The PRESIDENT of EUROPE

[HERESY]

I didn't see anything posted about this, so I'm posting it.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/11/19/eu.presidency/

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4181

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gD1QGhzzTf3AhsWbofh4mGm0p6Iw

Any comments, thoughts or questions?

 

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Thoughts:

This is continuing the progression down a path of bad news for the US.

"We" have become accustomed to a lot of European countries playing second place to us and assisting in our business because they didn't have the clout to oppose.

As resources continue becoming increasingly scarce, look for a united EU to begin to oppose the US and flex muscle in issues that can secure more resources for the EU.

Example: US involvement in Saudi Arabia. Look for EU to begin to increase military presence in areas where US currently is the unopposed controller.

 

[Simpaticone1]

Thoughts:

This is continuing the progression down a path of bad news for the US.

"We" have become accustomed to a lot of European countries playing second place to us and assisting in our business because they didn't have the clout to oppose.

As resources continue becoming increasingly scarce, look for a united EU to begin to oppose the US and flex muscle in issues that can secure more resources for the EU.

Example: US involvement in Saudi Arabia. Look for EU to begin to increase military presence in areas where US currently is the unopposed controller.

Agree

 

[The Duke of Earl]

power is shifting thats about it everything else will stay the same

 

[Home-E]

Great. One world government here we come. It's all falling in place for the antichrist

 

[Stealth]

Not that big of a deal. The EU has always had a "president". Same with the council of europe. And the presidency rotates about every 2.5, so presidents don't really get to implement their own agenda. Not to mention that the EU only has a certain amount of power in Europe. A lot of the power is still reserved to the individual states. No sitting president of the EU is going to declare war and expect every member state to fall in line. Not to mention that the EU is a select group of 27 countries that isn't nearly as big as the Council of Europe. Plus powerful member states like the UK don't sign onto a lot of the EU treaties, or have tons of reservations to them. They end up doing whatever they want.

There's the president of the EU, president of the Council of Europe, president of the European Commission, a defense president, etc.

I don't really think its that big of a deal until more power is given to the president.

Although the citizens should get the right to vote.

 

[HERESY]

^^^^The guy in the articles is the first "president" of Europe. Before him, there were no presidents of Europe (no such office existed.) Whatever job or title he has it's a new one and not something that has been previously filled.


Please refer to the articles for more information.

 

[iaoish]

Not that big of a deal. The EU has always had a "president". Same with the council of europe. And the presidency rotates about every 2.5, so presidents don't really get to implement their own agenda. Not to mention that the EU only has a certain amount of power in Europe. A lot of the power is still reserved to the individual states. No sitting president of the EU is going to declare war and expect every member state to fall in line. Not to mention that the EU is a select group of 27 countries that isn't nearly as big as the Council of Europe. Plus powerful member states like the UK don't sign onto a lot of the EU treaties, or have tons of reservations to them. They end up doing whatever they want.

There's the president of the EU, president of the Council of Europe, president of the European Commission, a defense president, etc.

I don't really think its that big of a deal until more power is given to the president.

Although the citizens should get the right to vote.

???

This is actually the first president of Europe, how did you come by this information?
The individual countries still have power, yes but this is being shifted to the overruling EU.
There is more or less a 'standard' being created for all European countries who are a member of the EU, but each got their own little exceptions..
But most of the decisions are being made in Brussels.

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

???

This is actually the first president of Europe, how did you come by this information?
The individual countries still have power, yes but this is being shifted to the overruling EU.
There is more or less a 'standard' being created for all European countries who are a member of the EU, but each got their own little exceptions..
But most of the decisions are being made in Brussels.

Seeing that you are in Europe, how do you feel about the situation? Good? Bad? Indifferent?

 

[Stealth]

???

This is actually the first president of Europe, how did you come by this information?
The individual countries still have power, yes but this is being shifted to the overruling EU.
There is more or less a 'standard' being created for all European countries who are a member of the EU, but each got their own little exceptions..
But most of the decisions are being made in Brussels.

