Tony Blair...President of Europe!

[SnapIT]

Let's end this discussion, Tony isn't my president, the only way he would ever become the president of the EU is if all elections in every nation are cancelled and he appoints himself as the president...

Tony Blair will not even be re-elected in GBR, most people there want him gone, for a good reason....

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: MadRat
If the European Union does create a president, what makes anyone think of any current national leader there as anything BUT a provincial governor? The whole idea of an EU President just smacks of dumbing down the national politics of all of the European Union member countries to the point that they have some sort of breakdown. Remember, the USA's strong central government was built upon a civil war. Could Europe survive a civil war to ever harden its union?

You cannot compare pre-civil war US to the EU, this is an organization that doesn't even have a currency accepted by all of their members...

The individualism in the member countries is one of the things that will be kept, EU will NEVER have a president, ask me, nemesis77, Czar or Boone, all living in Europe, all with similar opinions but different enough to know that we don't NEED a president to control our countries...

A president of the EU will have no power over the countries he is supposed to represent so it is a hopeless job...

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: charrison
He deserves it. He has proved himself a leader.

Yeah, by jumping when GWB tells him to jump

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Hey don't forget, Blair represents the new Labor Party . . . Tory Lite.

 

[kylebisme]

well if anything his is certainly doing a good job driving up recruitment for the WN, not that i actually consider that a good thing by any means. :disgust:

 

[Alistar7]

Better him than any of the "leaders" who convinced their citizens their oppostion was morally based when in fact it was nothing more than an attempt to protect their financial interests and illegal activites.
I always thought New Zealand had the most sheep, guess I was wrong.

 

[kylebisme]

you are defenatly puting in for the homeland on that compitition Alistar7.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Better him than any of the "leaders" who convinced their citizens their oppostion was morally based when in fact it was nothing more than an attempt to protect their financial interests and illegal activites.
I always thought New Zealand had the most sheep, guess I was wrong.

Alistar, Alistar, Alistar... Allow me to educate you. US attacked what it calls a "rogue nation", correct? Want to know the real irony here? Since US attacked without UN authorization and without provokation (was Iraq about to invde USA or one of their neighbours? Nope), it means that the invasion was against international law, and that makes USA a rogue nation as well.

If you wanted to find sheep, I suggest that you look in to a mirror.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Better him than any of the "leaders" who convinced their citizens their oppostion was morally based when in fact it was nothing more than an attempt to protect their financial interests and illegal activites.
I always thought New Zealand had the most sheep, guess I was wrong.

Alistar, Alistar, Alistar... Allow me to educate you. US attacked what it calls a "rogue nation", correct? Want to know the real irony here? Since US attacked without UN authorization and without provokation (was Iraq about to invde USA or one of their neighbours? Nope), it means that the invasion was against international law, and that makes USA a rogue nation as well.

If you wanted to find sheep, I suggest that you look in to a mirror.

Saddam could have gone back into Kuwait, he could have also slaughtered more Kurds if we had not enforced the UN required no-fly zone. Is it okay if he only commits genocide on his own people?


And who is the ONLY country to EVER ask the UN to go to war?

Who has led the effort to create UN approval in THREE wars? Bosnia and Afghainstan, we tried in this instance as well. The oppositions ulterior motives are well publicized.

Why is the US the only country that even bothers asking the UN??????

Yet we recieve criticism when we do, make up your minds, the hypocrisy is annoying.
Didn't you ever learn to play follow the leader? lol

 

[SnapIT]

Tony Blair will be forgotten and gone when the next election is over and done with...

Nobody will remember him for any reason whatsoever...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Better him than any of the "leaders" who convinced their citizens their oppostion was morally based when in fact it was nothing more than an attempt to protect their financial interests and illegal activites.
I always thought New Zealand had the most sheep, guess I was wrong.

Alistar, Alistar, Alistar... Allow me to educate you. US attacked what it calls a "rogue nation", correct? Want to know the real irony here? Since US attacked without UN authorization and without provokation (was Iraq about to invde USA or one of their neighbours? Nope), it means that the invasion was against international law, and that makes USA a rogue nation as well.

If you wanted to find sheep, I suggest that you look in to a mirror.

