Printable View
Worth readling, maybe a different angle for some of the Little Irelanders...(note by Little Irelander, I am not referring to all of the No side, just a subset of them, before high horses are dusted off).
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0b8b8cb6-3...0779fd2ac.html
Not the point. My point was that these doom and gloom scenarios were around before the Treaty, but we can now see that actually, they wouldn't have come about. Yet the Yes side continue with them ("Vote Yes for jobs!" as a quick off the top of my head example; it was the primary thrust of Martin's Irish Times article too), but with people now aware that they're nonsense, it's a completely ineffective tack. That's why Jebus' post was stupid, and that's a good part, I would say, of why the Treaty was rejected. Or, as I said in my original post -Quote:
Originally Posted by Student Mullet
Quote:
people are looking for more of a reason to vote something in than "Shut up and vote for it, idiot."
Good article but it will be discounted by some as some sort of neo liberal FT plot.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Yes the very real problem of climate change and not allowing other Balkan countries to enter are stupid problems Stu. Not giving up pretending that Ireland isn't linked completely with Europe is a very serious problem however, Vote No For Pretence
I'm not taking issue with your point, I'm taking issue with your way of making it and pointing out that that's why the Treaty was rejected. Given that it was the first time anyone'd asked the Yes side what the whole thing was about, it was an arrogant, dismissive answer, a neat microcosm of the Yes campaign, which brings me back to me conclusions I made about that.
You asked has anyone from the Yes side in this thread even given a reason for voting Yes yet and I gave you two, how arrogant of me
Or simply an opinion piece with the same value as every other opinion piece, pro and con.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
Out of curiosity, I asked a Dutch friend there what the reaction was like in the Netherlands to our no vote. For context, he studied politics in university and now works for a Dutch political party. Here's his reply:
Quote:
Well to the government it's mostly considered an inconvenience since our parliament approved the treaty 2 weeks ago. Our Prime Minister is respecting the outcome though, stating the treaty is as good as dead now
the European Commission seemed less inclined to respect democracy lol
the people are cheering but most of them don't really know what the treaty is about if I may be so arrogant.
The media are pretty much neutral on the treaty itself, but fiercely anti-EU on how Brussels is handling it lots of free promotion for Ireland
they mostly oppose what is perceived as Brussels' arrogant approach of the issue. Most seem to have concluded that's also one of the reasons the Irish rejected it: too much too soon and too little respect for voter concerns
And if you'd bothered to read my reply outlining my issues with your post, you wouldn't be dragging this thread into a circular discussion. It was easy to miss in fairness, huddled in there right next to yours. Suggest you go off and read it before random whining like the above again?Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
Thanks.
I would hazard the opinion that that article has slightly more value that someone's view that the Treaty will lead all our children to be conscipted into a European army.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
I wouldn't. The only difference is the level of scaremongering. It's just as short on actual facts.
House of Lords have just voted by quite a large majority for the UK Government to proceed with ratification
I think you're being unfair on the article's author.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
It's an honest opinion piece written from the perspective of a european living in China. Like you said about anyone's opinion, we can agree or disagree with him but not all opinions are equal and this one is well written by someone who seems to know what he's talking about and nowhere is it does he try to scare Irish voters or anyone else.
I don't doubt it's honest and I'm sure he does know what he's talking about, but he's done nothing to prove either of those things, which makes the article bog standard op-ed with about as much value as our voting machines.
I'd hardly call that "unfair". Writing an article devoid of facts could be considered the same thing.
Fair enough, there's no real argument between us.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
It's a well written op-ed piece and doesn't claim to be anything else. I'll admit that I don't read the Financial Times as often as I could but I think that they do have a pretty heavy news section in the areas that they cover. Not every article needs to be a report on facts, there's room for interpretation and opinion as well and I quite like it when papers keep the two separate.
In any case, the reason I commented is because I think you're being unfair using the word 'scaremongering' to describe it. That aside, what either of us thought of the article isn't immediately relevant.
Capital is still the dominant factor in our lives. Rather than dismiss ideas you don't really understand...Quote:
Originally Posted by Student Mullet
Understand!
Back on topic, the campaign against a re-run should start right now and should collaborate with the hundreds of thousands who actively campaigned against the treaty across Europe and reach out to the Millions who opposes it in its various guises.
Presumably a campaign against a re-run shouldn't begin until we've seen what is being put to us?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
Thats a load of @rse. There is absolutely no reason Croatia can't join the EU if they're dumb enough to want to now. You know its never going to be the gravy train it once was again.
As for your point on the environment, there was six words on environmental matters on the Treaty. The EU has historically been bad for the environment and the likes of Merkel and Sarkozy are definitely no friends of environmentalists. Berlusconi is hardly concerned with that type of thing either. He's far too busy pushing Italy back to Fascism.
Its actually laughable that people really believe that these "leaders" have our best interests at the heart of this treaty.
Would pretty much by my reply to your own post.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Anyway on page 42 you say my points are scaremongering 'Vote Yes or the sky will fall down and are rubbish reasons, on this page you say you don't have a problem with my points, just the way I say them. Are you a confused individual, or do you like scaremongering?
To move away from Stu, do people in the No camp not see the benefits of Europe having a common policy on climate change (for one point) as being a greater reason to vote than a percieved loss of power for this island? Personally I think climate change is going to be, and is, the biggest issue on the world table at the moment and I was sold on a Yes vote from the moment I heard the Treaty would bring Europe together on one common policy for carbon cutting, something which in turn would put pressure on the US, which in turn could have a positive effect on China. A lot of ifs in there I know, but better that than a world sitting back hoping things will get better.
Edited for your points BohsPartisan
As per Croatia and the Balkan countries. I haven't read the part of the Treaty where it states it will be more difficult for these countries to join (not Croatia, it's been clarified that they're okay), but I've read reports stating it will be in the Irish Times and BBC.co.uk and I tend to trust these news outlets. And if I were Croatia I'd still want on the EU gravytrain while it lasts
As for climate change. Those words were a positive step if it gets countries moving, even slowly, on climate change. Berlusconi and Sarkozy (especially Sarkozy) won't be around for much longer, and even if they are and have signed up to the Treaty than many environmental issues will be dealt with in Brussels. Don't understand your apparant attitude of 'the big boys won't let you' given your political leanings towards a minority party
Depends where you stand. I can see how Libertas and SF would be waiting to see whats on the table but there will be nothing of interest to most people who voted no. It will probably be some sort of concession on corporate tax and more assurances on the military.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bald Student
However, lets remember that any concessions will be Ireland specific, we should continue to stand behind the right of every member state's citizens to vote on the treaty and if it is rejected by them too it should be scrapped completely.