dark light

Ben.

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 398 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: General Discussion #384761
    Ben.
    Participant

    This is Jack with my hat on Grrrrrrr

    Now that looks like a nice dag :D. Cool dog, have one quite similar too. However, she’s getting old 🙁 I’ll be so depressed the day she … well better not think about it

    in reply to: Pics of your pets. #1948927
    Ben.
    Participant

    This is Jack with my hat on Grrrrrrr

    Now that looks like a nice dag :D. Cool dog, have one quite similar too. However, she’s getting old 🙁 I’ll be so depressed the day she … well better not think about it

    in reply to: General Discussion #384854
    Ben.
    Participant

    I bought myself an iPod shuffle some weeks ago and indeed, you can only download from iPod. the mp3-player itself is OK, especially since you dont need batteries

    in reply to: MP-3 Players #1948960
    Ben.
    Participant

    I bought myself an iPod shuffle some weeks ago and indeed, you can only download from iPod. the mp3-player itself is OK, especially since you dont need batteries

    in reply to: General Discussion #384891
    Ben.
    Participant

    One funny thing happened in the aftermath of the Dutch “Nee”.

    Our FM has called the Dutch PM a mixture of Harry Potter and bourgeoisie, saying he has the charisma of a pan-cake (which he, with all respect, has :D). Very funny because we have a diplomatic quarrel between the Belgian and the Dutch gov’t now. Our embassador has some explenations to do on monday. The PM of Flanders though said our federal FM was an idiot, trying to ruin 50 years of cooperation between our two states.

    in reply to: France says no to EU constitution #1948979
    Ben.
    Participant

    One funny thing happened in the aftermath of the Dutch “Nee”.

    Our FM has called the Dutch PM a mixture of Harry Potter and bourgeoisie, saying he has the charisma of a pan-cake (which he, with all respect, has :D). Very funny because we have a diplomatic quarrel between the Belgian and the Dutch gov’t now. Our embassador has some explenations to do on monday. The PM of Flanders though said our federal FM was an idiot, trying to ruin 50 years of cooperation between our two states.

    in reply to: General Discussion #384897
    Ben.
    Participant

    Look, the importance of the nation-states in Europe are overrated. It’s a 19th century construction, but people have the wrong idea states exist since fish got feet, to quote Arthur. The fact that each country has different needs and problems is not really true: Europe is geographically too small and we all need oil, food and other basic products. The power of the national capitals is now bigger than ever! Brussels could give some sovereignity back, not to the national gov’ts, but to the people itself. London is as bad as Paris trying to get a grip on everything. Thatcher has centralised the whole country so Dowing Street still has a lot of power, don’t underestimate this.

    That’s what I mean with informing people on history. They know some dates like 1066 and they’ll say ‘we never want to be ruled by France again’, totally out of context, forgetting all major events which followed 1066. And so is the “myth” of the nation-state. Arthur already talked about invented identities and traditions.

    Ohh and Arthur, I see another paradox. IMHO Turkey can join the EU, however, I still think the Judeo-Christian values (and the enlightment) should have been mentioned in the constitution. The Ottoman Empire indeed was more tollerant than any other country in Europe (Jews for example), and I think 40% of the inhabitans were even Christians. And since Turkey today is secular, the fact that 99% of the inhabitans are muslims should not be an argument to stop them from joining the EU. However, Turkey is not truely democratic (in practice) but neither is Albania or Serbia.

    in reply to: France says no to EU constitution #1948984
    Ben.
    Participant

    Look, the importance of the nation-states in Europe are overrated. It’s a 19th century construction, but people have the wrong idea states exist since fish got feet, to quote Arthur. The fact that each country has different needs and problems is not really true: Europe is geographically too small and we all need oil, food and other basic products. The power of the national capitals is now bigger than ever! Brussels could give some sovereignity back, not to the national gov’ts, but to the people itself. London is as bad as Paris trying to get a grip on everything. Thatcher has centralised the whole country so Dowing Street still has a lot of power, don’t underestimate this.

    That’s what I mean with informing people on history. They know some dates like 1066 and they’ll say ‘we never want to be ruled by France again’, totally out of context, forgetting all major events which followed 1066. And so is the “myth” of the nation-state. Arthur already talked about invented identities and traditions.

    Ohh and Arthur, I see another paradox. IMHO Turkey can join the EU, however, I still think the Judeo-Christian values (and the enlightment) should have been mentioned in the constitution. The Ottoman Empire indeed was more tollerant than any other country in Europe (Jews for example), and I think 40% of the inhabitans were even Christians. And since Turkey today is secular, the fact that 99% of the inhabitans are muslims should not be an argument to stop them from joining the EU. However, Turkey is not truely democratic (in practice) but neither is Albania or Serbia.

    in reply to: General Discussion #384995
    Ben.
    Participant

    I agree 200 % with you Arthur. The constitution is more of political compromise between the 25 memberstates (negative rights mostly) than what it really should be: a constitution build upon civil rights, social rights, 250 years of European enlightment values, and “Judeo-Christian” values as well. Not to **** of the Turks, but because I consider it to be a part of Europe as well. The constitution now looks like a half baked pie consisting of some ingedrients (Robbespiere mostly :D).

    I think the EU’s main problem is that it is focussing mostly (only) on socio-economical and political problems. Now it looks like the EU is nothing more than the price Germany had to pay for re-uniting after that particular 9 november 1989. (which it also is, else Mitterand would not have “pulled back” the French Army :D)

    However, there doesn’t seem to be any attention to the broader cultural heritage which unites us all. There’s not enough attention for our common history, and not only in the political meaning of the word. The constitution could have been the “cherry on the cake” (sorry for literally translating a Dutch expression but you know what I mean) of 500 years of Modern European History. I’m not saying this because this is academic BS, or because I want the EU to hire me later so I get a hell of a salary (this too ofcourse :D), but because history and culture is what really bothers the people. There’s not enough focus on this.

