
Another problem for France's "reset to a strategically autonomous Europe" most of Eastern Europe wants nothing to do with it, and is actively inimical to France.
A Czech military-political boffin here:
"Jakub Janda @_JakubJanda · Oct 7 Central and Eastern Europe will never support the French attempt to go sideways and create new defense structures next to NATO in Europe.
We only trust the U.S. military via NATO that they will defend us against a Russian aggression, that is why.
"Fact is that only Balts and Poles openly voice their concerns about Macron's push for "independence", but many, many other EU countries are equally concerned and not on board, they just don't want to have that dispute in public."
With France's military history it is no surprise that no one would trust them to.come to their aid.
Yes, French military strategy is almost entirely selfish. It is very hard to see France seriously coming to defend Poland or the Baltics against Russia. More likely France would reach some accord with Putin and Germany would play the lofty peacemaker
So the E Europeans cleave to the USA.
What they should do is cleave to THEMSELVES. The combined GDP of Poland, Romania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, the Baltics, etc, would not be entirely insignificant. Add in Austria maybe. If they seriously pooled their resources and manpower, bought their kit as one, became a single army, that would be a huge bulwark against Putin
These smaller multilateral alliances are the future. Aukus for the East
France is interested in what advances France, hence her desire for an Indo-Pacific strategy to protect her assets there, which she is, frankly, incapable of protecting by herself. She is no longer strong enough to seriously defend Polynesia. The Chinese could buy New Caledonia tomorrow
France went to war in 1939 because of an invasion of Poland. Sure, it didn't do them much practical use, but you would have to say the same for UK and Empire too.
Quite a long time ago
If the Baltics were invaded, would France really lead an autonomous Europe to challenge Putin? I just don't see it. If they had the Brits alongside, maybe, but we won't be there, any more. We are tilting to a maritime, oceanic strategy, allied to AUKUS, let the euros defend themselves, or not, as they wish.
The French might challenge Putin if Germany was up for it, but Germany is not up for it, any may never be so
Wait! We left NATO? I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
NATO is tottering. America is pivoting. The UK is quietly shuffling away. Macron says NATO is "brain dead"
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
You really, really loathe the EU don't you?
I suspect it's not so much that @Leon hates the EU, as that he has a wistful longing for a return to the days when Britain (and thus England) ruled the largest empire in the world.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
Jesus. That is so utterly far from the truth I despair. You guys really don't even BEGIN to understand the Leaver mindset. It's just.... pitiful. It's also bizarre
Yet you're constantly banging on about the rise of the so-called 'Anglosphere', a construct that has much basis in reality as Narnia.
Except, it really does have a reality. AUKUS is the new military embodiment, Five Eyes is the intelligence embodiment. Now that the UK (in some ways a pivotal nation in this construct) is out of the EU, you will see further moves to make this a political reality, beyond military and intel
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
"You always need an external enemy" is a weird sentiment.
It's a long-observed and accepted truth of both nation-building and alliance-building. Without an external enemy, there is no need to unite
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
To say that you "need" an enemy suggests that if nobody was actually threatening you then you would have to invent one. NATO isn't in that category, clearly. I do find it a bit weird that we are being dragged into a beef with China by the US (who see China trying to usurp it in the Pacific) and Australia (who also feels threatened). I don't think they are much of a threat to us and I don't understand what we're getting out of this new gang we seem to be joining. And where was the referendum where I got to express my opinion on it?
China are the biggest threat to world peace and the newest Evil Empire. If they disrupt trade in the Pacific then the entire global supply chain of things like computer chips etc would be disrupted and our economies and the NHS and everything else related would collapse. If you don't think that affects our Defence, then what do you think does?
As for when you got to express your opinion: Thursday 12 December 2019.
You could have elected a Marxist PM who wanted to quit NATO and hates the USA. But we didn't.
I already said that I 100% understand NATO, pay attention. And I hate the USA so much that I lived there for 5 years. I didn't sign up to get dragged into some pointless conflict on the other side of the world against a country that has never threatened the United Kingdom.
Never threatened the United Kingdom?
It has just broken a solemn treaty with us, annexed Hong Kong (our ex colony) and deprived 100,000s (millions?) or potential UK subjects of their basic human rights
It's not called that, but it's not far off. I heard about it on Radio 4 or 5 when a promoter of the campaign was being interviewed. It's been advertised to (and ignored by) me on social media. It seems to be something where people sign up to try their very hardest to buy everything from black owned businesses.
