Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Loud Whispers]

To rally the people is the job of Macron the Savior of France, which he's doing with excellence par none. I'm just an observer, who's stating facts. No election without cheating (which automatically excludes the UK election you mentioned, seeing as there's still an ongoing investigation of Tories' election fraud) has resulted in polling being wrong by that much. That's a fact. Of course, events may happen that could render it impossible. For instance, a meteorite shower could descend on Earth and kill all non-FN French via precision space-stoning. There are many possibilities, but if we stay within realistic bounds, En Marche! has already won.

First off, the Tories are not under investigation - they're trying to block it, and we need to push them until they relent and Cameron's feet are on the fire. Secondly, that would not exclude the UK election I mentioned, as I'm talking about the General Election - the election you think you're talking about is actually the Thanet By-election in South Thanet and you can be rest assured, are based Nige becoming an MP is an interesting prospect to say the least. The second thing is all you're doing is shoring up your subjective prejudices, not stating facts. Your argument is that it is impossible, because no previous case is known to you, therefore it is impossible.

Don't worry, you'll have a chance to get back to EUrope once you realize the folly of your "independence" ways. On EUrope conditions, of course.

Cheeki breeki i love eu now

To put it bluntly, your graphs mean nothing.

What they mean is cutting taxes for corporations whilst not dealing with the poor and unemployed is simply going to exacerbate the disaffected populace of France, which is ripe for populist movements promising a change from the usual business. Simple as m8

The unity will be achieved as long as there's political will to do so - and the Brexit/Trump combination has given the governments of Europe just the right kind of impulse in that direction. No other factors really matter.

The political will for unity exists right now. Doesn't seem to be helping calm down the ignored & downtrodden yuropoors that all their politicians, really, really want a unified Europe. Political will must translate into meaningful action, otherwise it's just ambitions and words. Ignoring all the disaffected yuropoors as "other factors" that don't "really matter" is not going to make them go away, while ignoring the other factors which produce them is just going to increase their numbers

USA enjoys even starker degrees of financial equality, yet even hints of separatism are met with nearly-universal scorn and calls to bring in the troops to suppress them.

Yeah let's just ignore that the USA's starker degrees of financial equality resulted in Donald Trump getting elected.

It's just a matter of creating a European Army, and within short period of time, the only thing remaining would be to formalize the birth of the new European Unity. If that "Shultz" dude wins in Germany, it could happen in as little as 10 years.

You know I'm gonna just ignore the logistical legend that would be forming an EU army in 10 years, cos deploying soldiers against revolting French peasantry, there's never been a historical case of that failing in France
I suppose European Unity is very convincing coming from a baton versus a baguette. Maybe you like guillotines, cos that's how you get guillotines
I love that as well, respond to the "insignificant factors" of people resenting EU overreach of power, by creating a military with which to police them. Hahaha

You aren't Trump. You don't have the magical power to repeat falsehoods until they become truth.

I suppose our fundamental disagreement is that I don't see the polls calling the victory wrong within margin of error, as well, right, while I see polls accurately declaring the result correctly as correct. It is either calling the correct result, or it is not - and it did not. I don't see how you can expect me to rationalize the polls calling a Clinton victory is false, simply because news media interpreted likely victory as landslide victory. I don't see 100% accuracy as all that achievable either, especially given earlier concerns of demographics, or even just what time the polls were taken. In the UK for example, our 2015 GE polls were rubbish - except until a few hours before the voting ended, wherein the exit polls were more or less spot on. Not terribly useful either way, and to call me false Trumpian is rather pointless ;P

As to your actual point (that reliance on polls breeds complacency), you're completely right. People don't realize that one has to actually put in the effort to maintain their position; polls just offer a snapshot into a brief window of the electorate. Even a burning building has a few windows without smoke or flame. Problem is when people start to try throwing parties in those rooms.

Aye, though that is a colourful metaphor. Reminds me of the everythingisfine.jpg

[Azzuro]

I love that as well, respond to the "insignificant factors" of people resenting EU overreach of power, by creating a military with which to police them. Hahaha

Pretty sure that he didn't mention anything about using the hypothetical European military to police EU citizens.

And creating an European Army is not "just a matter", given that you're talking about armed forces that don't even use the same languages, to say nothing of the nightmare of organisational structures and logistics that would ensue.

