Comments by "Regis" (@Timbo5000) on "EU rebukes Trump over attitude to allies" video.

  1. They're nominated by our national governments and then voted on by the directly chosen EU parliament, actually.
    3
  2. Says the guy who tapped Merkel's phone and blew up the Iran deal with is worth 20 billion euros in European trade with Iran (of course the US only had a few million dollar worth of trade with them so they didn't care). You spy on us and steal economic allies from us.
    1
  3. Libya: US-led NATO destroys a key partner of EU in protecting Europe against migrants (EU has a deal with all mediterranean countries to turn back migrants) Syria: US fuels civil war in Syria, also an important member in the EU deal with mediterranean countries for them to stop migrants in exchange for economic investments. Result: migrant crisis. Conclusion: the USA is the enemy of the European people!
    1
  4. +Pasquino Marforio Tusk and Juncker were elected by our national governments and then approved by a majority vote in the directly chosen EU parliament. So it's a form of indirect democracy.
    1
  5. +Pasquino Marforio: US government officials of any kind (i.e. a secretary of defense like Jim Mattis or advisors like John Bolton or even Supreme Court judges) were 'chosen'. There was no list that the people of the USA had a choice to choose from. They were chosen, and then ratified by an elite with no say by the people of the USA. 'Indirect Democracy'. The Soviet Union (and the USA, and Europe, and any democratic country on earth) had the same indirect democracy when Stalin was the only candidate for election. See what I did there? The EU is literally modelled after any democratic government you see. People elect parliament, the government is made up of chosen people (either from the parliament or chosen themselves) and the bodies that were elected directly can also elect people for more specific functions within the government, which is called indirect democracy. Every single democratic country has this, otherwise we'd all have to vote for every single minister in the cabinet and every single secretary of state. If you don't know what you're talking about, don't speak. Here in the Netherlands we have a saying that goes "Spreken is zilver, zwijgen is goud". Go for the last part.
    1
  6. +Pasquino Marforio You need to work on your reading skills. I'll keep it very simple for your simple nature: did you or did you not directly vote for Mattis to be the United States' secretary of defense? I'll help you: you did not. He was chosen by people that you chose before. That is called indirect democracy. People like Juncker and Tusk are chosen in the same way a secretary of defense in the US would be chosen: indirectly. You should take a bit more time to read, perhaps you'd actually understand others if you do so.
    1
  7. +Pasquino Marforio You can't seriously be this thick.... Juncker and Tusk work at the pleasure of the European Council, which is all of our directly chosen leaders sitting together. Our national leaders decide what political course the EU takes and what the policy of the EU is concrete situations, and the EU Commission follows that, with Juncker (elected by our directly chosen natonal governments and approved by the directly chosen EU parliament) at the top. An example: Juncker can't on his own accord do something about the migrant crisis. Our national governments have to come up with a policy on that and Juncker only gets to carry out the policy .
    1
  8. +Pasquino Marforio YOU STILL DON"T GET IT PASQUINO: Mattis' and Bolton's only constituency and the only people they answer to is the US government. NOT The American People. Did you ever notice that the US doesn't have referendums of ANY SORT ? The EU is literally designed to resemble the way our national democracies work, but on an international level... It's the exact same concept. Not only do I live in a democracy, I have more democracy than an American does.
    1
  9. +Pasquino: EVERY LAW IN THE EUROPEAN UNION WAS MADE AND PASSED BY VOTES OF THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL OF MINISTERS AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, BOTH OF WHICH ARE CHOSEN BY THE CITIZENS OF THE EU.
    1
  10. +Pasquino Marforio Ah that explains a lot. Mate, that video is complete and utter nonsense. The Internet Censorship Bill is pushed by our national governments. Countries like Germany want this. The European Council of Ministers (our national governments sitting together) voted in favour. The European Parliament (directly voted for by the people) has now rejected it and will vote again on an amended version in september. It's unsure whether it will make it. Short explanation on how laws are passed in the EU: European Council (our national leaders, like Merkel, Macron, etc. sitting together) draws a political goal for the EU. European Commission (Juncker and his commissioners) make up the actual law that represents the Council's views, then they do a proposition of law. European Council of Ministers (our full governments sitting together) vote on the contents of that proposition of law. The European Parliament (directly chosen representatives) also vote on the contents. Both have the power to amend the law as they see fit. That video of yours is nonsense. Our national governments are the biggest proponents of this new censorship bill, they are the pushing force behind it. The EU parliament temporarily stopped it. The Commission merely carried out the wishes of the likes of Merkel. Our national leaders are the most important factor in the EU, they guide it. Saying "the EU" made a law is not accurate, because our national governments and the EU are not separate; they are intertwined. Most people we vote for in our national government also play important roles within the EU. And then we have the directly chosen EU parliament. There is no such thing as "EU bureaucrats telling countries what to do", the bureaucrats ARE the countries. So if you criticise this bill, criticise countries like Germany for wanting it
    1
  11. WW2 and the Cold War are over. But the US' lust for war isn't. Latest trick: bombing Libya and fuelling a civil war in Syria, thereby causing over 2 million migrants to come to the EU. Thank you, our precious "allies". The US is the main aggressor of the world and caused more problems for Europe than all of its "enemies" combined. And NATO is just the US' personal tool for foreign interventions. It has little to do with protection anymore, it's pure aggression. But you Americans always have to look to the past to find your relevance. That past is gone now. Your "protection" is no longer relevant. Today, it is YOU that countries need protection from. But go on, reminisce about the old days and ignore the current situation... "but muh Cold War, muh WW2"
    1
  12. Trade = taking money. Okay then.
    1
  13. Also fact: NATO is mostly being used by the US to defend their personal interests, not for protecting any of its members. In the case of Libya, NATO intervention even caused a migrant stream into Europe... Keep on paying for your precious little war game tool or dissolve it, we don't care. I would personally rather see you dissolve it and leave others alone. NATO has done more damage to us than any of our "enemies" combined.
    1
  14. Haha, good riddance
    1
  15. I agree. If we have to pay for our defence, then why not defend ourselves? Why would we allow the US to use NATO as its personal war game tool? We don't need the EU + US to defend against Russia. Their military is about the same size as the combined EU military in its underfunded state right now... If we get to the 2% treshold we'll already be able to defend ourselves. We don't need the US.
    1