It made me wonder what other such ethnic or religious group campaigns would be allowed..
I doubt white, Christian or Jewish would make the list.
I presume that it is an extension of the attempts at this in the American political scene.
Mind you, this ended up in American politics with preferential government treatment for companies owned by the various groups. Veterans, disabled people, Native Americans, African Americans....
But don't worry. What (mostly) happens is that in the contracting shell game that is American public contracts - companies get work and contract it out to another company who contract it out to another company etc - the "special groups" get used. Their company gets a contract, but all the actual profitable work is still done by other companies, who use the facia of a minority owned company for public relations and little more.
Isn't it insultingly patronising and racist to say to black people that they need a special race based campaign to appeal for people's business?
And I say that even if it was demanded by some part of the "Black Community"
I think the Labour share is just as likely to go down in Old Bexley as the Tory share. Lab could lose votes to the Greens and similar parties, while the Tories could lose votes to Reform UK, etc, probably resulting in not much swing between the two main parties.
It would seem I as I was about right for the Grand Final result. I thought St Helens would win but only just and a 12- 10 result was about as close as you can get. I haven't seen the final yet as we have been entertaining but I suspect both teams defence was on top for most of the match.
It's not called that, but it's not far off. I heard about it on Radio 4 or 5 when a promoter of the campaign was being interviewed. It's been advertised to (and ignored by) me on social media. It seems to be something where people sign up to try their very hardest to buy everything from black owned businesses.
It made me wonder what other such ethnic or religious group campaigns would be allowed..
I doubt white, Christian or Jewish would make the list.
I presume that it is an extension of the attempts at this in the American political scene.
Mind you, this ended up in American politics with preferential government treatment for companies owned by the various groups. Veterans, disabled people, Native Americans, African Americans....
But don't worry. What (mostly) happens is that in the contracting shell game that is American public contracts - companies get work and contract it out to another company who contract it out to another company etc - the "special groups" get used. Their company gets a contract, but all the actual profitable work is still done by other companies, who use the facia of a minority owned company for public relations and little more.
Isn't it insultingly patronising and racist to say to black people that they need a special race based campaign to appeal for people's business?
Well, in the US, at least, the effects of racism against Black & Native American people was such that not even the Trump Republicans have suggested repealing the Federal Contracting laws that give such preferential treatment.
When even *those arseholes* think there is a problem....
It is a stupid and inefficient solution, of course. But that is what American politics is good at creating.
Anglosphere doesn't in practice seem to involve Canada and New Zealand very much. Liz Truss (pointedly?) left them off her list of allies and those that are into Anglosphere also seem to disparage those countries' leaders. USA? Yes, but problematic, maybe because they don't really see themselves as Anglosphere. India and other bits of the old British Empire aren't really Anglosphere. They're English speaking countries, which is different.
Which leaves Australia. Australia is most definitely Anglosphere, possibly feeling rather lonely.
It's also remarkable how "Global Britain" begins, and ends, with Australia.
Comments
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1446902060880994308?t=u46M-bxbuLJ2AKUqfMmI5A&s=19
Think there are a tiny amount fish houses left in Torry nowadays, but it still smells a touch fishy.
It is no more neutral than the absurd new court in Warsaw, as the Poles are, in effect, pointing out
The EU is built on a great big fucking lie. The lie has been exposed by Brexit
The chapters of the Acquis are here (https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/enlargement-policy/conditions-membership/chapters-acquis_en), and they list the ways in which countries have to be compliant in order to join the EU.
The words "independent judiciary" may seem fairly innocuous, but they refer to a specific thing. That the government cannot simply choose to fire judges at will. Sure, you can have processes for stripping judges of their power (as we do in the UK), but what you cannot have is the executive able to fire judges for giving inconvenient rulings.
We left NATO?
I realise this government can't fall over itself quick enough to implement Corbynism. But that one passed me by.
No wonder the EU is so popular amongst the Polish people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Austrian_legislative_election
No polls since the scandal broke, anyway.
The great threat is China, not Russia. Russia is a weakening power which is only a threat to its near neighbours and with its fuel "weapon"
Within ten years NATO will be finished in all but name. It will be up to the EU to defend itself. Americans will no longer pay, or they will jolly well expect every European nation to do its 2% and buy American kit if they want American protection. You can't blame America for that. Russia is not a threat to the USA, why should the USA care what happens to Estonia or Bulgaria?
