The Problem With Europe

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Excuse me bud, but I seriously doubt you have a lot of experience in Europe. None of what you said makes any sense and you DO NOT sound like a friend of Europe at all in your first 'pulled out of the National Review' diatribe.

Europeans have had a lot of experience with war they know the horrors that it brings and they know how evil the propaganda can get. I am neutral about Europe but kudos to them for showing some balls and standing in the way of the bible-thumping, ignorant, think-they-know-it-all but know nothing red staters.

Guess you dont know NOTHING about the red states or "bible thumpers". You are completely ignorant. By the way, I'm getting sick of you people calling good religious people "bible thumpers". Its very offensive.

Many of these conservatives you speak so negatively of are much more informed than your left wing America hating buddies.

 

[Proletariat]

The way I see it, Europe is on many levels being a good world citizen. That is a very good thing. I hope Europeans don't cave in to American arrogance, that would be a very negative for the world in general. I firmly believe a democracy should be socialist. After all regular people have always wanted to help other regular people since the dawn of time. No average worker is going to say I don't care about my fellow man. When these average people get the power, as they do in a democracy, they don't vote a big business man in, or an upper-class Enron allied member of the elite. They vote in a man of the people who helps the people.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: raildogg

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Excuse me bud, but I seriously doubt you have a lot of experience in Europe. None of what you said makes any sense and you DO NOT sound like a friend of Europe at all in your first 'pulled out of the National Review' diatribe.

Europeans have had a lot of experience with war they know the horrors that it brings and they know how evil the propaganda can get. I am neutral about Europe but kudos to them for showing some balls and standing in the way of the bible-thumping, ignorant, think-they-know-it-all but know nothing red staters.

Guess you dont know NOTHING about the red states or "bible thumpers". You are completely ignorant. By the way, I'm getting sick of you people calling good religious people "bible thumpers". Its very offensive.

Many of these conservatives you speak so negatively of are much more informed than your left wing America hating buddies.

Good pious men do not advocate war against nations that have done no wrong to them. Good pious men do not cut social programs. Good pious men do not hail war heroes one second and spit on them when they disagree with their policies. The way I see it all you are doing is thumping the bible and not living it. Start living it dude.

"It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven" - Jesus Christ

Sounds like a left-wing socialist bastard to me

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
You view it as that, but others view it as the return of European colonialism. And now what has happened regarding Kyoto? The US as well as other Western nations, developing nations, and oil nations have all banded together to reject further talks on what to do when Kyoto expires to resist EU bullying. It's the pefect example that the EU is in the hands of colonialism worshipping crazies, and that democracy is having trouble shining through.

On the current state of Kyoto - it isn't working out wonderfully, however whether it is or isn't defeats the point of my statement. At least the countries involved are making a statement that they are willing to work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. All the Americans ever say is "European colonialism" and that the EU is pushing these things on America. Well, yes, the EU is trying to push this on America. Has it dawned on you that almost every other person on this planet except the American people are clamouring for America to sign up to *something* to do with reducing CO2 emissions. And that's a major point there - the Kyoto treaty is going poorly because the support of the US, the largest greenhouse gas emittor, isn't subscribing. That refusal pretty much sentenced Kyoto to failure from the beginning. It's a testament to the will of the nations involved that it got as far as it has today without US involvement.

All the Europeans ever say is "Kyoto good." The EU is trying to push this onto everyone in the world. Has it dawned on you that almost every person on this planet except the European people are clamouring to not extend talks on Kyoto?

Kyoto was doomed from the start, not due to the US. The world knows that it's an attempt of European colonialism to control foreign countries and impede their growth. It's barely even a valid attempt at controlling emissions with all these loopholes in there, crippling economies to impede technological research that can reduce emissions and such, and it's acknowledged that even if ideally practiced it wouldn't do anything. Yes, it's a testament to the will of the nations involved to bring forth another era of colonialism.