I took a European Union Law class taught by a lawyer from London. I also got an international and comparative law certificate through my school, and spent time studying European laws when I lived in Madrid. Most of my focus was on human rights, and the European Court of Human Rights, and not so much the EU. Most people on here don't really give a fuck about credentials, but I figured I'd answer your question.

I haven't really read up on stuff since the last treaty was signed a month or two ago. Most of that is just stuff I recollect generally.

I do agree with you that a 'standard' is being created for all European countries who are members of the EU. It's a slippery slope and looks like it could eventually become a continental country that doesn't have much democratic representation. In the future, this could be a HUGE problem.

I just feel like the EU is too young and fractured RIGHT NOW. This could be a big deal - but right now not so much.

 

[Mr. Nice Guy]

It's a slippery slope and looks like it could eventually become a continental country that doesn't have much democratic representation. In the future, this could be a HUGE problem.

I just feel like the EU is too young and fractured RIGHT NOW. This could be a big deal - but right now not so much.

Which is what we were saying originally before you said it wasn't a big deal.

Change like this happens gradually. It may take another 50 or 100 years before we see any real unification, but not recognizing the current direction towards that unification is not understanding the progression.

The disengagement of European backing of American international interests has been subtly occurring in the background for the better part of the last few decades. It is a mistake to say that just because we have yet to any real change or conflict as a result, that it is not an issue.

 

[dali]

The conformity of basic laws in Europe might be necessary to ensure order and clarity on a continent which has been growing closer together for some years now. Now that the borders have become nothing but a formality, a wide range of different laws would only evoke confusion among the people. I could basically work in every country in the EU without having to deal with too much bureaucracy. Mutual laws could simplify the act of integration, traveling, and trade between EU members in the long run. Im all for it as long as cultural integrity and the democracy of the respective countries are not affected.

As for the President of Europe, i doubt many people are even aware of such an authority as of yet. The national leaders are still considered the undisputed leaders and law makers of their countries, while the EU is providing the general framework, which we need in order to develop and remain competitive.

 

[Stealth]

^^^^The guy in the articles is the first "president" of Europe. Before him, there were no presidents of Europe (no such office existed.) Whatever job or title he has it's a new one and not something that has been previously filled.


Please refer to the articles for more information.

The CNN and Google links didn't work for me and the Brussels one seemed more like propaganda than actual news.

 

[Stealth]

Which is what we were saying originally before you said it wasn't a big deal.

Change like this happens gradually. It may take another 50 or 100 years before we see any real unification, but not recognizing the current direction towards that unification is not understanding the progression.

The disengagement of European backing of American international interests has been subtly occurring in the background for the better part of the last few decades. It is a mistake to say that just because we have yet to any real change or conflict as a result, that it is not an issue.

I'm just making the point that its not a big deal RIGHT NOW. Do you think if the European Union decided to go to war with America and raise a bunch of tariffs and change the economy and trade regulations and things like that, a country like the UK is just gonna stand by idlely and let it happen? Hell no. These countries all maintain their own say on IMPORTANT issues. The EU, in my opinion, has its purposes. But no country in its right mind would give up its sovereignty. I think of the EU like the UN. Great organization, but very limited power.

 

[iaoish]

Seeing that you are in Europe, how do you feel about the situation? Good? Bad? Indifferent?

It was here on the news for a couple of day's. But to be honoust I haven't yet read up closely on the subject.
That's why I don't really know how I feel about the subject yet, but I will do so in the near future.

But as for now I don't really see why because they have come already this far without president. But maybe it's a step in a continues process.

I just read the article of the brusselsjournal, I didn't know he got elected by heads of government.
Pretty ironic that Europe tries to implement democracy everywhere and elect this guy for president.

Now, Herman has moved on to lead Europe. Like Belgium, the European Union is an undemocratic institution, which needs shrewd leaders who are capable of renouncing everything they once believed in and who know how to impose decisions on the people against the will of the people. Never mind democracy, morality or the rule of law, our betters know what is good for us more than we do. And Herman is now one of our betters. He has come a long way since the days when he was disgusted with Belgian-style politics.