Germany has to step up, it is pathetically inert. France needs to get over its Gaullist pretentions and realise it must commit, in an equal way, to an EU army - not one it wants to lead but only in a manner which serves French interests
Meanwhile the UK has joined AUKUS and looks to the seas. So it turns out the Anglosphere is a thing after all.
Despite all that Remainer mockery, I have seen more mention of the "Anglosphere" and the "Anglo-Saxons" on Twitter in the last month than in the last 5 years
Are you saying that if the ECJ makes a ruling that it palpably has no standing to make (apologies if that's not the right legal term) then the nations courts can't do anything about that? That there's absolutely no way to say "that's not authorised by the Treaty so the ECJ has no right to rule on that"?
Since the ECJ and the EU are not a nation in their own right, they only have whatever powers the Treaties have deferred upon it. The nation's supreme courts as defenders of their own constitutions surely have a right to say "we did not grant the EU that power since its not in the Treaty" and thus rule a proviso out of order?
I'm still upset about James Brokenshire.
He was such a lovely man.
Those days are gone for good of course so all his yearning will come to nowt.
But in the end I voted for my kids, because in the long term the EU is a failing, anti-democratic project, a silly, sometimes ghastly hybrid, and we are better off out, better off being and ruling ourselves
I wrote on here the other day my many reasons for admiring the ideals that founded the EU, they remain true. Free Movement was the best one of all. And I miss it. It was perhaps a sad but necessary sacrifice which I hope can be restored, somehow, in part and in time
They, being reasonable people, understand that this is motivated as much by historical reasons as anything else.
But the concern is that in "seeking to do anything but oppose Russia", Germany will do for Eastern Europe what they did for Ukraine. Not as a gaol of betraying anyone, but given a choice between pushing back against Russia or not........
Quite simply, they trust the US to be un-diplomatic and a bit gun happy. The only thing they think will give Putin some pause.
And since they can each respectively veto any attempted expulsion of the other, the EU is quite powerless to deal with it.
Makes me think of the early SCOTUS case Worcester v Georgia and the possibly apocryphal quote by President Jackson: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"
There is a the "we can't abandon the liberals' argument.
There is also the geo-political argument - you'd then have a couple of countries in a mess, looking to plug a big hole in their budgets. What happens if China (say) decides to rent Hungary for a few billion a year?
Perhaps not surprising that Johnson is blocking efforts to deal with harassment of women and girls. But interesting that Patel seems to be briefing against him on the issue.
Leave voters no doubt had many different reasons for voting the way they did, as did Remain voters.
Ergo, blaming that tiny minority for actions (Brexit and otherwise) taken and supported by more than a small minority is extremely lazy and also incorrect.
I suspect that people like to reach for that explanation because it is simple, and it means everything is entirely the fault of a group of inherently unreasonable people.
And so avoids the need for any more meaningful analysis of complex situations.
The Polish has now said so too.
If the national courts claim that right and most importantly have the ability to enforce that which the CJE lack, then how can it be said that right doesn't exist after all?
If the Germans and the Poles exercise this right and the CJE has no ability to reverse this, so that ultimately its maintained that this right does de facto exist - then surely in the end it does exist?
But it is a pet peeve of mine how often it gets trotted out as an explanation for so many things.
I am awaiting my referral to the Prevent programme.
I suspect it (Empire nostalgia) was only a factor for a minority of Leave voters. Sovereignty, immigration, red tape, concerns about democracy, loss of identity, jobs, standard of living, and of course simple dislike of foreigners... these and others all played a part and I have some sympathy for a number of these.
Canada, Oz, UK, Australia, NZ, and some smaller English speaking nations (or maybe even virtually English speaking nations, like Norway) share a common culture, often a monarchy, a common law system, an artistic legacy, Shakespeare, the Kardashians, the Beatles, the same social media, the same language
And this latter point is crucial. I read American social media daily. Americans look at the BBC daily. The Daily Mail is huge across the Anglosphere, so is the NYTimes.
I can't speak German so I don't read their media except with Google Translate, and my French is pretty poor, so sometimes there I also do machine translation. It is slow and laborious and basically I get bored and miss the nuances.
I'm not plugged in to their culture the same way I instantly plug into Anglophone culture, wherever it is. LA, Sydney, Edinburgh, Auckland.
Now this language thing becomes a political thing. In the face of an external enemy that unites us. China.
Twas ever thus. You always need an external enemy
The AUKUS agreement is just the newest in a very long line of arrangements that are a part of the Anglosphere.
One of the most consequential and longest running is Five Eyes, which has done far, far more for our security than the EU ever could or did. More practical and more important even than NATO.
