Elerond
-
Posts
2620 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Elerond
-
-
Here is the RNC'a chief strategist citing My Little Pony to argue that Melania Trump did not plagiarize her speech
https://twitter.com/ditzkoff/status/755455836240089088
Just for fun of it. As this should be material funny things thread instead of this, but this is world where we seem to live now.
-
Turkey was never going to get into the EU anyway. If they couldn't get in with the moderate secular CHP* in power they certainly won't with a wannabe Sultan religious nutbar in power. Recep Tayyip Erdogollum certainly knows that, hence the strongarming to get EU lite concessions like visa free travel over the refugee crisis. EU is the dangling carrot, but the donkey has got wise.
There are lots of people in Turkey that seem to hope that Turkey can someday join in EU, which is why both EU and Turkey use membership negotiation as tool in other negotiations like for example in negotiations about refugee crisis. Current Turkish regime don't want join in EU but they know that they have easier time to keep people happy if people see that there is hope in future when regime changes. And lots of politician in EU wanted to keep open door for Turkey because they saw it way to build bridge in Middle East. So currently Turkey's membership negotiations are in freeze and they most likely will be in freeze at least until Erdogan leaves the office (because he clearly don't want Turkey to join in EU). But if Turkey introduces death penalty it means that Turkey's membership negotiations will end, and then if Turkey wants to negotiate about membership they need seek to start new process for membership negotiations which need to be accepted by all the EU members. and I see changes for such thing to be nearly non existent, it was already difficult in 1999 when there was will to expand EU and less members.
-
1
-
-
Erdogan wants to go one step further and introduce the death penalty. Makes it a lot easier to get rid of all opposition to his plans for an all powerful executive presidency. He even built the palace where he plans to spend the rest of his days...Yes there is some truth in this concern, Erdogan has said he can now purge Turkey of ...people who oppose him?
Introduction of death penalty would mean that Turkey have decided to throw all their plans to join EU away.
-
1
-
-
Turns out, unfettered immigration of muslims isn't such a great idea.
Most Muslims in France are citizens of France (being old colonist super power has habit to make country's population diverse) and most terrorists in past couple dark years has been home grown.
The guy was of North African origin. It was not a native French, even if it is 2nd or 3rd generation, it is not home grown. it is still a result of importing alien and hostile culture.
There was time when France said that Algeria is part of France (to 1962). Also Morocco was part of France until 1956
-
Turns out, unfettered immigration of muslims isn't such a great idea.
Most Muslims in France are citizens of France (being old colonist super power has habit to make country's population diverse) and most terrorists in past couple dark years has been home grown.
-
They should've had more truck control laws.
Considering that said truck was full of weapons suspected to be illegal, I would say that there are things that can be improved in either how official do their job or laws about inspecting cargoes. Inquiry reports about previous terrorist strikes in France already say that French intelligence has grievously failed in its job, and I am pretty sure that this attack will not anyway lessen French government's plans to increase intelligence work and other measures to ensure that official will be able to protect innocents from terrorists.
There was also clear missed opportunity to tell how this attack could have been prevented if victims had carried guns.
-
Reports say that estimated death toll has increased to at least 75.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-crash-idUSKCN0ZU2K7
-
Ahead of GOP Convention, Cleveland Officials Affirm Protesters May Carry Guns
But water guns, toy guns, knives, aerosol cans, rope, tennis balls are barred
-
It isn't the use of violence during formation that meant they weren't organicIf use of violence to ensure formation of nation state prevents it being organic evolution then most of European nation states didn't born organically.
I thought it point of view where organic formation is one where people of nation/area themselves are the ones who behind the formation of state and non-organic formation is where outside forces are ones that are responsible of the formation of the state.
Like for example formation of Israel is my opinion an example of non-organic formation of state and formation of USA is an example of organic formation of state.
-
Okay the reason is I can dispute some of what people are saying but its not worth doing unless people like you are upset
It isn't anything that I haven't heard in past 21 years multiple times, even from people that know better. But it isn't really different from any other political discussion. It isn't optimal but one learns to live with it.Elerond on this thread there is a fair amount about of negative and incorrect information about the EU, you not getting concerned or a little depressed by the comments are you?
So I wouldn't want you getting negative about the EU just because of some of the comments. But I know you know a lot about the EU so I would assume you wouldnt believe the negative views
I can tell that this conversation is tame, compared to what I have had with my family, as most of them voted against joining EU in 1994.
