Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

US Going it alone because it has to

Bert_Preast said:
Nonono, the initial members in question would be the EU. They have rather more stringent entry controls than the UN, which is why they can do things. Also the US and sundry other countries around the world - mostly the big foreign aid spenders. That's the only way to make membership of the new UN something attractive - you get dosh and preferential trade terms.

Within the UN I suppose a country could be entitled to a % votes depending on it's population of over 65s. Basically, the more of your people you keep healthy for longer, the more of a say you get in international affairs. It's the best indicator of a 'good' society I can come up with.

I understand you proposition. Suppose (it is a pure fantasy) that other countrie aree that current members of EU would determine what country is democtatic or not.

Well, would be India recognised as a democracy? No doubt. China? Why not? From formal point of view there are (elected) local councils, elected parliament, there are clear signs of market economy. After acception of India and China with their huge populations EU votes would be insignificant in UN.

Bert_Preast said:
I have no idea why you think any of the countries you mention except Venezuela might be seen as beacons of democracy whereas the UK wouldn't?

Because the majority in the UN (developed countries) would vote for them.
 
Bert_Preast said:
KGB_resident said:
Rayc said:
Would fudging to become a President also be acceptable as a democratic means of a vibrant democracy fit to be a member of the UN?

Probably you mean Watergate affair. I think that it is an internal business of any country to punish own crooked politicians.

Not when the crookedness has international effects.

I see, USA organised coup de etat in Iran and established ... not a president exactly but something of this sort - Shah of Iran Reza.
 
jimmys_best_mate said:
ctauch said:
Northern Monkey said:
Ctauch-about time you tried being the world's policeman; we did it for long enough. The point about support for the USA's nefarious activities are valid-people won't help cos they don't agree with US actions nor the way they do it!

Do you speak german?

I speak German as well as my american cousins speak English! Are you suggesting that without the USA I would be speaking German all the time? Get a grip and read some history...
 
Bert_Preast said:
Oh, and Russia is someone you want in - if you have them, the EU and the US you have what you need to make it work. So just bribe the siht out of 'em until you get them onside.

Likely your obedient servant is the only poster on ARRSE who took part in Russian elections as a voter. There is no difference with other European countries. There exist a full spectrum of political parties.
 
India could probably get in - despite their statutes being often ignored in practice the books look good and that's enough for the EU. CHina no, there's some clearly anti UDHR stuff still on the books there which is why the Hongs made such a fuss. Still, China agreed with them in the end so there is hope.

And who on earth that wasn't foaming insane would say Cuba or Iran is a democracy?
 
KGB_resident said:
Bert_Preast said:
Oh, and Russia is someone you want in - if you have them, the EU and the US you have what you need to make it work. So just bribe the siht out of 'em until you get them onside.

Likely your obedient servant is the only poster on ARRSE who took part in Russian elections as a voter. There is no difference with other European countries. There exist a full spectrum of political parties.

As I said, I'd want Russia onside and I think it's quite possible to get them there. Though admittedly I'm sure you know a lot more of Russian politics than I do. Do you think they'll ever try for the EU? If not, what puts them off?
 
Bert_Preast said:
India could probably get in - despite their statutes being often ignored in practice the books look good and that's enough for the EU. CHina no, there's some clearly anti UDHR stuff still on the books there which is why the Hongs made such a fuss. Still, China agreed with them in the end so there is hope.

After acception of India and a full-right member of imagianry new UN, it would be able to determine all decisions (taking into account its population). India could agree to Chinese membership.

Bert_Preast said:
And who on earth that wasn't foaming insane would say Cuba or Iran is a democracy?

Form formal point of view Iran is a democracy (not of Western type of course). Iranian system is very complicated but the people elects a parliament, elects a president.

Electoral system exist in Cuba too. The Cubans elect their parliament. Again, Cuba is not a Western type democracy.
 
Would India have that power? Votes based on population over 65, remember? And why would they want China in anyway?

Iran has an unelected guardian council who strictly control those eligible to stand for election. Didn't they ban over 2000 candidates last time? So no, not democratic in the slightest.