Actually, it would be pretty easy. You know, because most EU countries that have military are a part of NATO. Most of the work on introducing the unified command language and decision systems has already been done.

NATO is hardly a good example to cite in forming an European military, given that the US is approximately two-thirds of it and US interests dominate. And within NATO, only four others met their stated goals of spending 2% of GDP on defence. It's clear that European countries in NATO aren't all that invested in it, which calls into question your point that NATO already promotes a unified language and command structure. It's more likely that an European military will exist on paper and the occasional training exercise only. Also important to note that while NATO nominally commands parts of the militaries of its member states, a huge amount of freedom is still in the hands of the member states. Does NATO regulate army recruitment, defence procurement, pay structures or the like?

[martinuzz]

I have the solution to the EU not integrating further. We should found a new political party in each EU member state. A single issue party for joining the UK. Make the Brexit great again!

[Erkki]

Does NATO regulate army recruitment, defence procurement, pay structures or the like?

It doesnt, really.

And despite all the regulations and standardization they've tried to implement, after over half a century of trying they still lack such basic things as a common rank system(they do have a placeholder-like system), or basic rifle cartridge(s), clothing and protective systems, let alone the more advanced stuff.

[Sergarr]

To rally the people is the job of Macron the Savior of France, which he's doing with excellence par none. I'm just an observer, who's stating facts. No election without cheating (which automatically excludes the UK election you mentioned, seeing as there's still an ongoing investigation of Tories' election fraud) has resulted in polling being wrong by that much. That's a fact. Of course, events may happen that could render it impossible. For instance, a meteorite shower could descend on Earth and kill all non-FN French via precision space-stoning. There are many possibilities, but if we stay within realistic bounds, En Marche! has already won.

First off, the Tories are not under investigation - they're trying to block it, and we need to push them until they relent and Cameron's feet are on the fire. Secondly, that would not exclude the UK election I mentioned, as I'm talking about the General Election - the election you think you're talking about is actually the Thanet By-election in South Thanet and you can be rest assured, are based Nige becoming an MP is an interesting prospect to say the least. The second thing is all you're doing is shoring up your subjective prejudices, not stating facts. Your argument is that it is impossible, because no previous case is known to you, therefore it is impossible.

And your argument is that because you think it's possible, it's possible, no facts needed. It's pure metaphysical bullshit, in other words.

Don't worry, you'll have a chance to get back to EUrope once you realize the folly of your "independence" ways. On EUrope conditions, of course.

Cheeki breeki i love eu now

Embrace the eu and bask in its sacred glory, m8

To put it bluntly, your graphs mean nothing.

What they mean is cutting taxes for corporations whilst not dealing with the poor and unemployed is simply going to exacerbate the disaffected populace of France, which is ripe for populist movements promising a change from the usual business. Simple as m8

You know what, you're right about that. Macron's platform is populist, that promises change from the usual business, by marching towards the ideals of Europe at full speed instead of making compromises with the local saboteurs. France is ripe for such movement, which is why he won the election.

USA enjoys even starker degrees of financial equality, yet even hints of separatism are met with nearly-universal scorn and calls to bring in the troops to suppress them.

Yeah let's just ignore that the USA's starker degrees of financial equality resulted in Donald Trump getting elected.

Trump was elected by uneducated people, not poor. Something that Europe has less problems with, being significantly more urbanized and all.

It's just a matter of creating a European Army, and within short period of time, the only thing remaining would be to formalize the birth of the new European Unity. If that "Shultz" dude wins in Germany, it could happen in as little as 10 years.

You know I'm gonna just ignore the logistical legend that would be forming an EU army in 10 years, cos deploying soldiers against revolting French peasantry, there's never been a historical case of that failing in France
I suppose European Unity is very convincing coming from a baton versus a baguette. Maybe you like guillotines, cos that's how you get guillotines
I love that as well, respond to the "insignificant factors" of people resenting EU overreach of power, by creating a military with which to police them. Hahaha

It's telling that the first thing you think about is using an army to quell the people you don't like with physical force. Which is, actually, not what I was thinking about. A unified European army means that people from various countries get to know each other in person for a long period of time without the possibility of evading social interaction due to the rigid structure of an army, and nothing destroys irrational xenophobia and prejudices faster than that.

