Germany Will Not Accept Any Of Cameron's Demands.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11203783/Germany-says-UK-could-leave-EU-if-David-Cameron-insists-on-migrant-quotas.html

It took 6 years of war and the loss of countless of lives to stop Germany ruling us, should we now be frightened of what they now threaten us with?

[New Judge]

"It is therefore not just up to Germany, but all of the members to decide if The UK can change the rules and still ge a member. "

I maybe a bit pedantic, here, Gromit, but any such change will require the agreement of all the other 27 members. So, if 26 of them agree but Germany does not then it will most certainly be Germany's decision which scuppers any deal.

However, it is unlikely in the extreme that many of the other nations will agree. The poorer nations seem content to ship as many of their people as possible out of their homelands to seek their fortune elsewhere; Germany (with an unemployment rate of around 5%) for some reason believes the free movement of people is fundamental to the smooth working of the EU; France seems not to care too much about anything at all lately.

The fact is that free movement of people was introduced as a founding principle when the EU's distant ancestor, the Common Market, was formed of a group of just six nations, each with similar economies. The idea was that a flexible workforce would be available across the bloc to cope with peaks and troughs in demands for labour. Now the EU consists of 28 nations with hugely disparate economies and the free movement principle is being exploited by people simply chancing their arm at securing a "better life". There is no regard given for if or where the peaks and troughs exist. This is because, particularly in the UK, migrants are cushioned against the consequences of neglecting that consideration by the provision of generous benefits. As a result the uninhibited free movement principle is now proving extremely troublesome for the UK. The electorate are fed up with it and the main parties are running round like headless chickens trying to decide what to do to slake their thirst for change.

There is absolutely no chance of the principle being modified and the UK's choices are clear: we either shut up and get on with it (and continue to see tens and probably hundreds of thousands of migrants arrive each year) or we leave the EU. There is nothing in between.

[lindapalmara]

Bring it on!!! Let the Germans prop up the other countries. They export more to us than the other way round so. They can't afford not to trade with us.

[Old_Geezer]

The free movement of goods is one thing, and was the aim: the free movement of people and finance are double edged swords at best. Useful to multinationals, and maybe giving an overall benefit to economies, but at the expense of the rights of nationals not be undercut by citizens in poorer areas of the group, and being able to negotiate a fair deal in their own national market; and not seeing profits/wealth moved around to avoid expense, to the probable detriment of individual nations/populations. Generally a disadvantage to the masses as they get manipulated.

[New Judge]

The problem is, OG, that whilst it is generally a disadvantage to the majority of the masses in the UK, it is a decided advantage to the masses from many of the poorer Eu nations. The greater problem is that because the rules governing free movement require the agreement of all the nations the poorer ones are not likely to vote to change the rules. When they joined it was rather like them being given a cheque book on Bill Gates's bank account and who would vote to hand it back?

Quite why Germany wants to continue the farce is one of life's great mysteries.

[jourdain2]

NJ is right, gromit is right IMO.

[BlackadderV]

All this makes me positively nostalgic for the days of the Iron Curtain and the Berlin Wall.

[bazwillrun]

"The free movement of goods is one thing, and was the aim"

But thats the problem, it never was the aim, it was just a byproduct, that was just the line to try and sell it.
The main aim/political dream as has been for a long time is a european empire, a superstate EUSSR call it what you want the ulterior motives are with one end.
They know they had no chance if the real reasons were known to the public, so they had to sell it with a Common Ag. Market policy to make it palatable....

and now look where we are ...the cats out of the bag.....dictated to on a daily basis from brussells, being flooded with immigrants they cant offload quick enough, Germany struggling, Greece well and truly donald ducked, Italy seems to want out and want the lira back, Germany imports far more from us than we from them etc etc etc.

When will people grasp and understand we dont need them....they need us.

All the countries currently being ruled and dictated to by Brussells can quite happily go on trading before this experiment started (we have done for thousands of years previously), and they can keep their autonomy and independence, individuality etc instead of being swallowed up by the homogenous and isotropic threat that the eussr willswallow them with.

It will end in tears one way or another sooner or later, not if but when just like every other empire before it.....

[Zeuhl]

/All the countries currently being ruled and dictated to by Brussells can quite happily go on trading before this experiment started/

Actually, 'before this experiment started' we were mostly fighting each other more than trading with each other.

People are concerned about the cost of the EU, but how much did WW1 and WW2 'cost' us?

Apart from an Empire that is?

The analogy with WW2 is correct. The history of Europe since 1870 has been how everyone deals with the 'German Problem'. Their economic domination today is just the latest episode and that will be so EU or no EU.

