Turn on thread page Beta

Is Germany using the EU as a dictatorship? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Is Germany using the EU as a dictatorship?
    Yes
    17
    68.00%
    No
    8
    32.00%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Germany is now saying that EU countries who refuse to obey them & sign up to compulsory immigrant quotas should have their EU funding cut. After much discussion & negotiation within the EU between the countries, several democratically elected EU governments such as Slovakia, Poland, Denmark, UK, Republic of Ireland, Czech Republic have refused to take part in forced quotas. Germany now wants to punish them for it.

    Is Germany using the EU like a dictatorship trying to pressure nations into agreeing and doing what they say? is Germany overstepping the mark? is Germany right to say countries funds should be cut for not obeying them?

    http://www.thelocal.de/20150915/berl...-refuse-quotas
    http://www.worldbulletin.net/berlin-...refugee-quotas
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/afp-ge...15-9?r=US&IR=T
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The in/out vote will be interesting.
    All of this couldn't have happened at a worse time for europhiles, they must be pulling their hair out with frustration.

    Who came up with and pushed for our opt out on the borders policy?
    They were very forward thiking when others weren't.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Of course they are.

    Is it a coincidence Juncker is close to Germany and is it a coincidence Germany got their representative in the top job in Juncker's EU cabinet?

    Apparently we are part of the EU yet how often do we hear Germany dictating commands to member states? I have heard more come from the mouth of Merkel than Juncker.

    His instatement as president was exposed a while back via back room deals involving German and French ministers.

    Germany can change the rules as they like in the EU, take Schengen for example, but if anyone else does they are attacked continuously.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    It doesn't sound entirely unfair to me. One of the major reasons for the EU to exist is for countries to work together in the face of a crisis and a lot of EU members are acting wholly irresponsibly at the moment. You can't just reap all of the benefits without paying a little bit in return and it's pretty outrageous how certain countries are behaving at the moment. If the EU genuinely has to use financial sanctions to encourage countries to do their moral duty then I can't really disagree with that. This is not what dictatorship is and to be perfectly honest, it's quite insulting and ignorant to compare this to a dictatorship. Using economic sanctions to persuade countries to do something they should be doing in the first place isn't the hallmark of a dictatorship.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    It doesn't sound entirely unfair to me. One of the major reasons for the EU to exist is for countries to work together in the face of a crisis and a lot of EU members are acting wholly irresponsibly at the moment. You can't just reap all of the benefits without paying a little bit in return and it's pretty outrageous how certain countries are behaving at the moment. If the EU genuinely has to use financial sanctions to encourage countries to do their moral duty then I can't really disagree with that. This is not what dictatorship is and to be perfectly honest, it's quite insulting and ignorant to compare this to a dictatorship. Using economic sanctions to persuade countries to do something they should be doing in the first place isn't the hallmark of a dictatorship.
    Can you explain how we're supposed to have a quota when nobody even knows how many people are going to continue coming? Wouldn't it be sensible to talk about a quota when all of this dies down?
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    Can you explain how we're supposed to have a quota when nobody even knows how many people are going to continue coming? Wouldn't it be sensible to talk about a quota when all of this dies down?
    What's supposed to happen to all of the refugees trying to get into the EU in the mean time?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    What's supposed to happen to all of the refugees trying to get into the EU in the mean time?
    You haven't answered the question. The quota isn't feasible.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    What's supposed to happen to all of the refugees trying to get into the EU in the mean time?
    You do realise Lebanese ministers said there is at least 2 in 100 jihadis among the migrants. AT LEAST! I don't have to do the maths to say that is outrageous.

    These people need to be documented and analysed. Who knows who is who. It is funny how 99% of migrants are men, fully fit and able. They are not victims, the women and children stuck in Syria are but hey the men have no problem leaving them to ISIS.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    You haven't answered the question. The quota isn't feasible.
    I don't understand why it isn't feasible. There are lots of EU countries that are taking in barely any refugees so put a quota on them to ease the burden off the countries that are taking many (e.g. Germany). 0.1% of the population sounds like a sensible quota to me. You can't just wait for the problem to "die down" because in the mean time, there are hundreds of thousands of lives being completely ruined.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    It doesn't sound entirely unfair to me. One of the major reasons for the EU to exist is for countries to work together in the face of a crisis and a lot of EU members are acting wholly irresponsibly at the moment. You can't just reap all of the benefits without paying a little bit in return and it's pretty outrageous how certain countries are behaving at the moment. If the EU genuinely has to use financial sanctions to encourage countries to do their moral duty then I can't really disagree with that. This is not what dictatorship is and to be perfectly honest, it's quite insulting and ignorant to compare this to a dictatorship. Using economic sanctions to persuade countries to do something they should be doing in the first place isn't the hallmark of a dictatorship.
    Sancions are an act of war you idiot
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    I don't understand why it isn't feasible. There are lots of EU countries that are taking in barely any refugees so put a quota on them to ease the burden off the countries that are taking many (e.g. Germany). You can't just wait for the problem to "die down" because in the mean time, there are hundreds of thousands of lives being completely ruined.
    Do you really think the migrants will stay in the surrounding countries. The ones who reach Spain, Greece, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and many more continue to go to Germany, Sweden or the UK. The quota system will fail because the second you put them in another country other than those 3 they will just leave and redo the journey. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows they will not stop until they get to Western Europe, putting them somewhere else will do jack****!
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Normies Out)
    Sancions are an act of war you idiot
    If you've got a group of countries that have agreed to cooperate and some of them get cold feet in the face of a crisis, what do you expect the leaders to do? If it's too much for them to make sacrifices to stay true to the aim of the EU then they should leave, and lose the many benefits they get from membership in the process. It's a give-and-take agreement, you can't just take all the rewards and refuse to give anything in return.

