Britain will veto EU army, says Defence Secretary

[Deleted]

I like how Russian propaganda still works in that you guys actually believe those situations are comparable. Kosovo was an entirely different thing to Crimea. After over 20 years without officially being communists, how can you still not fathom how democracy works? Hint: Holding polls at gunpoint is not how you do it.

It really isn't though.
And a majority of the people in Crimea (like 67% or some such) are ethnic Russians - In reality, it never should have been 'Ukrainian', and there is no real reason to think that a majority wouldn't have voted to join.
Fun fact, did eastern Germany ever hold a vote about being annexed by the west?

[Deleted]

It is incredibly smart diplomacy. I read your post, you're jumping to the conclusion that we'd otherwise support this if we voted Remain. We're still part of Europe, and will be until we enact Article 50. We could do that now, or in 100 years, there is no expiry date on the decision. Therefore, while we're part of the EU, we still hold all the rights we had before the referendum, because it changes nothing until we enact the Article.

You don't need a referendum to enact Article 50. Any country could start that right now if they wanted, but you don't prevent them from using their votes / rights within the EU? Why would it be any different for the UK? We've not left, we still have our vote, our veto and our rights. I agree with them blocking it, as between the vote for the EU Army, and Article 50 going live, we'd still have to contribute towards it.

EU Army is a bullshit attempt to prevent their collapse anyway. We've got NATO, the UN and so many other systems in place to allow for 'World Police'. Why do we need another ...

You're obviously not getting what I'm saying at all.

There would most likely be a certain agreement that says that the UK doesn't need to join the EU army, and therefore, not pay for it. There's a reason why the UK wasn't invited to the meeting where this issue was discussed - because for now it is assumed that the UK will activate Article 50 at some point, so why would we suddenly force the UK to be a part of any new EU arrangement? That would make no sense. And that's why it's stupid; Because the British diplomacy is based on a scenario which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and by presuming that scenario as the most likely and acting on that, it's deliberately creating hostile relations with the EU. Or in other words, it's fucking stupid.

What you're doing right now is describing why the UK can do it. But the question is why would the UK do it, and to that you haven't given any proper and thoughtful answer.

[Noradin]

What does it change?! Kosovo didnt even had any kind of referendum! there was only parliaments decision that Kosovo from now is independent state. Ofcourse situation in Kosovo and Crimea were different, but only in details that doesnt change main point. I like how you guys do it, you see only small details that are different in those two situations, but dont see the main ones that are same.
"Hey! Parliament of kosovo decided to be independent state just because. Let them be. Hey parliament of Crimea decided to be independent state after REVULUTION THEY DONT ACCEPT. Fuck them because we decide what is legal and what is not lulz" You can even forget about referendum, it doesnt change anything, just accept the fact that all this situation is freaking double standards. We are playing your fucking rules so stop crying and being hypocrite.
Damn my ass burn when all i read is "russian propaganda still bla bla". There is anywhere propaganda, abso fucking lutely. You just need to learn identify it, in western media and in russian one, they all try to shit in ur brains, but still 60-70% is true.

They did?
Them being claimed by Russia must have been our collective hallucination then?

[Deleted]

What does it change?! Kosovo didnt even had any kind of referendum! there was only parliaments decision that Kosovo from now is independent state. Ofcourse situation in Kosovo and Crimea were different, but only in details that doesnt change main point. I like how you guys do it, you see only small details that are different in those two situations, but dont see the main ones that are same.
"Hey! Parliament of kosovo decided to be independent state just because. Let them be. Hey parliament of Crimea decided to be independent state after REVULUTION THEY DONT ACCEPT. Fuck them because we decide what is legal and what is not lulz" You can even forget about referendum, it doesnt change anything, just accept the fact that all this situation is freaking double standards. We are playing your fucking rules so stop crying and being hypocrite.
Damn my ass burn when all i read is "russian propaganda still bla bla". There is anywhere propaganda, abso fucking lutely. You just need to learn identify it, in western media and in russian one, they all try to shit in ur brains, but still 60-70% is true.

The worst thing you can do is to compare Crimea to Kosovo. Or really any situation to the political situation in the Balkans. Frankly, it's like quantum mechanics; If you claim to understand what's going on in the Western Balkans you show you have no idea at all.

[Deleted]

It's more like having a divorce, and while the proceedings are on-going you still have a right to discuss / have a say on the House. We're not out, we're leaving. We still have full right to our Veto.
Also, are you saying then that you agree with an EU Army? Or is this just a chance for you to slap the UK?