-
1
-
-
It isn't anything that I haven't heard in past 21 years multiple times, even from people that know better. But it isn't really different from any other political discussion. It isn't optimal but one learns to live with it.Elerond on this thread there is a fair amount about of negative and incorrect information about the EU, you not getting concerned or a little depressed by the comments are you?
-
Most nation states in Europe did evolve organically.
Isn't that pretty much the nature of nation states?
Not necessarily; the 19th century situation was quite artificial and the EU is effectively an attempt to go back to an even more extreme version of that situation with one 'empire'. Then, Europe was dominated by large multi ethnic empires held together, ultimately, by threat of force; military force probably does not now apply but there's certainly implied economic... leverage that can be applied. Then, even somewhere like Spain (or the aforementioned France) which had 'natural' borders that had been established, more or less, for 500 years were multiethnic, and an amalgam of even older proto-countries that theoretically at least they could revert to. That's largely not true for France nowadays except for some lingering sentiment in Brittany, but is for Spain. However, if you look at the break ups of the empires after WW1 the countries which ended up stable and surviving long term where the ones which formed 'spontaneously' via popular sentiment and which were 'historical' entities. Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia (~Bohemia) and to an extent Finland all had long term identities prior to ending up in their respective empires. Same for the organic part of the Ottoman break up too, Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece and Romania (via Wlach/ Moldova) all had long term identities. The 'non organic' approach is always fraught with danger, as with the non organic/ imposed parts of the breaks ups of the Austro Hungarian and Ottoman empires. From that you got Yugoslavia on one hand and that cretinous artificial arbitrary mess in the middle east that still causes so much trouble on the other.
That's why an imposed EU is not just a bad idea but verges on being outright dangerous. If it's going to be done it has to be done via genuine popular approval rather than just acclamation from the political elite. Otherwise it risks springing apart, and potentially springing apart violently.
If use of violence to ensure formation of nation state prevents it being organic evolution then most of European nation states didn't born organically.
Finland isn't really a nation state, because we are federacy of multiple nations.
Elerond can I ask you two questions
- What laws and control exactly would you have restored to the Finnish government, you guys keep saying you have lost sovereignty so what specifically do you mean?
- Who are these " elites " people keep referring to...where do they live ?
You ask me question that I don't know answers. You probably should aim them towards those who make those claims.
-
1
-
Most nation states in Europe did evolve organically.
Isn't that pretty much the nature of nation states?
Not necessarily; the 19th century situation was quite artificial and the EU is effectively an attempt to go back to an even more extreme version of that situation with one 'empire'. Then, Europe was dominated by large multi ethnic empires held together, ultimately, by threat of force; military force probably does not now apply but there's certainly implied economic... leverage that can be applied. Then, even somewhere like Spain (or the aforementioned France) which had 'natural' borders that had been established, more or less, for 500 years were multiethnic, and an amalgam of even older proto-countries that theoretically at least they could revert to. That's largely not true for France nowadays except for some lingering sentiment in Brittany, but is for Spain. However, if you look at the break ups of the empires after WW1 the countries which ended up stable and surviving long term where the ones which formed 'spontaneously' via popular sentiment and which were 'historical' entities. Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia (~Bohemia) and to an extent Finland all had long term identities prior to ending up in their respective empires. Same for the organic part of the Ottoman break up too, Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece and Romania (via Wlach/ Moldova) all had long term identities. The 'non organic' approach is always fraught with danger, as with the non organic/ imposed parts of the breaks ups of the Austro Hungarian and Ottoman empires. From that you got Yugoslavia on one hand and that cretinous artificial arbitrary mess in the middle east that still causes so much trouble on the other.
That's why an imposed EU is not just a bad idea but verges on being outright dangerous. If it's going to be done it has to be done via genuine popular approval rather than just acclamation from the political elite. Otherwise it risks springing apart, and potentially springing apart violently.
If use of violence to ensure formation of nation state prevents it being organic evolution then most of European nation states didn't born organically.
Finland isn't really a nation state, because we are federacy of multiple nations.
-
Most nation states in Europe did evolve organically.
Isn't that pretty much the nature of nation states? Meaning that they are single government states that are formed by people who share same history, traditions, or language (usually you can check off multiple options) that live in a particular area. Meaning that nation states have aspect/s that organically unify people to seek live under single government. Although in unification of Germany there were also outside ideologies (like liberal ideology of Free Trade, because German Customs Union [Zollverein] helped German nationalist to sell their idea of unified nation state, which lead eventually to formation of German Empire) that played their part addition to people feeling to be part of same nation.
