17-12-2001 21:37									#61
	Suffering from ads?

Campaign against the Kurds? You reveal your ignorance of the situation. They fought the Kurds the same way we are fighting al Queda. What are the human rights abuses? What international laws did they violate? How is it a military dictatorship. If you can't get over your nonsensical anti-Turk prejudices, you shouldn't make non-specific statements.

	17-12-2001 21:37									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: "We are giving this trillion dollar bill to our allies who fought so poorly and gave up so readily." That is generally the feeling towards Europe.

WHAT THE **** DO YOU MEAN BY THIS?? - The American contribution to the Allies effort in WW2 was the third most important one.

	17-12-2001 21:39									#63
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

"The point about the Marshall Plan is that Europe and the U.S. were not equals."

You're getting all hooked up about a lousy 15 billion $ you have to europe after ****ing up the continent by getting into WWI and creating the great depression ? Hey we're funding a big chunk of your 450 billion $ account deficit.

"That is generally the feeling towards Europe."

And that is a reason why Americans have a bad reputation in Europe. But hey, compared to the attitude of the rest of the world against you, you are welcome here.

	17-12-2001 21:41									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

So the Turks are ignorant, are they? Nice.

The difference between U.S. and EU oil supplies is significant: the U.S. still supplies 50% of its own oil. How much does the EU produce?

The third most important one? Oh, so I suppose all your fine soldiers and commanders could have handled themselves if we had not given you a hand?

	17-12-2001 21:42									#65
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

And I suppose the Marshall Plan didn't do much good for Europe either. All you guys could have handled your own economies without our help just fine.

	17-12-2001 21:43									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

"Campaign against the Kurds? You reveal your ignorance of the situation."

No, actually you are showing that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

"They fought the Kurds the same way we are fighting al Queda."

By outlawing the kurdish language even for private purposes ?

"What are the human rights abuses?"

Extrajudicial killings, torture, summary punishment, unlawful arrests, lack of judicial review, death squads. For a start.

"What international laws did they violate?"

The european convention on human rights, maybe ?

"How is it a military dictatorship."

Half. Do you know the influence of the military via the national security council and the state security courts ? The permanent threat of a coup to maintain Kemalist principles ?

"If you can't get over your nonsensical anti-Turk prejudices, you shouldn't make non-specific statements."

If you only had a freakin' clue.

	17-12-2001 21:46									#67
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

"The difference between U.S. and EU oil supplies is significant: the U.S. still supplies 50% of its own oil. How much does the EU produce?"

Oh cute. About 25 %. But in that context, maybe north sea oil is a better measure. That amounts to roughly 50 % of european consumption.

"And I suppose the Marshall Plan didn't do much good for Europe either. All you guys could have handled your own economies without our help just fine."

If there had been free capital markets, yes. European GDP from 1948-1952 was maybe 500 billion $. The 15 billion $ from the Marshall plan were predominantly needed to cover current account deficits. Non-participants like east germany or Czechoslovacia showed a strong recovery as well - the real divergence came a bit later when communist planning failed.

	17-12-2001 21:47									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

"How about Mexico ?"

Sure. If they petition for statehood (or petition for 4 states for instance), we might be able to work something out. But there are sensitivities south of the border that make such a petition unlikely at the moment.

	17-12-2001 21:48									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Hoek Campaign against the Kurds? You reveal your ignorance of the situation. They fought the Kurds the same way we are fighting al Queda. What are the human rights abuses? What international laws did they violate? How is it a military dictatorship. If you can't get over your nonsensical anti-Turk prejudices, you shouldn't make non-specific statements.

I cannot answer because I am very busy at the moment. But I will say this. It is you who are completely igorant. And your ignorance is bloody because it allows the suffering of people like the kurds to go on.

You are as guilty as the turks for the bloodbath of the kurds.

And you call me prejudiced. You sicken me by your igorance on important humanitarian issues. (edited because I am a good natured person basically)

bye.

	17-12-2001 21:53									#70
	Suffering from ads?

"If they petition for statehood (or petition for 4 states for instance), we might be able to work something out."

Good. But you'd require some conditions to be met, would you not ? Like accepting the Bill of Rights.

Mexico has made a big leap forward esp. after the PRI got ousted. The biggest institutional problem with Turkey is the political role of the military though, and as they don't stand in elections...

	17-12-2001 22:01									#71
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Wrt the Turkish military, I view their role as quite a mixed bag. They have ensured a secular government, for instance.

"Good. But you'd require some conditions to be met, would you not ? Like accepting the Bill of Rights."

Well, most of that stuff has been settled long ago and its manifestations are fairly discrete. I don't think you could make the same claim for the EU. You guys are going into a constitutional convention, after all. Sort of making it up as you go along (this is not at all a criticism of the EU, but a natural piece of working with something new).