Why can't you step back for two seconds and see the bigger picture here from the eyes of anyone not living in America (not just those in Europe)? Recently America's waged its own personal little vendetta on a few countries of its choice, in the eyes of many (including myself) for things such as natural resources, power, and the advancement of liberal democracies (America's ONLY solution - it ignores and discredits anything else). America effectively blew up Afghanistan. It invaded Iraq and at the moment it's still a Vietnam II, quite literally. It acts as the world's policeman and puts great economic and political pressure on any country not doing exactly what the US wants (European countries included). It makes no effort to try to reduce greenhouse gas emissions whatsoever. Then a consortium of other countries come along and presents the Kyoto treaty in an attempt to get the US to subscribe for the good of the world (no hidden reasons, quite simply a huge environmental issue that everyone has managed to ignore so far from my posts and attack everything else around it). That's all that happened. Then the Americans attack the Europeans for exercising its great power over the US, waggling its finger at it, being imperialistic, "EU bullying", undemocratic... all we said is you're the largest CO2 emittor, and you're harming the whole world. We're trying to improve the situation and slowing our economies as a result, and you should too. That is not bullying - that is common sense. It enrages me to think you guys can't get over the fact that we are asking America to do something, and not the other way round. Your so called argument spews hypocrisy from every crack. If the US wanted to help the world, it would take it upon itself to lead the other countries in greenhouse gas reductions, rather than spend goodness knows how many billions on killing people for natural resources. I mean, even the Republican party's campaign funding (which is absolutely ridiculously disproportionate to any other political party in any other country), put towards reducing emissions, would probably go quite a way towards Kyoto targets.

Afghanistan was already blown up by European colonialism and Soviet aggression. At least this time the world mostly agreed to do something regarding Afghanistan and are attempting to rebuild it. I agree with you on Iraq.

I don't believe that Kyoto is a real attempt at reducing greenhouse gases. There are a multitude of hidden reasons within Kyoto. Nope, you're worsening the situation.

The funding European countries spend to eradicate refugees (who are vital to the future of Europe) would probably go quite a way towards actually coming up with an effective method to the global warming 'problem.'

America isn't being asked to subscribe to the EU concept, or follow the EU around on a leash (like the EU currently is being forced to with America due to *America's* imperialism). It is being asked to try to slightly improve the environment, which is a global issue affecting everyone on the planet. In my opinion, the decision over the future of the lives of the people of this world should rest with someone with a little more forethought, consideration and intellect than Bush, a man who is unable to string a single sentence together (and who's ridiculous attempts at just that I've been laughing at for the past year in my Bush page a day calendar).

I agree about Bush, however I don't think that decision resides within the EU since they're much worse than Bush.

European colonialism is attempting to rule the world again, but this time it shall fail.

 

[Proletariat]

So, let me get this straight, attempting to curb pollution for the benefit of all of mankind is... colonialist? You must be some kind of spoiled brat dude. Colonialism is when the British slaughtered 20,000 people at Jalianwala Bagh in India or when they bombed the hell out of Iraq in the 1920's. Colonialism is not pushing forward global initiatives that benefit the entire world. Look up definitions before you spout utter garbage. You are insulting all people who lived under colonialism.

Edit: 120 nations have ratified the Kyoto protocol. I'm wondering about this large group of countries calling it European colonialism.

 

[aceadrian1]

Who has been pumping this European colonialism rubbish around?! What are you talking about? Give me some other actual examples of how Europe is attempting to colonise once more. I think this is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in 2005 so far...

What I would agree with you on is that Kyoto is certainly far from perfect, but... what's actually happening is the European countries are subscribing to it and slightly denting their economies (barely noticeably) as a result. It is not negligable, but hardly a huge impact. America isn't subscribing. So this should be helping the American economy at the moment. How can you claim the hidden reason of the Kyoto treaty is to harm the American economy?!

