Well Done UKIP.

[Buzzer]

They tend not to be...however, have you ever ridiculed a rastafarian?

So, you don't ridicule their beliefs because they're scary but you ridicule Christians on here because it's safe to do so.

Fair enough.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Nice try.

NATO is that force, not the EU.
Wrong, the EU can enable a task force in the interests of our foreign policy. EU has its own foreign policy, therefore offering unified protection to its members.

Not strictly true. The EU can ask if member states would like to "donate" troops and resources to EU military missions. There is no pre-defined command structure ( unlike NATO ) and there is no requirement for one member state to come to the aid of another ( unlike NATO ). Also, foreign policy doesn't protect countries - military strength does. The EU are currently toothless on the military side as it is entirely voluntary for member states to provide military resources. That's why the EU wants to create the European Defence Force.

 

[daveinprague]

Ive argued with rastas about religion...ive argued with main stream christians, Hindus, Muslims...ive not 'ridiculed' Christians...I think all religion is daft, but if people want to practice it...fair enough.

Im curious to why somebody or some group would want to ridicule by parodying a name.
Theres no other reason for the term 'Pastafarian' other than parody. All im saying is some would find that offensive.

 

[Soulman]

They tend not to be...however, have you ever ridiculed a rastafarian?

Never felt the need to, then again i have never met a Rasta that is so concerned about a country he does not live in.
I must get out more eh.

 

[pastafarian]

however, have you ever ridiculed a rastafarian?

yes

 

[User removed 4]

Nice try.



See above, but feel free to explain yourself.



See my post. Interpol has no authority.
NATO is dominated by the U.S; EU has its own foreign policy. NATO isn't going to go to the protection of its members unless the U.S is interested. The EU has all the interest in ensuring the protection of all its members due to the economic consequences of not doing so.

Yes mate , just listen to how the world trembles as baroness Ashton voices her opinions , just look at how Putin is reconsidering his position in the face of the EU's displeasure and military might, in fact just look at how Belgium refused to sell us ammunition and France sold exocets to the Argentinians during the Falklands war before you start relying on our European 'allies' for our security, come back when you've left airy fairy land , its obviously where you livevif you really think that about Europe.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

See my post. Interpol has no authority.
NATO is dominated by the U.S; EU has its own foreign policy. NATO isn't going to go to the protection of its members unless the U.S is interested. The EU has all the interest in ensuring the protection of all its members due to the economic consequences of not doing so.

You might want to do some reading on the terms of membership of NATO before making such daft statements.

 

[daveinprague]

Never felt the need to, then again i have never met a Rasta that is so concerned about a country he does not live in.
I must get out more eh.

So, if you work abroad, you stop being English? You stop caring about your country?...youre a strange Englishman.

 

[daveinprague]

yes

Now why would I doubt that...haha

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Interpol has no authority.

And Europol does ?

 

[User removed 4]

They tend not to be...however, have you ever ridiculed a rastafarian?

If telling one to f**k off counts , then yes.

 

[CheeseRolls]

To be honest I don't know how much they can achieve within the EU apparatus, as to operate within the machinery they need to form cross national party groupings and this means pacts with other euro sceptics which on the face of it is challenging given the unpalatable nature of some other European parties.

That said I wouldn't care if they took a leaf out of Sinn Fein's book when they never turned up at the Houses of Parliament, no one hectored them for claiming their expenses and not turning up........why should this be different?

The real damage won't be in Brussels though it will be the domestic politics of countries like France. The solution to the euro crisis is for further integration and this will be much more unlikely now.........that could hamstring the euro itself and if we get another event lead crisis (say linked to Ukraine) it could be the end.

Voter turn out has a long time been low, don't know why you are baffled.

Thankfully UKIP is not comparable to right wing European parties, however the rise of FN should not be a surprise, they have always had a support base. There is a perfect storm in France with discontent with the political elite and the economy, and the message from le Pen is compelling for many French voters........it is essentially Vive la France.