But anyway, we certainly wouldn't claim Mexico's rights to regulate use of the death penalty, for instance (to not have it, in Mexico's case).

	17-12-2001 22:03									#72
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Would you please give a time frame for these abuses? The EU convention on human rights is not recognized as international law for countries outside the EU, and Turkey is not part of the EU. It is a misnomer to call it a campaign against the Kurds, just as it would be a misnomer to call the war against terrorism a war agains Arabs. Both are anti-terror campaigns, and you will note that now that Ocalan is in a jail cell in the middle of the sea, the terror has subsided. Do you have any idea how many Turks died at the hands of terrorists? Imporant humanitarian issues? Like the treatment of Turkish immigrants in Germany? Like the treatment of Gypsies in all European countries? Like the latent racism in France, Germany, England, Italy, and Spain against Muslims and blacks?

The North Sea? So, you mean...Norway? Well, Norway isn't in the EU, and isn't interested in it. The issue is control of resources, and the EU can't be viable without the ability to control a significant amount of resources.

The Marshall Plan alone was extremely significant in rebuilding industry. Considering how ass-backwards your economies were at the time (I notice your baseline figure was '48, not '45), it was extremely significant. Not to mention the shitty shape all of your militaries were. Had the U.S. not given protection to European countries over the past 60 years, do you really think you could have had decent economies, much less remained independent countries? Same thing in Japan: economic development is alot easier when you don't have to worry about defending yourself.

Attitudes towards the U.S. are bad around that world? That's funny, because last time I checked, people all around the world wait for years for U.S. visas, and those who can't wait come here illegally. You Europeans just have a rough time not being the big shots for the first time in History. You think Europe was equal to the United States? That is such a laugh. The U.S. economy was half of the entire world economy immediately following the war, so don't even try it.

	17-12-2001 22:04									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

"Would you please give a time frame for these abuses? The EU convention on human rights is not recognized as international law for countries outside the EU, and Turkey is not part of the EU."

Hoek: actually, Turkey has been in on the European human rights stuff from the beginning, IIRC.

	17-12-2001 22:05									#74
	Got spare money?

Of course, and so would Turkey need to accept the EU constitution, but they are not being considered in the next round of expansion, and indeed, their prospects for membership always seem just over the next hill. Offer them membership with specific requirements, and they'll meet them.

	17-12-2001 22:11									#75
	Remove this text

Stew:

quote: WHAT THE **** DO YOU MEAN BY THIS?? - The American contribution to the Allies effort in WW2 was the third most important one.

So what, exactly, were the first and second most imporant contributions? Britain was ready to give up by '41, and Russia would have lost without a second front. Oh, also, lend-lease gave both of them both free weapons.

The U.S. was the arsenal of democracy, and Britain and France were the cannon fodder of democracy. When was the last time France has actually won a war? I think it's been >200 years (the American Revolution). They are the most ******** soldiers in the world.

	17-12-2001 22:20									#76
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Hoek:

I would not mind your ignorance, but your accompanying arrogance is a bit much. I'll just point out 3 things from your idiotic ramblings:

"The EU convention on human rights is not recognized as international law for countries outside the EU, and Turkey is not part of the EU."

I was talking about the ECHR, wasn't I ? Which is part of the legal framework of the council of europe, not the EU.

"I notice your baseline figure was '48, not '45"

Because the Marshall Plan started in 1948 ?

"You think Europe was equal to the United States? That is such a laugh. The U.S. economy was half of the entire world economy immediately following the war, so don't even try it."

Look! You got one fact right. Just that it is completely irrelevant on the issue of quantity of the Marshall plan funds compared to western european economies. Around 1950 US GDP was maybe twice that of western europe. Where did you get the idea I said Europe was economically equal to the US after WWII ? You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

I'd also be waiting for you to address your obvious lack of knowledge about EU legislation, but I doubt you can contribute anything useful there.

	17-12-2001 22:27									#77
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Dan:

Just for the top of the iceberg:

quote: The Government generally respected its citizens' human rights in a number of areas; however, its record was poor in several other areas, and serious problems remain. Extrajudicial killings continued, including deaths due to excessive use of force. Unlike the previous year, there were no deaths in detention due to torture and no reports of mystery killings and disappearances of political activists. Although the authorities failed to investigate adequately many past disappearances, ongoing investigation of the Turkish Hizbullah terrorist organization may lead to resolution of some cases. Torture, beatings, and other abuses by security forces remained widespread. Police and Jandarma often employed torture and abused detainees during incommunicado detention and interrogation. The lack of universal and immediate access to an attorney, long detention periods for those held for political crimes (especially in the state of emergency region), and a culture of impunity are major factors in the commission of torture by police and other security forces. In addition the general climate of violence engendered by the PKK insurgency and urban leftist and Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, combined with a confession-oriented trial system, have hampered past efforts to carry out legal prohibitions against torture. With the decrease in counter-terror operations and overall detentions in the southeast, fewer cases of abuse of detainees were reported; however, the proportion of cases of abuse remained at high levels, and many cases go unreported.

