EU Referendum - How will you vote?

[Shef1985]

they are after their own army, thats the first step of a state. Large companies do not have an army, only states have them.

Think its already a superstate, such as setting tax etc, in everything but name.

 

So the EU want an army to.....overthrow its own citizens? Why?

 

Of course the King of Europe couldn't use the British part of his army to overthrow his British subjects, they might not want to do it, he'd have to send them to overthrow the French or something. The King of Europe might order the Italians to overthrow us. But the Italians might not want to because they know the Belgians have been sent to Italy and they are confident they can send them packing.

 

I'm confused....

 

Who is at war here and why?

Edited June 2, 2016 by Shef1985

[I1L2T3]

The evidence of the progression of central European authority over the UK since 1972 emphatically says otherwise.

 

We're less screwed if we're detached from it.

 

The EU doesn't have central authority over us, in any meaningful way.

 

What you really mean I guess is you don't like the extent to which we participate in shared decision making. Fair enough and I agree to a large extent but there is no need to use such dramatic language.

 

Once people start talking about being under the yoke of a superstrate the argument can quickly be picked apart. The irony is that the referendum is the clearest possible indicator that the sovereignty we are supposed to have lost actually hasn't been lost. If it had been lost them surely the EU would be exercising its 'central authority' over us right now to block the referendum!

[panzer1]

you tell me why they want their own army, we blocked it last time but the germans are putting the idea forward again.

[Shef1985]

you tell me why they want their own army, we blocked it last time but the germans are putting the idea forward again.

 

I've not read a lot into it....will it be a bit like NATO but without the US..or the UN Peacekeeping forces?

[tinfoilhat]

I've not read a lot into it....will it be a bit like NATO but without the US..or the UN Peacekeeping forces?

 

I read it as a bit like NATO without the US, which is not a bad thing depending on who wins the next US election.

[Shef1985]

I read it as a bit like NATO without the US, which is not a bad thing depending on who wins the next US election.

 

Oh good....I'm rather partial to NATO.

[JFKvsNixon]

you tell me why they want their own army, we blocked it last time but the germans are putting the idea forward again.

 

Maybe Europe thinks that collective defence is stronger than each individual country standing alone, when you also consider that integration of plans and equipment also increases Europe's security, you can see why it is being considered.

 

I cannot see an EU armed force being much more integrated than NATO though.

[Tomjames]

you tell me why they want their own army, we blocked it last time but the germans are putting the idea forward again.

 

The nato army?

[Shef1985]

Maybe Europe thinks that collective defence is stronger than each individual country standing alone, when you also consider that integration of plans and equipment also increases Europe's security, you can see why it is being considered.

 

I cannot see an EU armed force being much more integrated than NATO though.

 

Unionist Treaty of European Regimented Organisations. We'd be in utero....sounds grungy.

[panzer1]

The proposal was for 60000 troops, 400 tanks and 100 warships to operate under the command of the eu. In 2010 the headline goal for creation of the rapid reaction force expired, that may be why the germans are putting it forward again but full details not to be released until discussed after next eu head of state meeting.