My point about the campaign funding was to show that America wouldn't have to invest much money (relatively - it'd be quite a bit of money to the UK) to improve things considerably. I just gave you a throwaway figure as an example. There are probably numerous European examples we could use too - but Europe has subscribed anyway

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
So, let me get this straight, attempting to curb pollution for the benefit of all of mankind is... colonialist? You must be some kind of spoiled brat dude. Colonialism is when the British slaughtered 20,000 people at Jalianwala Bagh in India or when they bombed the hell out of Iraq in the 1920's. Colonialism is not pushing forward global initiatives that benefit the entire world.

So, let me get this straight, they're actually trying to bush forward a global initiative that benefits the entire world? Which one is that? Surely you can't be talking about Kyoto.

 

[aceadrian1]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
So, let me get this straight, they're actually trying to bush forward a global initiative that benefits the entire world? Which one is that? Surely you can't be talking about Kyoto.

Yes... that's the concept, even if it isn't working wonderfully. It would work a lot better with the US on board. Let's face it, it's a start. How would you like to start dealing with emissions when you're also dealing with countries like the US which don't want to spend a dime on anything other than advancing themselves and themselves only?

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1
Who has been pumping this European colonialism rubbish around?! What are you talking about? Give me some other actual examples of how Europe is attempting to colonise once more. I think this is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in 2005 so far...

Yes, they have. They are attempting to put forth their rule over the entire world and terrorize everyone again. Kyoto and the ICC are very good examples of this. What you just said is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in 2005 so far...

What I would agree with you on is that Kyoto is certainly far from perfect, but... what's actually happening is the European countries are subscribing to it and slightly denting their economies (barely noticeably) as a result. It is not negligable, but hardly a huge impact. America isn't subscribing. So this should be helping the American economy at the moment. How can you claim the hidden reason of the Kyoto treaty is to harm the American economy?!

That's one of the many hidden reasons. How can I claim it? Because that's how it is.

The effects of Kyoto will be negligible. It doesn't matter if it puts a little dent or a big dent when the result will be that it does absolutely nothing... except ignore the real issue.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
So, let me get this straight, they're actually trying to bush forward a global initiative that benefits the entire world? Which one is that? Surely you can't be talking about Kyoto.

Yes... that's the concept, even if it isn't working wonderfully. It would work a lot better with the US on board. Let's face it, it's a start. How would you like to start dealing with emissions when you're also dealing with countries like the US which don't want to spend a dime on anything other than advancing themselves and themselves only?

I'd start by keeping Europe out of any negotiations since their entire intent is advancing themselves and themselves only. That would also be useful since the world has banded together to oppose Kyoto Mark II.

 

[aceadrian1]

I can't tell if you're being serious or just joking.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1
I can't tell if you're being serious or just joking.

I can't tell that about you either

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1
I can't tell if you're being serious or just joking.

DUDE. This is what we are dealing with over on this side of the Atlantic.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Has the US increased or decreased its emissions?

 

[aceadrian1]

RabidMongoose:

I'm not sure, but if it did decrease (which I doubt), it was probably accidental. What the US tends to do is get to ger poor 3rd world countries that haven't used their emissions quota up to house CO2 emitting factories for them, so it gets around quotas anyway. Therefore it depends whether you measure the US' CO2 emitting factories overseas too

Proletariat:

Agreed

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1
RabidMongoose:

I'm not sure, but if it did decrease (which I doubt), it was probably accidental. What the US tends to do is get to ger poor 3rd world countries that haven't used their emissions quota up to house CO2 emitting factories for them, so it gets around quotas anyway. Therefore it depends whether you measure the US' CO2 emitting factories overseas too

lol

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1
RabidMongoose:

I'm not sure, but if it did decrease (which I doubt), it was probably accidental. What the US tends to do is get to ger poor 3rd world countries that haven't used their emissions quota up to house CO2 emitting factories for them, so it gets around quotas anyway. Therefore it depends whether you measure the US' CO2 emitting factories overseas too

Proletariat:

Agreed

That is pretty ridiculous. What kind of factories are you talking about? Are you saying that other countries don't have factories in third world countries? Are these factories owned by the government? Please provide some links to your claims instead of bland accusations.