And that source should not be suspected of being unfriendly against Turkey.

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrp...x.cfm?docid=844

	17-12-2001 22:30									#78
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Hoek Stew: So what, exactly, were the first and second most imporant contributions? Britain was ready to give up by '41, and Russia would have lost without a second front. Oh, also, lend-lease gave both of them both free weapons. The U.S. was the arsenal of democracy, and Britain and France were the cannon fodder of democracy. When was the last time France has actually won a war? I think it's been >200 years (the American Revolution). They are the most ******** soldiers in the world.

I'm not going into this here as i) this isn't the right thread, and ii) I'm no great expert on military matters.

Let's just say you could say what you're saying here with a little more tact than you probably use when talking to Americans about this - just an idea.

	17-12-2001 22:31									#79
	Put an end to popups!

"I was talking about the ECHR, wasn't I ? Which is part of the legal framework of the council of europe, not the EU."

My bad. At least I'm able to recognize when I'm wrong.

"Because the Marshall Plan started in 1948 ?"

The U.S. provided significant economic aide prior to '48, not to mention that none of you had to worry about maintaining a military.

"Just that it is completely irrelevant on the issue of quantity of the Marshall plan funds compared to western european economies."

It shows that Europe was not at all equal to the U.S. You call it arrogance, I call it a founded conclusion. During the 45-49 time period, the U.S. was a sole superpower.

"I'd also be waiting for you to address your obvious lack of knowledge about EU legislation, but I doubt you can contribute anything useful there."

I do not know every law the EU has passed, but I do understand the general framework. There is significant regulation of telecom, but that is one industry, and economic regulation in general is still by far in the hands of the countries, not the EU. This is not true in the United States. The degree of economic integration is somewhere between NAFTA and the U.S., but much closer to NAFTA.

	17-12-2001 22:34									#80
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Roland I was talking about the ECHR, wasn't I ? Which is part of the legal framework of the council of europe, not the EU.

Which Turkey was signatory to before Austria. Obviously, Turkey is more European than Austria.

Wrt to the State Dept. report, yes that is exactly the bad part of the mixed bag I was talking about.

	17-12-2001 22:35									#81
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I would use more tact if I was trying to convince someone of something. I'm not, though. I argue my points mainly to test myself-to see what holes exist in my opinions. On the issue of the American contribution to World War II, you're the one who asked me what the **** I was talking about, which is no less tactful than sayin that French soldiers have no dicks.

	17-12-2001 22:42									#82
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Let me say this, though. I do greatly appreciate Britain's friendship. Blair has been a big help to the U.S. in international politics, and has served as an important link between the U.S. and the rest of Europe. They have proven themselves as an ally like no other european country has. Generally, the British have been far less arrogant than the French, for instance. I don't know how the British feel about the French, but most of us in the U.S. really don't like them. Time and again, they have proven themselves unworthy of any assistance from the U.S. How many times have they delibrately undermined our foreign policy while we gave them military cover?

	17-12-2001 22:42									#83
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Good.... sorry for the burst.

"The U.S. provided significant economic aide prior to '48"

Some aide, but if you take western germany, at least in the british and esp the french zones, there was also a continued destruction and depatriation of infrustructure and plants. On the other hand, most of the capital stock was still intact - the worst hits had been to transport strcuture. 1946/47 saw a strong rebound eg in coal mining - and some setbacks as well. It is simply a gross exaggeration to grant US aid with the basic recovery - shown in the simple fact that until the mid 50s there was a strong rebound in the developped eastern bloc countries too.

"not to mention that none of you had to worry about maintaining a military."

Britain and France continued/started spending again, eg on the Indochina war. The US taking over most of the cost there was quite late.

"It shows that Europe was not at all equal to the U.S."

Again no issue there. My point is that compared to economic output, the Marshall plan was quite small in volume. This has nothing to do with the relative sizes of the US vs euroepan economies.

"There is significant regulation of telecom, but that is one industry, and economic regulation in general is still by far in the hands of the countries, not the EU. This is not true in the United States."

Despite the interstate commerce clause there is still a good deal of state legislation. Competition law, monetary policy, the acquis is covering a lot of issues.

"The degree of economic integration is somewhere between NAFTA and the U.S., but much closer to NAFTA."

NAFTA is just a free trade area. The EU is far closer to the US federal government in economic regulation. NAFTA doesn't even have secondary legislative power, or does it ?

	17-12-2001 22:47									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

"They have proven themselves as an ally like no other european country has. Generally, the British have been far less arrogant than the French, for instance."

Britain has been towing the US line but some key capabilities (like nuclear) depend on the US. The French are just independence-minded, not arrogant.