Clearly it is more than voters that baffle me.

So voters protest about politicians who do nothing and the net result is that they bring in a bunch of politicians to do even less?

Meanwhile as the good old Brits sit around drinking beer and smoking fags, Europe is dismantled brick by brick, by a bunch of Frenchmen with no trousers, who angrily man the barricades.

 

[GreersElbow]

NATO is that force, not the EU.
Wrong, the EU can enable a task force in the interests of our foreign policy. EU has its own foreign policy, therefore offering unified protection to its members.

Not strictly true. The EU can ask if member states would like to "donate" troops and resources to EU military missions. There is no pre-defined command structure ( unlike NATO ) and there is no requirement for one member state to come to the aid of another ( unlike NATO ). Also, foreign policy doesn't protect countries - military strength does. The EU are currently toothless on the military side as it is entirely voluntary for member states to provide military resources. That's why the EU wants to create the European Defence Force.

The EU's military capability is based on the UN model, however, if the EU was threatened by an external threat, for argument's sake: Turkey. Then it'd be in the economic interests of the EU and even non-EU members in Europe to defend against any aggression. NATO binds forces to commit troops that may not necessarily benefit them or protect them. Foreign policy isn't protection, no. However, what it is, is to represent the interests of each EU member on the international stage, creating consensus as to what requires protection and doesn't. NATO doesn't offer that. Say for example, the U.S gets into a full blown war with Mexico. What interests other than the mutual protection, are we fighting for if we were to enter that war? NATO may bind us to wars that are unsustainable, like Afghanistan.

The biggest problem with NATO is the presence of American influence, which IMO is a big problem (given their free-nilly bombing of Serbia in the 90s), EU would be using the economic incentive to protect one another, which is what they currently do. However, I admit the biggest barrier to this is Russia. However, NATO still did nothing when Georgia went to war with Russia in 2007, although Georgia isn't a full member yet. They are apart of a scheme that NATO runs before membership, NATO failed to fulfil a duty of care. As Georgia committed some troops to ISAF in 2004.

It's not perfect, however, relying on NATO, we're just hoping the U.S is having a good day and come to our support.

 

[pastafarian]

Im curious to why somebody or some group would want to ridicule by parodying a name.
Theres no other reason for the term 'Pastafarian' other than parody. All im saying is some would find that offensive.

especially your family who are(mock) offended at my username

whats wrong with it?... apart from it being offensive to some members of my family with your ridiculous hijacking of Selassies name,

 

[Buzzer]

What do you call a Jamaican with glasses?

Rasta Four Eyes.

I'm in a reggae band. I play the triangle. I just stand there and ting.

 

[GreersElbow]

And Europol does ?

Um, yes. By request, as seen under article 7 of the Europol Council Decision. They can enact investigations of member states, provided there's 2 consenting, unless there's factual cause of concern in respect of terrorism and that it's within their mandate.

More than Interpol

 

[Russconha]

You're all wrong. It is the notion of nation states that is doomed to failure. Bring back village rule!

 

[GreersElbow]

Yes mate , just listen to how the world trembles as baroness Ashton voices her opinions , just look at how Putin is reconsidering his position in the face of the EU's displeasure and military might, in fact just look at how Belgium refused to sell us ammunition and France sold exocets to the Argentinians during the Falklands war before you start relying on our European 'allies' for our security, come back when you've left airy fairy land , its obviously where you livevif you really think that about Europe.

Hahaha, all of which were before the EU was officially formed and a united foreign policy. I give you 4/10 for trying.

 

[pastafarian]

out of interest cheeserolls and sorry to drag you into this(you were 2 usernames above me on this thread) but do you hate Hamrolls? is it a religious hatred slash or parody you have against the bacon eaters or just a will to offend jews and muslims?

 

[Notters]

They're part of the same country. Piss poor analogy.

Hopefully Europe will be a country soon.