    (Original post by Gears265)
    Do you really think the migrants will stay in the surrounding countries. The ones who reach Spain, Greece, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and many more continue to go to Germany, Sweden or the UK. The quota system will fail because the second you put them in another country other than those 3 they will just leave and redo the journey. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows they will not stop until they get Western Europe, putting them somewhere else will do jack****!
    They're not migrants, stop calling them that - it's wrong. And if we actually had a quota system in place - if the EU actually put a system in place to provide refuge to everyone who needs it - then I think countries would be justified in preventing refugees from claiming asylum wherever they want. The issue is that at the moment, the capacity isn't there in the first place.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Normies Out)
    Sancions are an act of war you idiot
    Imagine these lefties if we were in WW2 right now. It is safe to assume they would side with Hitler.

    For them their hatred of the UK runs so deep they will have no issue in selling the UK to the enemy. I can see it right now.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    No. Britain's done exactly the same thing before, threatening to withdraw funding unless the other EU countries agreed to make concessions. The fact that in the end we paid up anyway is irrelevant.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Calling Germany a dictatorship would be wrong because I don't think Germany actually sought to dominate the EU, its just that events have gifted them enormous control.

    Is it Germany's fault they are better managed economically than France, that Italy is a political joke and that the UK won't go all in.

    All nations pursue their own self interest (even the UK), it should not be a shock that a country with no real political rivals in the EU has the most leverage.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    If you've got a group of countries that have agreed to cooperate and some of them get cold feet in the face of a crisis, what do you expect the leaders to do? If it's too much for them to make sacrifices to stay true to the aim of the EU then they should leave, and lose the many benefits they get from membership in the process. It's a give-and-take agreement, you can't just take all the rewards and refuse to give anything in return.
    The point of the EU is trade, not forcing poor European countries to be flooded with refugees, if Germany wants to commit cultural suicide they can do it alone, don't drag everyone else with them
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Normies Out)
    The point of the EU is trade, not forcing poor European countries to be flooded with refugees, if Germany wants to commit cultural suicide they can do it alone, don't drag everyone else with them
    No, the point of the EU is not just trade. The EU is a cooperative union - the economy is a big part of that, of course, but it's not the only thing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    No, the point of the EU is not just trade. The EU is a cooperative union - the economy is a big part of that, of course, but it's not the only thing.
    How is it cooperation if only one nation actually wants the refugees?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)

    They're not migrants

    The scattered documents along the Serbian border will tell you otherwise. They throw away their documents (or never brought them in the first place) and pretend to be Syrian. They refuse to be registered as well. No one knows where the hell they are actually coming from.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)

    They're not migrants, stop calling them that - it's wrong. And if we actually had a quota system in place - if the EU actually put a system in place to provide refuge to everyone who needs it - then I think countries would be justified in preventing refugees from claiming asylum wherever they want. The issue is that at the moment, the capacity isn't there in the first place.
    But they are migrants.

    The people in the camps in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan for example, now they are the refugees who need real help and funding.

    These swarms of people who come to Europe have firstly not been documented or analysed so we can not deduce if they are a refugee or migrant. To be a migrant you move from one place to another, to be a refugee requires confirmation and detailed evidence which is not accessible. Anyone can say they are a refugee, doesn't mean they are.

    Secondly a refugee seeks safety from war and circumstances beyond their control. Is their war in Turkey? in Hungary? in Greece? in Spain? in Serbia? in Jordan? In any of these many countries other than Germany, Sweden and the UK? NO THERE IS NOT. If they are migrating from a safe country to another safe country that you call a migrant. Is there a brain there, or am I speaking to a rock?
 
 
 
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.