Heritage foundation calls US to sabotage EU - Political Forum

Slartibartfas · 01-08-2007, 01:34 PM

The US think tank Heritage Foundation has published a stunning report about the EU recently.

The EU Constitution: Will Europe Force a Way Forward?

In it it does not less than to demand the administration to interfere within internal European politics in a destructive and malign way, in order to sabotage any possible progress on the issue of the EU constitution. It calls to use all available means the US has, political, economical and diplomatic.

The report starts first with the usual rethorics about democratisation and American value in dangers. Even though it gets a bit comical when they try to make Europe the source of danger to all those things. The first part tries flimsy to legitimate the second part of the report. But the second one speaks out what its really about. Its about how they call to sacrifice principles like sovereignity of other countries, the free will of people of other countries for forcing the American interests onto Europe.

In short,the report claims the large threat that Europe could emancipate from the US and thats what has to be prevented at all costs.

Is this how the "benign hegemony" of the US looks like? Being hostile against allied countries who dare to have an own mind nonetheless? Destroy their achievements, just because it looks like it would further some American interests?
Or is this just a conservative think tank gone wild and the American administration will not follow it even remotely anyway?

francois60 · 01-08-2007, 02:30 PM

Considering that we've been drawn into a few wars due to Europeans' inability to manage their own affairs in a mature fashion, I think we've earned the right to make sure you don't do anything stupid. And that EU Constitution, which enshrined things best left to the democratic process into unchangeable law, was a step in the wrong direction. The US has a compelling interest in making sure Europe stays democratic. The EU as set up in the Constitution was decidely undemocratic in ways unacceptable to us. We don't want to be drawn into another European war.

george.d · 01-08-2007, 02:40 PM

The Heritage Foundation is closely aligned with Project for The New American Century (PNAC) ideology and philosophy, which is the basis of US Neocon ideology.

~The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.~

The Heritage Foundation

Welcome to the Project for the New American Century

To provide you with some insight of how strong PNAC influence is in current US administration, the ambassador to Iraq who just resigned to become the US ambassador to the UN worked for Heritage and was an original member of PNAC.

If you study Heritage and PNAC you'll better understand current US foreign policy and why its heavily supported by US special interests. Fascism is a dirty word, so democracy and humanitarianism (often at the point of a gun) are the bywords for both organizations.

Slartibartfas · 01-08-2007, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W.E.B. Du Bois

It's an absolute disgrace. I see little difference between the author and the Al-Qaeda philosophy which also attempts to conquer the world. Al Qaeda would rule the world by converting Europeans to Islam, an imperialist would try to rule the world by sabotaging the cooperation of other nations. They are the same people in different camps.

I would not go that far Web. The Heritage foundations at least suggests all means, but not violence or military in terms of threatening Europe military with attack or invasion.

But behind both certainly is some logic of global hegemony.

francois60 · 01-08-2007, 02:44 PM

It is a rather awful article, unbecoming of a good think tank like the Heritage Foundation. It frames the debate in terms of US interests.

But that Constitution is an atrocity, and much like the referendums to join the EU, are conducted in a fashion not entirely consistent with democratic norms. Such as having people vote and vote and vote until they give the correct answer(Yes) and then hold no more elections on the subject.

Or, as Heritage points out, implementing the constitution even though it was rejected.

I would think you would understand that when Europe starts abandoning democratic norms, that's a cause for concern on the other side of the pond. We've seen this movie before. The script changes, but the ending is always the same.

Slartibartfas · 01-08-2007, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by francois60

Considering that we've been drawn into a few wars due to Europeans' inability to manage their own affairs in a mature fashion, I think we've earned the right to make sure you don't do anything stupid. And that EU Constitution, which enshrined things best left to the democratic process into unchangeable law, was a step in the wrong direction. The US has a compelling interest in making sure Europe stays democratic. The EU as set up in the Constitution was decidely undemocratic in ways unacceptable to us. We don't want to be drawn into another European war.

I make it short and compact:
The European constitution NONE of your business!!!

If it should be nonetheless, I demand on the other side our right to interfere in American politics to get rid of this barbaric 2nd Amendment, that is against every basic European value, against any European democratic tradition and causes hundreds of unnecessary deaths each year. It simply has to be eliminated! Thats our responsibility, as we have learned in the last century how dangerous weapons are and that they have to be fought.

francois60 · 01-08-2007, 02:49 PM

Whoa. Good old francois, showing he doesn't really believe in democracy again.