We could cut and run as many suggest; a version of Neville Chamberlain appeasement; or total isolationism 'nothing to do with me guv' approach.

But for the first time in history, we've enjoyed 70 years without war (surely not a coincidence) and, we are not 'dictated to' by Brussels, we have elected officials over there same as everyone else and if we don't like something we should have the strength, the balls and the confidence to get stick in, forge alliances and change it to something we do like.

[BlackadderV]

The idea that the EU has brought peace to Europe and saved us from war is so ludicrous as to be unworthy of further discussion. EU apologists are going to have to come up with a far better argument than that!

[DTCwordfan]

Cameron is being a bit of a tw-t.....he doesn't need to get into an end-game over this. Just tweak the effing rules as to benefits and when any person entering the UK gets them, i.e. take us into being the least attractive to move to without a job and for those immigrants from outside the EU, double the time and introduce a points system like the States and Australia uses. This tweaking is within their remit but it's that flakey chocolate bar called Cadbury Clegg that probably is holding this up.

Just do it!

[bazwillrun]

" we've enjoyed 70 years without war "

yeah we just fight in iraq, afghanistan, etc

We have always traded with "europe" wars or no wars.

The main reason for not having any european wars in recent history is more to do with the distate and aftermath of WWII, the scale of the losses etc the various treatys that were made its got very little if anything to do with the eu as much as you and others would like to claim.

the eu is a surefire way of generating a future war, a terrorist war with countries or mere regions as they will be under eu rule wanting their independence and identity back...

the eu hates sovereign nations and all they stand for with a vengeance....

[Zeuhl]

/The idea that the EU has brought peace to Europe and saved us from war is so ludicrous as to be unworthy of further discussion./

BA - not really - that's a very poor attempt at quelling discussion...

So you're saying Europe hasn't been at peace since 1945?

funny, i must have missed that war somehow.

Maybe it wasn't due to all the States who had been involved in the preceding 80 years continuous conflicts linking their resources together?

So what was it?

[DTCwordfan]

they are probably thinking of those wars we enacted out as seven to eleven year olds, zeuhl. Serious, they were.....

[Zeuhl]

/The main reason for not having any european wars in recent history is more to do with the distate and aftermath of WWII/

History suggests that is nonsense.

There was massive 'distaste' after WW1 - didn't stop WW2

There was massive 'distaste' after the Franco-Prussian in 1870 - didn't stop WW1

I suspect there is massive 'distaste' after any major conflict

and comparing the 'cost' to the British people of our sideshows in Iraq and Afghanistan with the devastating effects of a european war is daft.

[DTCwordfan]

What was the dead count for the UK in WW1 and WW2 and then Iraq and finally Afghanistan. With no disrespect to those who lost their lives in Afghanistan, more than 2.5 times the number of British military died on our shores...and that doesn't count the Irish on both sides of the conflict or the Irish Republic's security folk, or the police.

[DTCwordfan]

sorry the police are in the numbers....but the point is there. To extend the perverse logic here, do we expect to see a war with Ireland again?

[DTCwordfan]

and I am behind the eight ball tonight, my comparison being Northern Ireland.

[New Judge]

Europe may well have been relatively peaceful since WW2 but that is despite the existence of the EU, not because of it. The continued friction brought about by a supra national organisation continually eroding national sovereignty is making conflict ever more likely, not less.

Just have a think. The PIIGS nations (the citizens of them, not the political leaders) despise Germany and to a lesser degree, France, for enforcing fiscal measures upon them which are seeing millions of their people descend into penury. Germany and France despise the UK for not being "good Europeans". France is none too fond of Italy for ushering hundreds of thousands of African migrants across their border. France blames the UK for their accumulation in Calais. The UK believes Germany is trying to dominate Europe. France has fallen out with Germany because of their criticism of French economic policy. Germany and France want to impose Europe-wide taxes on the financial sector which will principally the City of London (of which they are exceedingly jealous). The list is endless and anybody who thinks the EU is the reason why Europe has been at peace for almost seventy years is sadly deluded. There are many things the EU has achieved - huge unemployment in the southern nations, stagnation in the eurozone, mass uncontrolled movement of people from both within the Union and beyond to name but three. But peace in our time is not among them.

[BlackadderV]

You know that, NJ, and I know that. The thinking classes would agree,but not, alas the chattering classes. I could not believe that anyone could post on here to the effect that the EU is solely responsible for avoiding European wars in the last 70 years.

[ludwig]

//I could not believe that anyone could post on here to the effect that the EU is solely responsible for avoiding European wars in the last 70 years. //

Me neither. It's utter nonsense.