 

[HERESY]

The CNN and Google links didn't work for me and the Brussels one seemed more like propaganda than actual news.

It doesn't matter what the Brussels linked "seemed like" as the third sentence of the link stated the following:

He is the first President of the European Union, which with the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon by all the 27 EU member states in early November was transformed into a genuine United States of Europe

That is information and nothing in that sentence screams propaganda. But don't worry we're past that point now. I'm more interested in what everyone (you included) has to say about this subject.

 

[Dhadnot]

Tom Clancy's Endwar coming to life... awesome! I mean what's new, Western -I mean European powers- setting aside nominal differences in order to consolidate their power and retain their grip on the world, as non-occidental countries grow and become potential threats both domestically (for them) and abroad.

I just think about the added leverage they will have in their ravaging of the world, and the importance of Quaddafi's African Union, and Latin America's current political/social revolution of sorts.

It's sad to know the old colonizers of the world will sway "us" into a new age of foreign government organization (even though unions are not new by any means)... but just as some of the non-occidental powers were starting to ease into the seat of national statehood they must prepare themselves for yet another revolutionary way to organize people or be TOTALLY helpless to future European aggression.

My stream-of-conscious, immediate thoughts on the EU.

 

[iaoish]

No other thoughts?

The President of the European Council is the person responsible for chairing and driving forward the work of the European Council, the institution which provides political direction to the European Union (EU). The President also represents the EU on the world stage.[2]

Article 15 of Treaty on European Union states that the European Council appoints its President for a two-and-a-half year term, with the possibility of renewal once. Appointments, as well as the removal of incumbents, require a qualified majority.

From 1975 to 2009, the head of the European Council was an unofficial position (often referred to as President-in-Office) held by the head of state or government of the member state holding the semiannually rotating Presidency of the Council of the European Union at any given time.

On 1 December 2009, President Herman Van Rompuy took office as the first permanent President of the European Council. Van Rompuy had been selected to the top post on 19 November 2009, and, upon the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, his appointment was formalized, effective immediately, for a term of office beginning of 1 December 2009 and ending on 31 May 2012[3].

Pre-2009

The role of President-in-Office of the assembled European Council was performed by the head of state or government of the member state currently holding the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. This presidency rotated every six months, meaning there was a new President of the European Council twice a year. The presidency set agenda of the meetings, a competence that was misused to push national interests. The presiding country was allowed also to have additional negotiators at the table.[5][14][15]

The role as President-in-Office was merely a primus inter pares role among other European heads of state or government. Being primarily responsible for preparing and chairing the meetings of the European Council, the role had no executive powers and was in no sense equivalent to that of a head of state. However, the President-in-Office represented the European Council externally and reported to the European Parliament after its meetings as well as at the beginning and at the end of the presidency.[14][15] The last President in this system is the Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt.

Post-2009

The president's role is largely administrative, coordinating the work of the European Council, organising and chairing its meetings, and reporting to the European Parliament after each meeting; the president will also "at his level and in that capacity, ensure the external representation of the Union on issues concerning its common foreign and security policy, without prejudice to the powers of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security".[16] Some overlap between the roles of the President of the European Council, the President of the Commission, and the High Representative—notably in foreign policy—leaves uncertainty about how much influence the President of the European Council will acquire. There is further concern over whether the President will have sufficient personnel and resources to fulfil the duties of the post effectively and that, in lacking a ministry, the President might become a "play ball" between EU leaders.[17]

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_European_Council

 

[Neshani]

I think Europeans dislike each other too much for this to have that much of an impact on the world. The history between all of the counties involved has too many wars and too much distrust to allow for a truly "United States of Europe".

Economically they can call some shots, but if actual action is required I don't think the European "States" will be willing to coordinate in any significant way.

 

[NAMO]

I think Europeans dislike each other too much for this to have that much of an impact on the world. The history between all of the counties involved has too many wars and too much distrust to allow for a truly "United States of Europe".

Economically they can call some shots, but if actual action is required I don't think the European "States" will be willing to coordinate in any significant way.

It will take a while, but I think it's a possibility. Russia is the bigest hurdle at the moment.