If we are to borrow your analogy, then you are saying 'no' to the EU's idea of remodeling the basement when he retires in a few years.
There is no proposal up for vote, no treaty, nothing - At the earliest, they will get some exploratory funding in 2019 budget.

On-Topic: EU Army is a fuck up. Honestly, it was one of the things that was spoken about pre-Brexit and everyone was like; "Nahh... that's never going to happen". They're doing this because they know that without some 'World Military Power Department' they could collapse a lot sooner than expected.

Because the UK have vehemently disagreed with all plans in this area, quite singlehandedly in many cases, and Vetoed everything - That's why it wasn't ever going to happen.
Also when you hear 'eu army' you think army! - When in reality they are pushing for it to increase EU capabilities for various operations (there are 'EU' troops deployed this very second) increase defense coordination in procurement and training, and that's about it - There has been some talk of putting together some specialized brigades (like an heavy airlift wing, since few individual countries can afford or want such a thing).
Many of these things are necessary.

[Dentelan]

They did?
Them being claimed by Russia must have been our collective hallucination then?

First they decided to be an independent state. Then as an independent state they had referendum to join Russia. Problems?

[Deleted]

But the plan is to drop debt from 180% to less than 120%. If it keeps rising, that target will never be reached.
The German plan for reforms aint working at all.

Last i checked the Greek budget is at surplus (as long as one ignores interest payments).
In reality, what needs to happen is that the debt needs to be forgiven, and then we can get away from this crisis, of course it cant be, because that would be political suicide.
Bah - The way out of this is that the EU(zone) 'eats' all member states debts and then issues EU-bonds to pay for it, of course that would take a decisive step towards federation (but its a necessary one given the Euro).

[Dentelan]

The worst thing you can do is to compare Crimea to Kosovo. Or really any situation to the political situation in the Balkans. Frankly, it's like quantum mechanics; If you claim to understand what's going on in the Western Balkans you show you have no idea at all.

I see your entire position. *The situation are different*, your main argument. I will better not continue this discussion with you.

[Deleted]

I really don't understand what this ethereal "Brussels" talk is supposed to mean? The EU army would be under the direct command of either the EU Commissioner (who's probably going to be chosen directly by the people soon) or the joint command of the EU council (all the prime ministers). I.e., there's not going to be any dirty play on democracy involved.

The commissioners will probably never be picked by the people, maybe the 'head' one, but i doubt it still, (and he is picked by the parliament currently anyway).
President of the European Council Though, that one could/should be picked by the people (in a direct vote) - And presumably would be (as he is the head of state analogue) the CINC.

[Slant]

What does it change?! Kosovo didnt even had any kind of referendum! there was only parliaments decision that Kosovo from now is independent state. Ofcourse situation in Kosovo and Crimea were different, but only in details that doesnt change main point. I like how you guys do it, you see only small details that are different in those two situations, but dont see the main ones that are same.
"Hey! Parliament of kosovo decided to be independent state just because. Let them be. Hey parliament of Crimea decided to be independent state after REVULUTION THEY DONT ACCEPT. Fuck them because we decide what is legal and what is not lulz" You can even forget about referendum, it doesnt change anything, just accept the fact that all this situation is freaking double standards. We are playing your fucking rules so stop crying and being hypocrite.
Damn my ass burn when all i read is "russian propaganda still bla bla". There is anywhere propaganda, abso fucking lutely. You just need to learn identify it, in western media and in russian one, they all try to shit in ur brains, but still 60-70% is true.

There are people who might say that change from within a nation is quite different than change that is initiated from outside a country. One could be called a revolution, while another is simply refered to as annexion. I'm sure the different choice of words doesn't escape your attention. Language has this funny thing where different words are applied to different situations. Or would you call Kosovo an annexation?

- - - Updated - - -

It really isn't though.
And a majority of the people in Crimea (like 67% or some such) are ethnic Russians - In reality, it never should have been 'Ukrainian', and there is no real reason to think that a majority wouldn't have voted to join.
Fun fact, did eastern Germany ever hold a vote about being annexed by the west?

Fun fact, East Germany held general elections before the East German Government (that was practically voted in for this single purpose) unilaterally acceeded to West Germany and signed the reunification contract. That's how you actually do it. West Germany did not move an inch into East Germany's sphere of influence. It was all East Germany holding the reigns on their territory. West Germany was busy talking to the 4 occupational forces and getting their approval. That's how you do it. You do not waltz in with an army, point a gun at people and then say "Now vote!"