And creating an European Army is not "just a matter", given that you're talking about armed forces that don't even use the same languages, to say nothing of the nightmare of organisational structures and logistics that would ensue.

Actually, it would be pretty easy. You know, because most EU countries that have military are a part of NATO. Most of the work on introducing the unified command language and decision systems has already been done.

NATO is hardly a good example to cite in forming an European military, given that the US is approximately two-thirds of it and US interests dominate. And within NATO, only four others met their stated goals of spending 2% of GDP on defence. It's clear that European countries in NATO aren't all that invested in it, which calls into question your point that NATO already promotes a unified language and command structure. It's more likely that an European military will exist on paper and the occasional training exercise only. Also important to note that while NATO nominally commands parts of the militaries of its member states, a huge amount of freedom is still in the hands of the member states. Does NATO regulate army recruitment, defence procurement, pay structures or the like?

NATO's very existence promotes a unified language and command structure. You can't exactly have a military force where there's a possibility of two officers speaking two different languages and not understanding each other, or a military force where two officers do not know which one is superior and which one should be subordinate.

The "2% of spending" is not an official NATO rule, it's something USA invented in order to fuel its stupidly large military-industrial complex by finding new markets to sell its stuff to. Obviously, European countries has refused to do so, except for ones that are directly threatened by Russia. Then again, they would've done so anyway, after Ukrainian events.

[Erkki]

The "2% of spending" is not an official NATO rule, it's something USA invented in order to fuel its stupidly large military-industrial complex by finding new markets to sell its stuff to. Obviously, European countries has refused to do so, except for ones that are directly threatened by Russia. Then again, they would've done so anyway, after Ukrainian events.

Its something they agreed together... Although I dont think theres ever been sanctions for not spending the 2 %. Most equipment and services bought by European defence ministries are bought from within Europe any way. Fighter aircraft are one of the exceptions where major money does indeed money go to USA, but even there many European nations are active participants of the developement and manufacturing, such as in the case of the F-35, for example.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[smjjames]

And creating an European Army is not "just a matter", given that you're talking about armed forces that don't even use the same languages, to say nothing of the nightmare of organisational structures and logistics that would ensue.

Actually, it would be pretty easy. You know, because most EU countries that have military are a part of NATO. Most of the work on introducing the unified command language and decision systems has already been done.

English is already used as a Lingua Franca between international militaries, but when it comes to the rank and file, that could be a concern, dunno.

@sergarr: Not neccesarily uneducated, plenty of them have highschool, but it's true that Trump won bigger in places with low college education.

[ChairmanPoo]

TBH even expecting it from ranking officers is probably too much

[Baffler]

The idea of the EU army being forced by circumstance to speak the language of the country that left (among other things) over the push for its formation is pretty hilarious.

[Sergarr]

The idea of the EU army being forced by circumstance to speak the language of the country that left (among other things) over the push for its formation is pretty hilarious.

It's also not entirely unprecedented. India still has English as its official language, despite kicking the British occupants out, because it was the only option that was equally neutral to each of the nations inside.

[smjjames]

Well, English is kind of the fallback option I suppose because it's already used so much internationally.

If you wanted to choose a language other than English, how would you choose? (warning, huge image) There are three major groups of languages in Europe, Germanic (English, German, Swedish, etc), Romance languages (everything descended from Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, etc), and Slavic (Russian, Polish, Serbian, etc). French and German have been Lingua Francas in the past, but with so many diverse languages, how do you pick one that is to be used in common throughout an EU army.

What Sergarr said, English is already used widely and is seen as a pretty neutral one to use. Although the French would insist on French being used instead, heh.

[redwallzyl]

The idea of the EU army being forced by circumstance to speak the language of the country that left (among other things) over the push for its formation is pretty hilarious.

its not English its Merican. totally different.

[Baffler]

Le Pen leaves leadership role of FN, citing need to be "above partisanship." Very interesting, though it seems she's left her way back to control of the party open if she should lose the election.

[TempAcc]

In non frog news: Lel have fun with that.

[smjjames]

In non frog news: Lel have fun with that.

That's just so stupid......

The same kind of problem also exists for the UN Human Rights commission, those that don't exactly have a great human rights record are on there.