-
"So will Kim Kardashian be his running mate? You know, since twitter popularity is obviously important in the election."
Let me guess. You want the pro rapist in the WH, right? I guess being pro rapist is important.
Are you speaking Trump or Clinton now? Because of according to media scoops that is something that fits both of them.
-
1
-
-
Chinese, Japanese, Cambodian, Rwandan, etc. nationalist movements have shown that you don't necessary need to be "civilized" European to bastardize said ideology to do justify awful things. Nationalism as ideology has good and bad elements, like all other ideologies known to man kind, which is why extreme nationalism (or extreme in any other ideology) can lead to awful things. So people should try seek balance of ideologies where positives of said ideologies over weight negatives and then seek ways to reduce amount of those negative things even more. But of course such idealism is much easier to say than practice in reality.
-
Is it me or are half the EU elected officials... the politico's who lost elections in their home countries? Almost like some countries use it as a dumping ground to get party opponents out of the public eye?
That has been and still seems to be problem. Like for example ex-prime minister of Finland who had to resign because she leaked confidential documents about Iraq war and lied about it to our parliament is now one of our longest running MEPs.
-
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36745862
The suspect, named by US media as Micah Johnson, 25, said he was upset about the recent police shootings of black people, Police Chief David Brown said.
Five Dallas police officers were killed and seven wounded by snipers during a march against the shooting of black men by police, officials say.
Three people are in custody.
Mr Brown said the suspect had been killed when police used explosives placed by a robot to end a tense stand-off in a building where he was holed up. Before that he had spoken to a negotiator.
"He said he was upset about Black Lives Matter [protest movement]; he said he was upset about the recent police shootings," Mr Brown told a news conference.
"The suspect said he was upset at white people. The suspect stated that he wanted to kill white people, especially white officers."
Mr Brown added that the man had said he was not affiliated with any groups and he acted alone. However, police had previously said they believed that more than one gunman was involved.-
1
-
-
European Commission consist of 1 President, 7 Vice-Presidents and 20 Commissioners
A new team of 28 Commissioners (one from each EU Member State) is appointed every five years.
The candidate for President of the Commission is proposed to the European Parliament by the European Council that decides by qualified majority and taking into account the elections to the European Parliament.
The Commission President is then elected by the European Parliament by a majority of its component members (which corresponds to at least 376 out of 751 votes).
Following this election, the President-elect selects the 27 other members of the Commission, on the basis of the suggestions made by Member States. The final list of Commissioners-designate has then to be agreed between the President-elect and the Council. The Commission as a whole needs the Parliament's consent. Prior to this, Commissioners-designate are assessed by the European Parliament committees.
The current Commission's term of office runs until 31 October 2019. Its President is Jean-Claude Juncker.
-
I went to secondary level college (Opisto, which teach lots of same things that gymnasiums do, but they have specialized subject that they specifically focus, like writing, music, acting, husbandry, information technology, etc,) instead of gymnasium (which is the institution that is more typical for secondary level schooling in Finland and the one which is often called high school when Finns speak about our school system in English, it is comparable to preparatory high schools in US).
-
1
-
-
Congratulations Britain..
Standing up to unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs is always the right thing to do.
J.
I have also always find it is excellent way to stand up against unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs, by changing them to another group of unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs
PS. I always wonder why people bother to put unelected before bureaucrats, as bureaucrats by their nature are unelected
First of all, you stand up to someone, not against them. Second - it is absolutely necessary to emphasize that they are unelected, as the technocrats of the EU act as elected rulers.
J.
All the people in EU that have political power are elected.
Don't trust your high-school teacher..
J.
I didn't as I didn't go in high-school. But that don't change the fact that all people in EU that hold political power are elected.
-
Technically they're elected but their reach was set and expanded by agreements withing the EU superstructure, not through nation based decision making. In other words, the elected elites shaped the "federal" system with
littleno bottom up input. Whenever bottom up input was sought (as in the EU constitutions referendums, Brexit) it usually failed.This suggests that the masses dislike the way things are run in the EU. The only directly elected European body, the EP, is a weak institution. On paper it has significant power, in practice the least representative and accountable institutions, the Comission and the Council run the show.
All of this would not be a problem if the overall trends within that system acted in favor of the hypothetical European citizen of the future. But they champion the US imported neoliberal model that favors European (and other) corporate elites. The EU institutions are thus used to erode the remnants of the welfare state and the economic benefits of the lower middle and working classes, which is why they are so hostile to the EU project. They also push the melting pot ideology and essentially uncontrolled immigration (because the financial elites like to keep the wages depressed) which has 0 popular support in Europe. These are the two primary reasons that the masses (which are not as stupid as everyone likes to believe) now seem so willing to dismantle the EU.