    The EU-leaders should have done this: exhibitions on European History, fund this instead of sending a copy of this “cold” constitution to everyone.

    * Strang you are talking about “dogma’s” now. I am busy now studying the philosophy of Karl Popper :). I thought I once heard you saying you liked his work, however, it’s the first time I read something of him, but he sure has some interresting views on “science” and the historical process.

    in reply to: France says no to EU constitution #1949036
    Ben.
    Participant

    I agree 200 % with you Arthur. The constitution is more of political compromise between the 25 memberstates (negative rights mostly) than what it really should be: a constitution build upon civil rights, social rights, 250 years of European enlightment values, and “Judeo-Christian” values as well. Not to **** of the Turks, but because I consider it to be a part of Europe as well. The constitution now looks like a half baked pie consisting of some ingedrients (Robbespiere mostly :D).

    I think the EU’s main problem is that it is focussing mostly (only) on socio-economical and political problems. Now it looks like the EU is nothing more than the price Germany had to pay for re-uniting after that particular 9 november 1989. (which it also is, else Mitterand would not have “pulled back” the French Army :D)

    However, there doesn’t seem to be any attention to the broader cultural heritage which unites us all. There’s not enough attention for our common history, and not only in the political meaning of the word. The constitution could have been the “cherry on the cake” (sorry for literally translating a Dutch expression but you know what I mean) of 500 years of Modern European History. I’m not saying this because this is academic BS, or because I want the EU to hire me later so I get a hell of a salary (this too ofcourse :D), but because history and culture is what really bothers the people. There’s not enough focus on this.

    The EU-leaders should have done this: exhibitions on European History, fund this instead of sending a copy of this “cold” constitution to everyone.

    * Strang you are talking about “dogma’s” now. I am busy now studying the philosophy of Karl Popper :). I thought I once heard you saying you liked his work, however, it’s the first time I read something of him, but he sure has some interresting views on “science” and the historical process.

    in reply to: General Discussion #385128
    Ben.
    Participant

    It is possible to conclude that France and the Dutch people have rejected the constitution or can I see in in the following way.

    This was the first time when Europeans were consulted about the EU, the vote of non by the French and Ney by the Dutch may have been a protest on not only the constitution but on many concearns such as countries like Bulgaria etc joining in. Also is the so called secular and socialist Europe ready for a Muslim country like Turkey to join the Eu?

    Strange, in fact it are not the neo-liberals but the socialists who were against the EU consitution. Europe = socialism … Yeah right. Europe is also conservatism, catholicism, extreme right etc. Europe, and most certainly the EU is all but socialist. In fact, that’s why so many people don’t like the EU, because there’s no social security in it.

    in reply to: France says no to EU constitution #1949097
    Ben.
    Participant

    It is possible to conclude that France and the Dutch people have rejected the constitution or can I see in in the following way.

    This was the first time when Europeans were consulted about the EU, the vote of non by the French and Ney by the Dutch may have been a protest on not only the constitution but on many concearns such as countries like Bulgaria etc joining in. Also is the so called secular and socialist Europe ready for a Muslim country like Turkey to join the Eu?

    Strange, in fact it are not the neo-liberals but the socialists who were against the EU consitution. Europe = socialism … Yeah right. Europe is also conservatism, catholicism, extreme right etc. Europe, and most certainly the EU is all but socialist. In fact, that’s why so many people don’t like the EU, because there’s no social security in it.

    in reply to: General Discussion #385131
    Ben.
    Participant

    GA and Ben,

    Ok then how about all those Aircraft that where shot at or down durning the whole Cold War peroid. If that isn’t a shooting War then what is? And how should we organise it. I’m pretty sure the Poles were eager to form an alliance with Germany against USSR back in 1945.

    Also Europe could have stop the whole Cold War before it started by stepping up when the Russians start to play there card in the first place.

    RER

    And how? Forget the little detail that after WWII most of Europe was destroyed … Germany didn’t exist anymore. You thought we still had enough manpower/money to start a full scale war against the Russians?

    And as Frank said, we didn’t controll anything after WWII. It was the Big 3 (US, UK, USSR) who decided and divided. Don’t forget it took 3 years before Western-Europe realised Stalin was not really thinking about a democratic Eastern-Europe. Only in 1948 the Cold war really started. The 3 years between were really just chaos. But good enough for Stalin to set his base for 50 years of oppression.

    in reply to: France says no to EU constitution #1949102
    Ben.
    Participant

    GA and Ben,

    Ok then how about all those Aircraft that where shot at or down durning the whole Cold War peroid. If that isn’t a shooting War then what is? And how should we organise it. I’m pretty sure the Poles were eager to form an alliance with Germany against USSR back in 1945.

    Also Europe could have stop the whole Cold War before it started by stepping up when the Russians start to play there card in the first place.

    RER

    And how? Forget the little detail that after WWII most of Europe was destroyed … Germany didn’t exist anymore. You thought we still had enough manpower/money to start a full scale war against the Russians?

    And as Frank said, we didn’t controll anything after WWII. It was the Big 3 (US, UK, USSR) who decided and divided. Don’t forget it took 3 years before Western-Europe realised Stalin was not really thinking about a democratic Eastern-Europe. Only in 1948 the Cold war really started. The 3 years between were really just chaos. But good enough for Stalin to set his base for 50 years of oppression.

    in reply to: General Discussion #385386
    Ben.
    Participant

    Their was this thing called The Cold War

    Nice try but totally out of context. The EU was set up DURING the cold war, to unite western-europa. Only now, central and eastern-europe can become members … 😎 And these nations were not members of the EU back then were they …

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 398 total)