Saddam could have gone back into Kuwait, he could have also slaughtered more Kurds if we had not enforced the UN required no-fly zone. Is it okay if he only commits genocide on his own people?


And who is the ONLY country to EVER ask the UN to go to war?

Who has led the effort to create UN approval in THREE wars? Bosnia and Afghainstan, we tried in this instance as well. The oppositions ulterior motives are well publicized.

Why is the US the only country that even bothers asking the UN??????

Yet we recieve criticism when we do, make up your minds, the hypocrisy is annoying.
Didn't you ever learn to play follow the leader? lol

Maybe, might, perhaps? ok, that is a solid argument...

WHICH country has used it's veto to ensure the domination of ONE nation in the middle east? could it be... the US?

You should really educate yourself before jumping up on that high horse of yours...

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: charrison
He deserves it. He has proved himself a leader.

Yeah, by jumping when GWB tells him to jump

Yes that is right, anyone who agrees with the US is our Poodle. One only has to agree with France to be a free thinker

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

You cannot compare pre-civil war US to the EU, this is an organization that doesn't even have a currency accepted by all of their members...

The individualism in the member countries is one of the things that will be kept, EU will NEVER have a president, ask me, nemesis77, Czar or Boone, all living in Europe, all with similar opinions but different enough to know that we don't NEED a president to control our countries...

A president of the EU will have no power over the countries he is supposed to represent so it is a hopeless job...

I think you missed the whole point of the American Civil War. It wasn't as much about slavery as it was the consolodation of the federal powers over the states; the states have never been able to gain the old pre-Civil War balance. I'm talking about centralization of the European executive branches of government not about a simple position of president. If you really think that this can happen because the common citizen doesn't like it then you're ignoring the trend in governments this past seventy-five centuries. As governments age they assume more control and eventually gobble up the individual rights of its citizenry. Its happened since the dawn of civilization - it will continue to happen because that is the nature of government. (As an example to prove my point: Ask yourself, did the U.S. president or U.K. prime minister seek the console of the citizenry before they invaded Iraq? No. Was the idea of a safe invasion of Iraq even remotely plausible in the minds of either citizenry before the fighting started? Mostly no. C'mon, even this war on "Terrorism" is a veiled instrument of control over the citizenry of the world into making it legitimate for the western nations to do things that even three years ago were unfathomable!)

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: MadRat

Originally posted by: SnapIT

You cannot compare pre-civil war US to the EU, this is an organization that doesn't even have a currency accepted by all of their members...

The individualism in the member countries is one of the things that will be kept, EU will NEVER have a president, ask me, nemesis77, Czar or Boone, all living in Europe, all with similar opinions but different enough to know that we don't NEED a president to control our countries...

A president of the EU will have no power over the countries he is supposed to represent so it is a hopeless job...

I think you missed the whole point of the American Civil War. It wasn't as much about slavery as it was the consolodation of the federal powers over the states; the states have never been able to gain the old pre-Civil War balance. I'm talking about centralization of the European executive branches of government not about a simple position of president. If you really think that this can happen because the common citizen doesn't like it then you're ignoring the trend in governments this past seventy-five centuries. As governments age they assume more control and eventually gobble up the individual rights of its citizenry. Its happened since the dawn of civilization - it will continue to happen because that is the nature of government. (As an example to prove my point: Ask yourself, did the U.S. president or U.K. prime minister seek the console of the citizenry before they invaded Iraq? No. Was the idea of a safe invasion of Iraq even remotely plausible in the minds of either citizenry before the fighting started? Mostly no. C'mon, even this war on "Terrorism" is a veiled instrument of control over the citizenry of the world into making it legitimate for the western nations to do things that even three years ago were unfathomable!)

You didn't read my post before you replied? or is it just a misunderstanding... ?

You are basically saying the same thing that i said in my post...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: charrison
He deserves it. He has proved himself a leader.

Yeah, by jumping when GWB tells him to jump

Yes that is right, anyone who agrees with the US is our Poodle. One only has to agree with France to be a free thinker

Actually, Nemesis is right, most of europe did not agree with Tony, most of UK did not agree with Tony, and that is why we dislike him, becase he is a tool, that is all he is...

If Bush says "jump" you can bet Blair will jump...