	17-12-2001 22:56									#85
	Tired of ads?

My opinion of France is dictated largely by my History reading. They so often ****ed up U.S. foreign policy, and De Gaulle was so arrogant (not to mention the pre-WWII leaders). When I visited Paris, most kids seemed to really like the U.S., though. The kids are obviously more reasonable

You probably know about as much specific information about U.S. economic authority as I know about EU legislation. Ask any political scientist, and he or she would tell you how relatively little authority the EU has compared to the U.S. Most agreements revolve around trade and immigration, though authority is expanding. They still have a long, long way to go before having an integrated economy.

Also, dollar figures are misleading. The United States also provided alot (ALOT) of technical and agricultural assistance that was not in pure dollars. It was this agricultural assistance to Greece that kept the people from starving and this techinical assistance that helped Europe get on its feet quickly.

	18-12-2001 00:49									#86
	Tired of ads?

quote: So what, exactly, were the first and second most imporant contributions? Britain was ready to give up by '41, and Russia would have lost without a second front. Oh, also, lend-lease gave both of them both free weapons. The U.S. was the arsenal of democracy, and Britain and France were the cannon fodder of democracy. When was the last time France has actually won a war? I think it's been >200 years (the American Revolution). They are the most ******** soldiers in the world.

Is this a troll?

	18-12-2001 01:12									#87
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

No, its just me not being polite about the French.

	18-12-2001 01:43									#88
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Just for the record: I haven't been anti-Turkish here, just pointing out that they are still not near meeting the criteria for admission to the EU. Roland has kindly provided some of the facts that I was too lazy to search for And they have to meet the same criteria as all the other candidate states, it's not that the criteria are adjusted every time to keep Turkey out, like you seem to insinuate.

	18-12-2001 03:00									#89
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Hoek No, its just me not being polite about the French.

Carry on.

	18-12-2001 13:35									#90
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Hoek:

"I would use more tact if I was trying to convince someone of something. I'm not, though. I argue my points mainly to test myself-to see what holes exist in my opinions."

Odd, seems I overread this yesterday. In that case I can really do a lot for you.

On economic aid:

"Also, dollar figures are misleading."

Yes, because the dollar was overvalued at the time.

"The United States also provided alot (ALOT) of technical and agricultural assistance that was not in pure dollars."

Most of the Marshall plan aid was in the form of credit to buy food, equipment etc from the US.

"...and this techinical assistance that helped Europe get on its feet quickly."

Was the Marshall plan and other assistence a great help ? Yes. Put that feather on your cap if you must.

Was it crucial for economic recovery ? No. As evidenced by the relative small size and the strong recovery in non-CEEC/OEEC countries.

There were several other problems. Currency overhang, refugees etc. In the Trizone, currency reform was more important than the Marshall plan. The US made a big contribution btw in the 1948 introdution of the D-Mark. Another feather if you want. But don't give me that braindead chauvinistic "America rebuilt europe" crap.

On the EU:

"You probably know about as much specific information about U.S. economic authority as I know about EU legislation."

You are virtually clueless about the EU, and accusing me of similar lack of knowledge is quite insulting. I'm not familiar with US regulatory detail, but have a rough idea of the constitutional and practical distribution of powers.

Let's take for example electricity market deregulation: There is a single EU framework for that, just like the telecom one that you were completely unaware of. There is no such federal legislation in the US.

There is a far reaching Acquis on all public procurement, especially on legal standards and legal review. I'm not aware of a similar piece of US federal legislation that extends to the states and local governments.

There is the state aid regime under which every state subsidy must be notified to the Commission and can be ruled out by the commission. I'm not aware of a similar US federal law.

"Ask any political scientist, and he or she would tell you how relatively little authority the EU has compared to the U.S."

Odd.. usually political scientists ask me about EU law not the other way round. For political science, the integrationist apporach, the treaty-making process, the EU legislative process, Comitology, crises management (empty chair, Solange I, ban on beef...) are the interesting things; the authority as in regulatory power and actual legislation is just a starting point for their work - yet a centerpoint of my work.

"Most agreements revolve around trade and immigration"

You are showing another hole big enough to drive a truck through. Agreements ? Bollocks. We are talking mostly about legislation here; only few sectors are directly regulated in the treaties. "Trade" - can we be a bit more specific ? NAFTA is a free trade area with rules of origin; the EU is a customs union with free movement of goods, capital and people. If you refer to outside trade representation (like WTO), that is an exclusive Community power. "Immigration" - Free movement of EU citizens within the EU, the Schengen acquis - but immigration (stays exceeding 3 months) of non-EU nationals is still a national matter.

"They still have a long, long way to go before having an integrated economy."

Define "integrated". Tell me which steps would be required to economically "integrate" the EU to US levels. If you could be arsed to read a textbook about EU economic law you might be a bit surprised ...