Mostly masses have accepted changes or they are indifferent about them, because people keep vote politician driving in those changes in their national parliaments and in European parliament, meaning that even though there is no referendums most people have accepted those changes. And interestingly public trust towards EU has increased significantly from 2013, when it was in all time low, also trust towards national governments has increased from that low point. Of course that trust may have plummeted during current year, for multiple reasons, refugee crisis being top contender. Referendums about EU's constitutional changes has been demanded and organized only minority of EU countries and eventually there has been always agreements that even those countries accept (like for example people of Ireland are currently holding most positive outlook about EU of all member countries even though in past they voted against it in referendums). Brexit will probably be first time when there will not be compromise in the issues, because ultimate nature of it.
Eurobarometer also show interesting change in public opinion in 2014, percentage of people that say that their voice isn't heard in EU went from 66% to 52% to 50% in 2015. (In UK, Italy, Spain, Czech, Latvia, Cyprus and Greece over 60% people are holding opinion that their voice isn't heard in EU, in Cyprus and Greece percentage is over 70%. Sweden has highest percentage (69%) of people that feel that their voice is heard in EU, followed by Denmark (68%) and Croatia (67%), Eu averages in this issues are 50% of people think that their voice isn't heard in EU and 42% think that their voice is heard in EU, 8% answered don't know). 58% of people in EU have optimistic view of EU's future and 36% have pessimistic view of its future. People of UK were most pessimistic after People of Greece and Cyprus (which in hindsight foretell results of this referendum). Like I said earlier people of Ireland have most positive outlook about EU's future with 77% of them holding positive outlook about EU's future. People of UK told in barometer named same issues as EU's biggest problems that they told after referendum, immigration being #1, economy #2 and unemployment #3. Same three issues are also biggest problems for rest of EU. Surprisingly for Portugal and Finland biggest issue is other member states Financial state, even though both are suffering from their own economic issues. And not so surprisingly Germany and Malta are most worried about immigration in EU. And Greece, Spain and Cyprus are most worried about economy and Ireland fear most of unemployment. From national point of view unemployment is biggest issues with large margin and immigration is second. Not so surprisingly euro countries like euro and non-euro countries don't like it. Estonia as new euro country has most positive view about monetary union and UK has most negative view. 67% of people said that they feel that they are citizens of EU. in UK only 56% hold that opinion. In Cyprus, Greece, and Bulgaria only 50% held that opinion. In Luxembourg 88% of people said that they feel like citizens of EU. People of UK and Finland are least interest to know more about their rights as citizens of EU. Nearly all people in Cyprus were interested to know more about their rights as citizens of EU. Free movement of people, goods and services is seen as most positive thing in EU, peace between member states is close second. 56% people of EU see free trade agreement in favorable light although its supports seem to be decreasing.
In short public opinion seem to regard EU in OK light, but there has been clear sign for several years that people of UK have different direction in their mind that rest of EU.
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb83/eb83_first_en.pdf
-
1
-
-
Congratulations Britain..
Standing up to unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs is always the right thing to do.
J.
I have also always find it is excellent way to stand up against unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs, by changing them to another group of unelected bureaucrats and megalomaniacs
PS. I always wonder why people bother to put unelected before bureaucrats, as bureaucrats by their nature are unelected
First of all, you stand up to someone, not against them. Second - it is absolutely necessary to emphasize that they are unelected, as the technocrats of the EU act as elected rulers.
J.
All the people in EU that have political power are elected.
- European Parliament is elected in direct election, by citizens of EU.
- European Council consist on heads of state or government of EU countries and European Commission President
- Council of the European Union consist on government ministers from each EU country, according to the policy area to be discussed.
- European Commission consist on a team or 'College' of Commissioners, 1 from each EU country. The list of nominees for Commissioners has to be approved by national leaders in the European Council. Each nominee appears before the European Parliament to explain their vision and answer questions. Parliament then votes on whether to accept the nominees as a team. Finally, they are appointed by the European Council, by a qualified majority.
It is perfectly acceptable not like work they do, or them as persons or even way they are elected, but they are all official elected by various democratic systems, in direct or indirect elections.
But EU is also full of bureaucrats whose job is do the day-to-day pencil pushing, like any other government, country, organization, etc..