If you seriously don't think the Anglosphere is real, then it just shows you're either completely ignorant of the facts, or you're utterly delusional.
Now that Brexit's done they're back to squabbling amongst themselves. And to quote TSE Ireland are getting pounded like a stepmom on pornhub with the changes to corporation tax.
I mean, I guess I do miss the days when Britain ruled the world, but only inasmuch as I miss the days when I was 18 months old and I could royally poo my pants and my mum came to change them without me having to bother with all that boring toilet business. But it is not exactly an ambition of mine to go back there, because it is absurd and unfeasible and ludicrous and mad
Fucking get a grip. Leavers were not driven by "nostalgia for the British Empire"
Are some Leavers in part driven by a desire to be closer to countries that are more naturally our allies, like Australia? Yes. Because they are a better fit. And, moreover, as we grow closer, they will not seek to impose alien laws on us via undemocratic courts and bogus parliaments
That is an entirely different thing
Funnily it doesn't ever seem to include the many other English speaking countries of the world 🤔
You label me
I label you
So I dub thee unforgiven
To most of us the Anglosphere is colour blind and includes all those bits you seem so keen to deride or exclude.
The only bits we might have trouble with are the French speaking bits of Canada.
NATO came to existence because of the USSR
Arguably, the UK came into existence because of Catholic Europe, especially France
Now China is creating new alliances in opposition. This is not some outlandish new theory
It's not called that, but it's not far off. I heard about it on Radio 4 or 5 when a promoter of the campaign was being interviewed. It's been advertised to (and ignored by) me on social media. It seems to be something where people sign up to try their very hardest to buy everything from black owned businesses.
It made me wonder what other such ethnic or religious group campaigns would be allowed..
I doubt white, Christian or Jewish would make the list.
Why is it that the five nations of the Anglosphere can formally operate together under Five Eyes and other arrangements, the French can recognise its reality . . . but certain elements in this country are in complete and utter denial and compare it to Narnia?
If you're not familiar with Five Eyes, then you should go and learn about its significance.
Narnia it isn't.
PS as far as I know all of those nations are less 'white' than the EU.
I do find it a bit weird that we are being dragged into a beef with China by the US (who see China trying to usurp it in the Pacific) and Australia (who also feels threatened). I don't think they are much of a threat to us and I don't understand what we're getting out of this new gang we seem to be joining. And where was the referendum where I got to express my opinion on it?
This weeks Paris fashion shows should help get rid of your desire to attach us to Australian livestock
https://www.wallpaper.com/fashion/paris-fashion-week-ss-2022-kenneth-ize-to-marine-serre?utm_source=Selligent&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20211009_XWP-X_NWL_EO_Daily-Digest&utm_content=20211009_XWP-X_NWL_EO_Daily-Digest+&utm_term=9913024&m_i=mIETdYVdDJrSi9qh6LteezckIAH9f4BZ9QJQLdUy1qFCoAUH5y+Uro5n0eWxnFGjKcdmfp9O3jk6l3Qvz72odEqqSpgCt2ymmC&lrh=1b9c0581dacb138d2e49f06eb24b6fc2ebbd31d61af9ac3add70a2b856d3d76b&M_BT=49135553986692
Mind you, this ended up in American politics with preferential government treatment for companies owned by the various groups. Veterans, disabled people, Native Americans, African Americans....
But don't worry. What (mostly) happens is that in the contracting shell game that is American public contracts - companies get work and contract it out to another company who contract it out to another company etc - the "special groups" get used. Their company gets a contract, but all the actual profitable work is still done by other companies, who use the facia of a minority owned company for public relations and little more.
As for when you got to express your opinion: Thursday 12 December 2019.
You could have elected a Marxist PM who wanted to quit NATO and hates the USA. But we didn't.
You think our Defence being aimed at preventing that is "pointless"?
He does not deserve this
https://twitter.com/sportbible/status/1446766246603771906?t=1PJWHCw_MyCrdZv8SQh8cQ&s=19
Otherwise the poor might notice that they are being fleeced by the rich.
It has just broken a solemn treaty with us, annexed Hong Kong (our ex colony) and deprived 100,000s (millions?) or potential UK subjects of their basic human rights
So pleased for James Roby.
When even *those arseholes* think there is a problem....
It is a stupid and inefficient solution, of course. But that is what American politics is good at creating.
Which leaves Australia. Australia is most definitely Anglosphere, possibly feeling rather lonely.
It's also remarkable how "Global Britain" begins, and ends, with Australia.