National Sovereignty in the EU?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

No you said

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but your Bill of Rights is abrograted at will

Thats patently and irrefutably false. Again you have no concept of what you're talking about.

**reds8n**

Hmm.. I'm not sure it's "at will" as such...

..unless this is a reference to the infamous " Presidential decrees of state of emergency that has never been properly ended so the President can impose martial law and suspend the Constitution with one signature" kind of argument that goes round. I've read this in a lot of magazines and on all manner of websites but I think it's perhaps exaggerated somewhat.

To earlier points : I don't think comparing the EU to the UN is accurate here Mr. Frazzled, if anything it is closer to a Federal vs. State level of conflict.

**Frazzled**

reds8n wrote:Hmm.. I'm not sure it's "at will" as such...

..unless this is a reference to the infamous " Presidential decroos of state of emergency that has never been properly ended so the President can impose martial law and suspend the Constitution with one signature" kind of argument that goes round. I've read this in a lot of magazines and on all manner of websites but I think it's perhaps exaggerated somewhat.

1. That would be illegal.
2. That would result in a coup, quickly
3. if it didn;'t result in a coup it would start a civil war. We have the 2nd Amendment to protect the 1st.

EDIT: HTH did this get to be about the US Bill of Rights again? This is a Euro issue not ours.

**Da Boss**

I dunno. It's going to be interesting to see if the abortion case being brought before the european courts will be enough to get through the legal gaurantees on ireland's freedom to have it's own stance on abortion. If they do over rule it (which I wouldn't mind, I think we should legalise abortion) it would be a massive PR own goal and would make a lot of small nations anxious and pissed off. Or, should I say, even more anxious and pissed off.

**Kilkrazy**

It depends on what you want from a supra-national authority.

A lot of people in places like Eire don't want to be denied abortion because of local law (no doubt there are other similar cases elsewhere.)

If it's in conflict with basic human rights then there is value to the individual in being able to appeal to a higher power than the national government which has already decided against you.

**Da Boss**

Well, it was put to referendum fairly (1983) recently and voted down.
Though I don't know if it would voted down again, if there was another one. It's okay for irish women to get the ferry to the UK and have an abortion there.

But I mean, homosexuality was only DECRIMINALISED in 1993. That's seriously backward. The country needs a kick in the behind.

**Orkeosaurus**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Albatross wrote:What does that mean for the US then, as they have the UK and EU as principle allies? Does that lower it's score?

You're assuming that the UK's score is dragged up by its alliance with the USA, and the USA is dragged down. It's more like this.

The UK's diplomacy score is increased by its traditional links with the Commonwealth including India, closeness to the EU and alliance with the USA. The USA's score is increased by its alliance with the UK and EU which has all these other diplomatic links to be exploited.

The point of alliances is to be stronger than the sum of the two partners.

I read his post as saying "would the United States also have a lower score if allies weren't being factored into its power?"

**Kilkrazy**

All nations are stronger with allies (unless they are Italy.)

**Albatross**

@Orkeosaurus - well done mate, that's exactly what I meant. 'Would the 'true' score of the USA be lower without factoring in at least 2 nuclear powers as allies?' was the crux of what I meant - I probably could have put it better...

Does the score include alliances? Is diplomacy the same thing? It's a big part of it, definitely.

@Kilkrazy -

**Frazzled**

I'd think it be higher actually.

**Albatross**

Yep, cause MORE weapons = LESS powerful...

That's not like you... What have you done with the real Frazzled?

**Frazzled**

Allies just get in the way of our firing solution...

**Albatross**

I suppose it's harder to 'Nuke From Orbit', if you've got whiney allies to worry about hitting...

Not that THAT ever seems to bother you lot....

**Frazzled**

Albatross wrote:I suppose it's harder to 'Nuke From Orbit', if you've got whiny allies to worry about hitting...

Exactly. Although we can drop something from orbit into a garbage can, it takes like, concentration. You can't expect a man to time that kind of time away from watching Rehab, just not gonna do it.

**Kilkrazy**

Soon you'll be able to subcontract that to North Korea. They don't have TV to distract them.