European Parliament:
- Role: Directly-elected EU body with legislative, supervisory, and budgetary responsibilities
- Members: 751 MEPs (Members of the European Parliament)
- President: Martin Schulz
- Established in: 1952 as Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community, 1962 as European Parliament, first direct elections in 1979
- Location: Strasbourg (France), Brussels (Belgium), Luxembourg
What does the Parliament do?
Legislative
- Passing EU laws, together with the Council of the EU, based on European Commission proposals
- Deciding on international agreements
- Deciding on enlargements
- Reviewing the Commission's work programme and asking it to propose legislation
Supervisory
- Democratic scrutiny of all EU institutions
- Electing the Commission President and approving the Commission as a body. Possibility of voting a motion of censure, obliging the Commission to resign
- Granting discharge, i.e. approving the way EU budgets have been spent
- Examining citizens' petitions and setting up inquiries
- Discussing monetary policy with the European Central Bank
- Questioning Commission and Council
- Election observations
Budgetary
- Establishing the EU budget, together with the Council
- Approving the EU's long-term budget, the "Multiannual Financial Framework"
Composition
The number of MEPs for each country is roughly proportionate to its population, but this is by degressive proportionality: no country can have fewer than 6 or more than 96 MEPs and the total number cannot exceed 751 (750 plus the President). MEPs are grouped by political affiliation, not by nationality.
The President represents Parliament to other EU institutions and the outside world and gives the final go-ahead to the EU budget.
How does the Parliament work?
Parliament's work comprises two main stages:
- Committees - to prepare legislation. The Parliament numbers 20 committees and two subcommittees, each handling a particular policy area. The committees examine proposals for legislation, and MEPs and political groups can put forward amendments or propose to reject a bill. These issues are also debated within the political groups.
- Plenary sessions – to pass legislation. This is when all the MEPs gather in the chamber to give a final vote on the proposed legislation and the proposed amendments. Normally held in Strasbourg for four days a month, but sometimes there are additional sessions in Brussels.
Petitions
One of the fundamental rights of European citizens: Any citizen, acting individually or jointly with others, may at any time exercise his right of petition to the European Parliament under Article 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Any citizen of the European Union, or resident in a Member State, may, individually or in association with others, submit a petition to the European Parliament on a subject which comes within the European Union's fields of activity and which affects them directly. Any company, organisation or association with its headquarters in the European Union may also exercise this right of petition, which is guaranteed by the Treaty.
A petition may take the form of a complaint or a request and may relate to issues of public or private interest.
The petition may present an individual request, a complaint or observation concerning the application of EU law or an appeal to the European Parliament to adopt a position on a specific matter. Such petitions give the European Parliament the opportunity of calling attention to any infringement of a European citizen's rights by a Member State or local authorities or other institution.
European citizens' initiative
As of 1 April 2012, EU citizens have a new tool allowing them to participate in shaping EU policy. Put in place by the Lisbon Treaty, the citizens' initiative allows 1 million citizens from at least a quarter of the EU Member States to ask the European Commission to propose legislation in areas that fall within its competence.
The organisers of a citizens' initiative - a citizens' committee composed of at least 7 EU citizens, resident in at least 7 different Member States - have 1 year to collect the necessary support.
Signatures must be certified by the competent authorities in each Member States. Organisers of successful initiatives will participate in a hearing at the European Parliament. The Commission will have 3 months to examine the initiative and decide how to act on it.
European Commission
Role: Promotes the general interest of the EU by proposing and enforcing legislation as well as by implementing policies and the EU budget
Members: A team or 'College' of Commissioners, 1 from each EU country
President: Jean-Claude Juncker
Year established: 1958
Location: Brussels (Belgium)
What does the Commission do?
Proposes new laws
- The Commission is the sole EU institution tabling laws for adoption by the Parliament and the Council that:
- protect the interests of the EU and its citizens on issues that can't be dealt with effectively at national level;
- get technical details right by consulting experts and the public.
Manages EU policies & allocates EU funding
- Sets EU spending priorities, together with the Council and Parliament.
- Draws up annual budgets for approval by the Parliament and Council.
- Supervises how the money is spent, under scrutiny by the Court of Auditors.
Enforces EU law
- Together with the Court of Justice, ensures that EU law is properly applied in all the member countries.
Represents the EU internationally
- Speaks on behalf of all EU countries in international bodies, in particular in areas of trade policy and humanitarian aid.
- Negotiates international agreements for the EU.