Cuba elects the parliament, but again can elect only those Castro decides to let them vote on.
 
Bert_Preast said:
As I said, I'd want Russia onside and I think it's quite possible to get them there. Though admittedly I'm sure you know a lot more of Russian politics than I do. Do you think they'll ever try for the EU? If not, what puts them off?

Russian politicians? Mainly crooks and clawns. Looking at British political zoo I see many similiaries. So Russia is well prepare to EU membership. But I doubt that it ever happen for one simple reason - unlike Turkey Russia doesn't need EU membership.
 
Bert_Preast said:
Would India have that power? Votes based on population over 65, remember? And why would they want China in anyway?

Votes based on population over 65? Older than 65? It's a very strange rule. Looks as Oriental style council of the elders.

Bert_Preast said:
Iran has an unelected guardian council who strictly control those eligible to stand for election. Didn't they ban over 2000 candidates last time? So no, not democratic in the slightest.

I'm not a big fan of Iranian political system but it is more complex than you think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Iran

The candidates technically were not 'banned'. Rather the most popular ones were selected. And everybody agrees: all popular candidates took part in Iranian presidential elections.

Btw, mr.Le Pen in France could be banned (not approved) to take part in the presidential elections. French electoral system requires approval of some number of local councils that could not happen. But mr.Le Pen is a very popular political figure - #2 on the previous elections.

Also BNP in the UK is popular enough but how many sits it has in the parliament?

Bert_Preast said:
Cuba elects the parliament, but again can elect only those Castro decides to let them vote on.

You think this way and I rather agree with you but how to eleborate a formal rule? Many (including me) think that every American president has approval of the big business, of influental lobbies. And what?
 
Bert_Preast said:
Never said they did. Just that preferential trade terms with the EU etc. would make them think about it.

Structure of Russian export to EU is not rich - oil, gas, metals and so on.

Russia would sell gas on a good price with or without EU membership. Russia is a very attractive place for the investments even without EU membership. Look at car industry.

Ford always has a plant. Toyota, WV, GM, Nissan are building their ones. Mitsubishi and Pegeot seriously think about it. Nyundai, KIA, Renault, BMW cars are being assembled in different parts of Russia.
 
Are those cars being assembled in Russia because of the superior quality of workmanship? Do the companies involved boast that their cars are made there? No, it's simple economics and the moment Russia gives rights to the workers they'll move somewhere else where labour is cheap. This is fine for the companies involved, but for long term world stability it's not helping anyone.

I say votes based on the population over 65 because it's a measure not of how fast a government can get people to breed and work, but how well a government can look after those who have served it. I'll ask again, has anyone a better measure?

For the BNP and Le Pen, have either declared themselves against democracy? As long as they remain within the limits of the system, I'm not overly bothered by either.

As for Iran - well where are the trade unionists then? That's no democracy no matter which lenses you look at it through.
 
Northern Monkey said:
jimmys_best_mate said:
ctauch said:
Northern Monkey said:
Ctauch-about time you tried being the world's policeman; we did it for long enough. The point about support for the USA's nefarious activities are valid-people won't help cos they don't agree with US actions nor the way they do it!

Do you speak german?

I speak German as well as my american cousins speak English! Are you suggesting that without the USA I would be speaking German all the time? Get a grip and read some history...
If it hadn't been for some slant eyes downing our ships in Pearl Harbor the US would have just supplied you with enough arms and bleed your country dry.

No matter whether the US builds a coalition or not we will still be frowned upon. It doesn't matter what the US does it will always be spun in a negative light. We get it we aren't liked or appericated in the rest of the world...so f'ing what there isn't a single country that can do anything about it, try as they may.

Just beware; keep p!ssing down our back and one day when you need our help we may just show up to p!ss on your burning carcass.
 
ctauch said:
.so f'ing what there isn't a single country that can do anything about it,

You missed out the word "yet".

Ancient Romans thought the same way too - until the Barbarians came knocking on the gates.

It will happen in your lifetime.

See under 'China' for details.
 
Top