LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksShouold we leave the EU to save neutrality?
Shouold we leave the EU to save neutrality?
"Yeah, well, there's a mirror in the toilet if you want to go in there and talk to them." - Brian Cowen responding to Martin McG - "We'll have to consult the army council on this"
Originally Posted by derry_ff
No, we should forget about the hang-up we have about neutrality in the first place.
If we're serious about being part of any kind of union/bloc of countries to protect our interests then we need to contribute in some way, militarily, to that. As it is in the EU, we get away with doing damn all.
"Losing" neutrality is a bit like "losing" your virginity. After a while it's just cutting off your nose to spite your face.
The Mahon Tribunal found Olivia Mitchell to have received an inappropriate payment from Frank Dunlop at the time of the 1992 Election. F.G. Gael has taken no action against her.
No, we should forget about the hang-up we have about neutrality in the first place.
If we're serious about being part of any kind of union/bloc of countries to protect our interests then we need to contribute in some way, militarily, to that. As it is in the EU, we get away with doing damn all.
The EU was not set up as a military block.
and with the loss of our neutrality we lose also our honest broker status in the world...not only that but our peacekeeping soldiers will no longer be seen as neutral when they go overseas to conflict zones but aligned with one faction or another...
No, we should forget about the hang-up we have about neutrality in the first place.
If we're serious about being part of any kind of union/bloc of countries to protect our interests then we need to contribute in some way, militarily, to that. As it is in the EU, we get away with doing damn all.
losing our neutrality is also one step towards military cooperation with other nations including the US and hence we may end up accepting part of their missile shield or the siting of nuclear missiles here.
Is that what you want? If as it seems you are on the Yes side, then you seem to be advocating that Ireland abandons its neutrality. I cannot decide if the entire Yes side would like us to give up our neutrality or not, but neutrality is never good for big business and war profiteers so I suppose they are in favour of that. Again another reason to vote NO if the Yes side are in favour of us abandoning our neutrality.
Why is it left to the Irish people to stand up for our traditional principles when our politicians seem intent on undermining and signing away those principles, alledgedly in the name of progress or efficiency? Could it be that they are slaves to the EU?
Save it? There has never been such a thing as Irish neutrality, to believe otherwise is extreme naivety- how can we be neutral when we can't defend ourselves?
I believe nations like Belgium, Norway or The Netherlands would be regarding well internationally despite not being "neutral".
Yes- the obvious next step is conspiring with dubwya to kill babies in Iraq... in case you've forgotten we don't let a little thing like neutrality stand in the way of helping out our American friends with their war efforts. In fact it was "old Europe" according to Rumsfeld who were the biggest critics of the Iraq war.
It is long since time to dispense with this lip service towards neutrality and take up our responsibility as part of a common EU defence policy.
"I trust that beneath it's folds the hands of the Irish protestant and Irish catholic may be clasped forever in a generous and heroic brotherhood"
Thomas Francis Meagher 1848
Ireland only thinks it neutral because we arent in nato
I am highly against Nato but very much in favour of a common eu foreign and defense policy
I object strongly to our triplelock in respect to the UN.
These things are decided by the security council which aint exactly neutral itself.
China blocked us from sending trops to FYR Macadonia and will Russia prevent us from helping in Kosovo
Not been neutral doesnt mean been some warmonger going off fighting wars just for the sake of it.
Every situation needs to be looked at individually and decided upon.
I also dont like the way America can simply do what it wants militarily and I fear what they would have done if Iraq had been a success
"We know what to do, we just dont know how to get elected afterwards" Jean-Claude Juncker on how to fix the European economy
Why would there be a 're-negotiation' - here's a novel idea if the people choose to vote no why wouldn't that be respected and then if changes are needed in the EU why can't they be faced one by one and if that means lots of various referendum they so what - I'm sure Irish people can cope with more than one or two questions on a ballot paper.
Most of the text doesnt even require a referendum
The rearranging of the commissioners doesnt need one nor does the changes in voting weights
"We know what to do, we just dont know how to get elected afterwards" Jean-Claude Juncker on how to fix the European economy
If we vote No why should it exclusively fall to parties who accepted the terms of the (by-then) already-rejected treaty to renegotiate terms acceptable to those who rejected their (The Yes parties') position in the first instance?
Grow spuds and be true to yourself...