Council of the European Union (also called Council of Ministers)
Role: Voice of EU member governments, adopting EU laws and coordinating EU policies
Members: Government ministers from each EU country, according to the policy area to be discussed
President: Each EU country holds the presidency on a 6-month rotating basis
Established in: 1958 (as Council of the European Economic Community)
Location: Brussels (Belgium)
What does the Council do?
- Negotiates and adopts EU laws, together with the European Parliament, based on proposals from the European Commission
- Coordinates EU countries' policies
- Develops the EU's foreign & security policy, based on European Council guidelines
- Concludes agreements between the EU and other countries or international organisations
- Adopts the annual EU budget - jointly with the European Parliament.
Composition
There are no fixed members of the EU Council. Instead, the Council meets in 10 different configurations, each corresponding to the policy area being discussed. Depending on the configuration, each country sends their minister responsible for that policy area.
For example, when the Council meeting on economic and financial affairs (the "Ecofin Council") is held, it is attended by each country's finance minister.
How does the Council work?
- All discussions & votes take place in public.
- To be passed, decisions usually require a qualified majority :
- 55% of countries (with 28 current members, this means 16 countries)
- representing at least 65 % of total EU population.
To block a decision, at least 4 countries are needed (representing at least 35% of total EU population)
- Exception - sensitive topics like foreign policy and taxation require a unanimous vote (all countries in favour).
- Simple majority is required for procedural & administrative issues
European Council
Role: Defines the general political direction and priorities of the European Union
Members: Heads of state or government of EU countries, European Commission President, High Representative for Foreign Affairs & Security Policy
President: Donald Tusk
Established in: 1974 (informal forum), 1992 (formal status), 2009 (official EU institution)
What does the European Council do?
- Decides on the EU's overall direction and political priorities – but does not pass laws.
- Deals with complex or sensitive issues that cannot be resolved at lower levels of intergovernmental cooperation
- Sets the EU's common foreign & security policy, taking into account EU strategic interests and defence implications
- Nominates and appoints candidates to certain high profile EU level roles, such as the ECB and the Commission
On each issue, the European Council can:
- ask the European Commission to make a proposal to address it.
- pass it on to the Council of the EU to deal with
Composition
The European Council is made up of the heads of state or government of all EU countries, the European Commission President and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs & Security Policy.
It is convened and chaired by its President, who is elected by the European Council itself for a once-renewable two-and-a-half-year term. The President represents the EU to the outside world.
How does the European Council work?
It usually meets 4 times a year – but the President can convene additional meetings to address urgent issues.
It generally decides issues by consensus – but by unanimity or qualified majority in some cases. Only the heads of state/government can vote.
-
2
-
Talks with Russia are always so nice, especially because it isn't always that easy interpret what they mean
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/52312
Question (English translation by presidentti.fi):A question to President Putin. It seems to us here in Finland that it is Russia that is pushing Finland toward NATO. At any rate, here the prevailing attitude was against NATO but now this issue is being discussed seriously enough. Why is Russia behaving like this? Perhaps you have some specific proposals on enhancing the security of Finns? This question is for President Putin.
And a question for President Niinistö. Finland and the United Kingdom, and Finland and the United States, are currently signing some kind of defence cooperation agreement; could you tell us a little more about the contents of the agreement?
Vladimir Putin: We don’t quite understand what could have caused the concern of Finnish citizens. I’ve already said that we made a decision and carried it out by withdrawing all our armed forces to the depth of 1,500 km from the Finnish borders. Despite all the tensions in the Baltic Sea region or other parts of the world, we have done nothing that could have prompted the Finns to worry. Incidentally, we are doing this in recognition of Finland’s neutral status. Imagine if Finland joins NATO. In this case the Finnish troops will cease to be fully independent or sovereign. They will become part of NATO’s military infrastructure, which will emerge overnight on the borders of the Russian Federation.
Do you think we are going to continue acting like that: since we have withdrawn our troops to a depth of 1,500, they will stay there? But in any event we’ll respect whatever choice the Finnish people make. It is up to them how to guard their independence and ensure their security. We cherish and respect Finland’s neutral status but this issue is not up to us. Paraphrasing a statement by one of my Finnish friends, I could say that NATO would probably be happy to fight Russia to the last Finnish soldier. Is this what you need? We don’t, we don’t want this but you decide for yourselves what you need.
Things are not nice in Nice
in Way Off-Topic
Posted
There is quite lot nationalists here, who are against other EU nations especially Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Greece, Bulgaria and Romania. Because people from those countries come here to steal our jobs and they are communist criminals, etc..