Ethnic majority or not. That's not how democracy works.

To pull another example from history: Hitler annexed Bohemia in what, 1938 or so? And he had high approval ratings there at the time. Was that legal? I hardly think so. The world community never thought it was. Yet, using the same arguments presented in this thread, I could say that was perfectly fine and everyone was just bitching at Germany just 'cause it's Germany. Nah man, that's a weak bullshit argument to make.

[Dentelan]

There are people who might say that change from within a nation is quite different than change that is initiated from outside a country. One could be called a revolution, while another is simply refered to as annexion. I'm sure the different choice of words doesn't escape your attention. Language has this funny thing where different words are applied to different situations. Or would you call Kosovo an annexation?

Again. If somehow Russia would have taken Crimea as a part of Ukraine it will probably be annexation. But it was different way. First crimea becomed independent state, then they had referendum to join Russia or keep being independent, after referendum they send ambassadors to Moscow. Then Crimea became part of Russia. Independent state decided to join another country. As Georgia to Russian Empire in 19 century as i remember (maybe 18). I dont see annexation here, independent state can do whatever it want.

[Slant]

Again. If somehow Russia would have taken Crimea as a part of Ukraine it will probably be annexation. But it was different way. First crimea becomed independent state, then they had referendum to join Russia or keep being independent, after referendum they send ambassadors to Moscow. Then Crimea became part of Russia. Independent state decided to join another country. As Georgia to Russian Empire in 19 century as i remember (maybe 18). I dont see annexation here, independent state can do whatever it want.

Yes, they became an independent state after a poll at gunpoint. That's not democracy. That's not valid voting procedure anywhere outside Russia, apparently.

What irks me is that Crimea might perhaps have voted the same without russian troops in the area. Yet, Russia had to foul the procedure and invalidate it with russian presence. If they had sat outside the borders and moved in after the vote, things would've looked a lot different.

[Deleted]

I see your entire position. *The situation are different*, your main argument. I will better not continue this discussion with you.

You don't know any Balkan people do you?

Trust me, there's nothing worse you can do than to simplify the political situation in the Western Balkans. But I wouldn't expect anything more from self-pitying Putinistas.

[Dentelan]

You don't know any Balkan people do you?

Trust me, there's nothing worse you can do than to simplify the political situation in the Western Balkans. But I wouldn't expect anything more from self-pitying Putinistas.

You really think that political situation in post soviet republic are less complicated than in balcans? Pff. Im done.

[Deleted]

It is incredibly smart diplomacy.

No its stupid.

I read your post, you're jumping to the conclusion that we'd otherwise support this if we voted Remain. We're still part of Europe, and will be until we enact Article 50. We could do that now, or in 100 years, there is no expiry date on the decision. Therefore, while we're part of the EU, we still hold all the rights we had before the referendum, because it changes nothing until we enact the Article.

You get that the very reason this was proposed after you voted to leave, was the fact that you have spent 40 years vetoing anything remotely suggesting something similar?.

You don't need a referendum to enact Article 50. Any country could start that right now if they wanted, but you don't prevent them from using their votes / rights within the EU? Why would it be any different for the UK? We've not left, we still have our vote, our veto and our rights. I agree with them blocking it, as between the vote for the EU Army, and Article 50 going live, we'd still have to contribute towards it.

It isn't happening tomorrow, you get that right?

EU Army is a bullshit attempt to prevent their collapse anyway.

Oh crap you realised our sinister plans of using the EU army to invade the UK.

We've got NATO, the UN and so many other systems in place to allow for 'World Police'. Why do we need another ...

Because A, this would not be like those things, B, because it would be a EU thing, and C, because a non trivial reason for this is to reduce the weight of NATO.

[Dentelan]

Yes, they became an independent state after a poll at gunpoint. That's not democracy. That's not valid voting procedure anywhere outside Russia, apparently.

What irks me is that Crimea might perhaps have voted the same without russian troops in the area. Yet, Russia had to foul the procedure and invalidate it with russian presence. If they had sat outside the borders and moved in after the vote, things would've looked a lot different.

If russian troops had sat at their sea base ther would be no referendum because Ukraine would not allow it because of *separatism*, its so simple, i dont know why you dont see that.