I wouldn't be shocked if the US has decreased its own emissions through its own measures. If they're decreasing them without the massively flawed Kyoto Treaty that most countries cannot even meet, then what's the problem? Can't the 'world' - which in this case apparently is not even 1/4 of the world - do anything without the US?

 

[aceadrian1]

Sorry, I can't remember exactly where I read that. It was the New Scientist, Scientific American or another such scientific magazine/journal I believe. What I was saying is that other 3rd world countries which don't produce much CO2 get paid a little by the US in return for the US setting up CO2 factories in their countries. I think that was the gist of it anyway.

I'll see if I can dig up some information on how the US is doing with emissions in a minute. I agree that if the US is reducing outside of Kyoto, then there is no problem, although I'd still like to see a commitment of some sort - be it a statement from the President or whatever.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1
Sorry, I can't remember exactly where I read that. It was the New Scientist, Scientific American or another such scientific magazine/journal I believe. What I was saying is that other 3rd world countries which don't produce much CO2 get paid a little by the US in return for the US setting up CO2 factories in their countries. I think that was the gist of it anyway.

What are these 'CO2 factories'? Are you saying that no other countries have corporations that own factories in other countries that emit CO2? Are you saying that the US government sets up these factories? Please provide a reliable source with sufficient information if that is possible.

And isn't an almost equivalent possibility already in the Kyoto Treaty? Yes it is.

I'll see if I can dig up some information on how the US is doing with emissions in a minute. I agree that if the US is reducing outside of Kyoto, then there is no problem, although I'd still like to see a commitment of some sort - be it a statement from the President or whatever.

I would guess that there are statements about it from some agency.

 

[aceadrian1]

North America is the highest fossil-fuel, CO2 emitting region of the world with 1.65 billion tons of carbon in 2000. This 2000 total is an all-time high for North America and represents a 1.5% increase from 1999.

-- http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_nam.htm

Carbon dioxide emissions, a major contributor to global warming, jumped nearly 3% in the United States last year while declining in other industrialized nations, according to preliminary estimates released Friday.

--http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0630-01.htm, Published on Saturday, June 30, 2001 in the Los Angeles Times

You need more evidence? I can't find more recent data right now.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1

North America is the highest fossil-fuel, CO2 emitting region of the world with 1.65 billion tons of carbon in 2000. This 2000 total is an all-time high for North America and represents a 1.5% increase from 1999.

-- http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_nam.htm

Carbon dioxide emissions, a major contributor to global warming, jumped nearly 3% in the United States last year while declining in other industrialized nations, according to preliminary estimates released Friday.

--http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0630-01.htm, Published on Saturday, June 30, 2001 in the Los Angeles Times

You need more evidence? I can't find more recent data right now.

Well I would like something more recent than 1999-2001. You may be right that the US has not decreased their reductions recently. Is CO2 the only emission under Kyoto?

BTW, do you know if the Kyoto Treaty adjusts for increase in population?

BTW, there are statements from Bush and other officials that the US will try to independently reduce its emissions.

 

[aceadrian1]

I too would like some more recent figures. To be honest with you, I know little about Kyoto. It's mainly the concept I was commenting on previously, but it certainly doesn't hurt to learn a little more about it. I will print off a document on it tonight and read it at school tomorrow. Hopefully I'll have a few more answers by tomorrow evening.

Off the top of my head, I have a feeling Kyoto does adjust for population changes, but obviously I'll need to check that.

 

[0roo0roo]

well its all irrelevant as kyoto completely ignores countries like china .. lets em spew as they please.

 

[0roo0roo]

and seriously, until europe stops building ever more suv's and gas guzzling luxury vehicles for the us market, they should stfu about emissions.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: aceadrian1
To be honest with you, I know little about Kyoto.

That's obvious!