Actually, my point was that the EU is behaving in undemocratic fashion.
And that's a big concern for us.

Oh so a constitution is bad because they have "enshrined things best left to the democratic process into unchangeable law?" But you've used the US Consitution as the basis for many of your arguments.

The US Constitution is only a few pages long. The EU Constitution is thousands of pages and enshrines things like labor standards into unchangeable law. Where the US Constitution said the federal government can regulate interstate commerce, the EU Constitution already lists what regulations there shall be.

There's no point in using canard arguments about democracy, francois. You are in favor of US national interests. You seek for the US to rule, just like Stalin did and Bin Laden does now. US power politics first, democracy be damned. That is what you are really saying

What I'm saying is that when Europe starts abandoning democracy in favor of beauracratic centralized rule, that's a concern for us.

To hell with what is acceptable to you, sir. It is their country and countries. They are not persecuting anyone. Their style of government is their choice. I doubt that there is any chance of reasoning with you, just as I would not think it possible to reason with Al-Zwahiri, Ahmadinejad or anyone else bent on power. However, your imperial vision of sabotaging Europe will never take hold on US foreign policy.

Europeans rejected the Constitution. By also opposing the Constitution, I am siding with Europeans.

Why are you against the will of European citizens?

francois60 · 01-08-2007, 02:51 PM

If it is, I demand on the other side our right to interfere in American politics to get rid of this barbaric 2nd Amendment, that is against every basic European value, cause hundreds of unnecessary deaths each year. And simply has to be eliminated! Thats our responsibility, as we have learned in the last century how dangerous weapons are and that they have to be fought.

America doesn't get Europe into trouble. Europe does get America into trouble. When was the last time European troops had to come to the Americas to put out a fire?

Besides, I'm on your side. You voted to reject the Constitution. What's the problem?

Slartibartfas · 01-08-2007, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by francois60

But that Constitution is an atrocity, and much like the referendums to join the EU, are conducted in a fashion not entirely consistent with democratic norms. Such as having people vote and vote and vote until they give the correct answer(Yes) and then hold no more elections on the subject

Show me a single joining referendum that was not entirely consistent with democratic norms. Prove your point or take back this severe accusation.

Quote:

Or, as Heritage points out, implementing the constitution even though it was rejected.

I would not know where to start here. Perhaps with the point that there is no constitution. There exists only a "treaty over the establishement of a constitution". As such its just another treaty like all those before. Of course in a way special as it would have cleared up the mess with those dozen treaties by fusing it and reforming....
... but thats not the point anyway. The constitution is NOT in power, not as long it is adopted by all member states.

This backdoor thing you seem to see, are legitimated decissions of the European council, where all democratically legitimated heads of states unanimously agreed on further going cooperation. Since when does increased international cooperation needs a referendum in each country? It seems Americans are confusing primary law with the rest. There has not been adopted any new primary law since the rejection of the constitution. And no passed law was violating primary law.

Do you see ghosts?

Quote:

I would think you would understand that when Europe starts abandoning democratic norms, that's a cause for concern on the other side of the pond. We've seen this movie before. The script changes, but the ending is always the same.

Who defines what democratic norms are? You?
Why not asking Switzerland? I propose Europe and the US should be posed under Swiss administration in order to establish democratic norms in those pseudo democracies in Europe and America.

Slartibartfas · 01-08-2007, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by francois60

The US Constitution is only a few pages long. The EU Constitution is thousands of pages and enshrines things like labor standards into unchangeable law. Where the US Constitution said the federal government can regulate interstate commerce, the EU Constitution already lists what regulations there shall be.

BS. You don't have much insight on European issues, do you?
The EU constitution in its last version exactly 465 pages. Whereas the actual constitution makes up 202 pages. The rest is attachement, of protocolls that could not fused into the constitution, but partially already valid law or needed to be changed in order to enable the constitution. The real core part of the constitution is around 50 pages, the extensive charta of Human Rights included. Every human that is able of reading can cope with these dimensions.

I never understood your argument of size anyway. The current primary law is acutally really thousands of pages long, divided apart in a dozen different treaties enriched with additional protocols and simply a mess. With the treaty over the constitution this mess would have been boiled down to 465 pages and a single document.

The hell Europe is no white sheet like the US of your grounding fathers. We cant simply throw our legal system and primary laws away and make a restart from zero. The US could not do so either nowadays.