[Deleted]

You really think that political situation in post soviet republic are less complicated than in balcans? Pff. Im done.

The Crimean one? That's not what I think. Only Putinistas think that Crimea is a complex situation. To the rest of the civilized world, the situation of Crimea is not complex at all - we know it was annexed under Russian directives. It's a fact.

- - - Updated - - -

If russian troops had sat at their sea base ther would be no referendum because Ukraine would not allow it because of *separatism*, its so simple, i dont know why you dont see that.

Because Ukrainian's domestic affairs is Ukraine's and Ukraine's alone? How can you not see that?

[Slant]

If russian troops had sat at their sea base ther would be no referendum because Ukraine would not allow it because of *separatism*, its so simple, i dont know why you dont see that.

Then Crimea would have to change the minds in Kiev, wouldn't they? That's how democracy works. Have you still not gotten it? Democracy isn't a one party system where one man can just decide what he thinks is better for the majority. It's when people have opposing opinions and have to work together to form a compromise. Russia can't just step in and say "Oh this is stupid, we know they want this" and change things by planting troops there.

Russia has meddled in the internal affairs of a country that was absolutely stable and aside from rallies and the odd riot here and there, nothing happened. They were trying to figure out if they want to be more EU or not. And Russia essentially put a stop to that natural political process. Russia essentially forced the rest of the Ukraine to a hardcore western orientation. Oh, and they brought a civil war to a country that didn't need one. Well done.

The stupid thing is that Russia has invalidated any pro-Russian effort that may have been made in Crimea. All we have now is the Russian word that they really wanted it. And excuse me, but the dump I took in the toilet this morning is worth more than the word of Russia these days. Lose all credibility you have and then bitch when people doubt your intentions. That's Russia in a nutshell.

[Deleted]

That's how you do it. You do not waltz in with an army, point a gun at people and then say "Now vote!"

Yeah they did hold a vote, true, My point remains though, Crimea did vote, and its unlikely to be a case of fraud.

To pull another example from history: Hitler annexed Bohemia in what, 1938 or so? And he had high approval ratings there at the time. Was that legal? I hardly think so. The world community never thought it was. Yet, using the same arguments presented in this thread, I could say that was perfectly fine and everyone was just bitching at Germany just 'cause it's Germany. Nah man, that's a weak bullshit argument to make.

And if they had held a vote?

- - - Updated - - -

Because Ukrainian's domestic affairs is Ukraine's and Ukraine's alone? How can you not see that?

Which is why the west should have stayed out of the internal maters of jugoslavia/serbia, and onwards.
In short, Once a people decide they dont want to be part of their polity, we have extrajudicial problems.

- - - Updated - - -

Then Crimea would have to change the minds in Kiev, wouldn't they?

No we can go into recent history, relatively at least.
Imagine that was how it went down, Crimea holds a vote to secede, then once the vote is done, Russia recognizes the state and threatens to nuke anyone who disagrees.
These sort of questions are extra legal, because once the people of Crimea decides that they are not part of the Ukraine, they cant be expected to care about what the Ukraine thinks.

[Slant]

Yeah they did hold a vote, true, My point remains though, Crimea did vote, and its unlikely to be a case of fraud.


And if they had held a vote?

Yes, is that the same kind of vote that gave the communist party close to 100% in soviet elections? Why are people still pretending that just because something's called a "vote" that it automatically makes everything democratic? Heck, East Germany was called German Democratic Republic, yet nobody in their right mind had any doubt that it was anything but democratic. It's like some people are on this planet that I could dupe by slapping a big sign on a car that reads "This is a plane". They'd probably get in and wait for the stewardess to explain how to exit the vehicle in case of emergency...

Countries have sovereignity. If they had held a vote without nazi influence (and yes, forming a subsidiary local chapter of the NSDAP is nazi influence, before you question this), it would have looked a lot more credible. See, it's all about who's planting the idea and being the driving force behind these things. In Kosovo, people started being dissatisfied and change came from within. There was no outside party telling them they should or could do that. They just decided they would, no matter what.

With Crimea, things were stable until Russia went and said "Oh, btw, we could just make you Russia again, how about that?" That's when things heated up. Where the EU was reluctant and dealt with Ukraine like they deal with every potential new member (be democratic, have certain values), Russia not only baited them with a monstrous carrot, they also sent in troops to help push the cart and point a gun at anyone on the cart not to move or else...