 

[MadRat]

I don't think Tony Blair is an American tool. His ideals rule him and they are not American ideals. Better take a closer look at him before making a simple judgement on the superficial decisions.

I'm not understanding your point in saying that I'm wrong but I'm right... try to explain your position in more detail so it makes more sense, would ya?

Edit: By the way, your European ideals of individualism leave the government unchecked, so how is that supposed to keep an EU president lame?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: charrison
He deserves it. He has proved himself a leader.

Yeah, by jumping when GWB tells him to jump

Yes that is right, anyone who agrees with the US is our Poodle. One only has to agree with France to be a free thinker

Actually, Nemesis is right, most of europe did not agree with Tony, most of UK did not agree with Tony, and that is why we dislike him, becase he is a tool, that is all he is...

If Bush says "jump" you can bet Blair will jump...

Like I said, you have to agree with the French to be considered a free thinker.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: charrison
He deserves it. He has proved himself a leader.

Yeah, by jumping when GWB tells him to jump

Yes that is right, anyone who agrees with the US is our Poodle. One only has to agree with France to be a free thinker

Did I say that? My point was that according to you, Blair has proven to be "a leader". How exactly? By doing everything GWB wants him to do? To me, that doesn't make him a leader, it makes him a follower.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Saddam could have gone back into Kuwait, he could have also slaughtered more Kurds if we had not enforced the UN required no-fly zone. Is it okay if he only commits genocide on his own people?

No, it is not OK to commit genocide against his own people. Did I say it was? Besides, killing of the kurds took place before the Gulf War (and the no-fly zone)

And who is the ONLY country to EVER ask the UN to go to war?

Who has led the effort to create UN approval in THREE wars? Bosnia and Afghainstan, we tried in this instance as well. The oppositions ulterior motives are well publicized.

And the fact remains that in this case, you did not have UN authorization to go to war.

Yet we recieve criticism when we do, make up your minds, the hypocrisy is annoying.
Didn't you ever learn to play follow the leader? lol

I believe you were/are not criticized for going to UN to ask permission for war, you were/are criticized because you walked right over UN and started an unsanctioned act of aggression against a sovereign nation.

Maybe I just expect more from the "leader of the free world".

 

[owensdj]

According to a Bible prophecy guy Jack Van Impe, the European Union is what the Bible calls the Revived Roman Empire and the person who will become the leader of it will be from Spain. The head of the Revived Roman Empire will later be revealed as the Anti-Christ. Sorry Mr. José María Aznar.

 

[owensdj]

Nemesis77, I'm pretty sure there's no "international law" that prohibits one nation from going to war against another nation. If there is such a "law," please cite it here.

 

[MadRat]

To go to war one has to violate literally thousands of laws against the treatise of sovereignty if thats what you meant.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Better him than any of the "leaders" who convinced their citizens their oppostion was morally based when in fact it was nothing more than an attempt to protect their financial interests and illegal activites.
I always thought New Zealand had the most sheep, guess I was wrong.

Alistar, Alistar, Alistar... Allow me to educate you. US attacked what it calls a "rogue nation", correct? Want to know the real irony here? Since US attacked without UN authorization and without provokation (was Iraq about to invde USA or one of their neighbours? Nope), it means that the invasion was against international law, and that makes USA a rogue nation as well.

If you wanted to find sheep, I suggest that you look in to a mirror.

Saddam could have gone back into Kuwait, he could have also slaughtered more Kurds if we had not enforced the UN required no-fly zone. Is it okay if he only commits genocide on his own people?


And who is the ONLY country to EVER ask the UN to go to war?

Who has led the effort to create UN approval in THREE wars? Bosnia and Afghainstan, we tried in this instance as well. The oppositions ulterior motives are well publicized.

Why is the US the only country that even bothers asking the UN??????

Yet we recieve criticism when we do, make up your minds, the hypocrisy is annoying.
Didn't you ever learn to play follow the leader? lol

Maybe, might, perhaps? ok, that is a solid argument...

WHICH country has used it's veto to ensure the domination of ONE nation in the middle east? could it be... the US?

You should really educate yourself before jumping up on that high horse of yours...

YES!!! I love it when Alistar gets stumped, no response to that even though he's probably still around. You might soon hear a "look at them cheering in the streets!" or some tripe, but that was a nice one. Cheers man, cheers.