Originally posted by Hand87_5
Well if your representants at the parlement don’t represent the general public opinion , it sounds like a major failure in your democratic system to me !

Now this is something I am inclined to agree upon. 😡

Tell me if I’m wrong , but I thought that Mrs Thatcher negociated a much lower fee for the UK than the other members, is it still true?

In a word no it isn’t. Thatcher negotiated a lower premium full stop, not a lower premium than anybody else. To start off it was a lot higher than most, it was the one decent thing that bitch ever did, made it a little bit fairer.

Originally posted by Geforce
OK, seems like this forum really is worthless piece of crap. Apart from Hand nobody even did the effort to contribute something. 😡 😡 😡 It’s sad to see discussions here can’t reach any further than the level of “what was the colour of your sh!t this morning”-polls.

Anyway, what suprises me in this constitution is the fact that there will be a way left open to leave the EU. Actually, this was also in the Soviet constitution. But if a country would leave the EU, without directly being punished, wouldn’t it suffer a lot from the economic consequences?

Hand, apart from the Commission there will also be a “president” of the EU, who would take over the role of the EU-presidency, which is now a rotating system among the memberstates. This will make it a lot cheaper.

And Snapper, you Britons don’t have to pay much to the EU anyway, all buildings etc are either being paid by the Belgian, Luxembourg or French taxpayer. If you have to pay the EU that’s because the UK is breaking a rule, but due the EU, especially in the field of finances and business, there has been saved a lot of money.

Why is it a worthless peice of crap? Because some people don’t agree with what you say? Thats the whole point you see. Thats why we get so apathetic and sometime angry. Because people like you cannot and will not accept that we DO NOT WANT WHAT YOU WANT. What part of this do you not understand and why can you not accept and respect it?

And do you not think that a seeker capable of gaining a lock on from the front of an aircraft would be able to be used from behind that same aircraft with a much greater reliability and much higher PK. They fired at the tails of the Argentine aircraft because they could. Because they made the effort to get on the targets tail they had a much better kill ratio (ie launch to kill ratio) than they would otherwise have had. (It was the fact that the Harrier was better designed for low and slow turning combat that gave them the number of kills but it was the all aspect missile they used that gave them the high shot per kill rate.

Yes thats what I said didn’t I?

Fingers are well and truly crossed. 🙁

He’s that bad?:eek:

Well done France. 🙂