ah ha, the better way to gain control of Europe. A half century of trying to get it right by force only led to the allies becoming the bullies, but now Germany is taking over with money and brains. A good combo.
The reference is to Berlin and Vienna as being better locations for the capital of the EU. The "wrong side" would make a different had the dates not been posted. 70 years in the past and 70 years of exemplory democratic governance makes the belabored point of being on the wrong side of WWII a non point.
Sorry, but it's pretty hilarious to refer to WWII as "non-point" when it comes down to European integration.
You did not read my post. I said 70 years worth of aftermath during which those you are against have demonstrated exemplory democratic governance makes the attitudes of 1945 a non point when it comes to current relationships and roles.
... I did read your post, and you are just plain wrong. Tell me, when where the Treaties of Rome signed? When did German re-unification occured?
Surely you have a greater understanding of the past 70 years of history to maintain such bias. The fact that Germany was a signator to the treaties underscores the point that Germany was on par with its democratic neighbors. And that was in the 1950s. Unification in 1990 was a direct result of the communist world crumbling and Germany charitably reaching out to provide aid and support to their own people who had been enslaved for 45 years by the USSR and GDR governments. You know that. We have much more to fear from other capitals than Berlin. What fear? Incompetence. Just look at the economies many lead. Fact is, the EU is constantly looking to Germany and begging to be bailed out so why shouldn't Germany be the seat of the organization? Even Obama insisted his government be in the drivers seat for bailing out the american auto industry.
good idea, move the capital of the EU to Berlin, and for good measure move the United Nations out of the US and also relocate it in Berlin.
... Uhm... sorry to burst your bubble but "the EU" is not constantly looking to Germany to bail her out. Fact is that Germany is the memberstate with the biggest population, and as such, the biggest economy and the deepest pockets. It would make as much sense to make Los Angeles, as biggest city (?) of the most populous state in the American Union, the capital of the USA. For historical reasons, and also coincidence and a bit of luck, Brussels is -- and always -- will be the capital of the European Union. Not only that, Brussels is also the capital of the Atlantic Community and the greater Free World. And of course, it also functions as the capital of the most globalized country in the world, Belgium. BTW -- pretty funny that you refer to the EU as "the organization". That really says it all about your lack of knowledge about the EU. LOL! The EU, an organization?! Incroyable!
1) No bubble to burst. As you admit, Germany has the deepest pockets and when the EU an its individual members need a bailout, they turn to Germany. As the money bags of Europe, the capital should be there, imo. 2) No one is looking to los angeles or California to bail out the U.S. Both are so far in debt and cash poor they can't even run their juristictions effectively. So very bad example; sorry your example makes no sense. LA has nothing to offer as the capital of the U.S. Berlin on the other hand is obviously in a far better position to be the symbolic and financial leader of the EU. 3) I agree with the "luck" part. There are no good reasons to have the capital in a second-tier location. Your allegiance to Brussels and fondness for your home are understandably biassed, but takeover the U.N. if you want some international presense. American would love you to do so. 4) the word organization is perfectly suitable. Your rude point only shows your lack of fluency in the english language and need to lash out when uncomfortable with your unawareness of facts. Educate yourself by reading the first line of the Encyclopedia Britannica EU review. and laughter is often the sign of an ignoramus. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/196399/European-Union-EU
Sorry, but the word "organization" is not "suitable" -- by all means it is not! I don't call the USA an "organization" either. Problem is that you are way out of your comfort zone regarding the EU. Sure, it isn't a sovereign country either, but it isn't an "organization" either. An organization? That's just bonkers! And, sure, English isn't my mother tongue -- and you probably can speak and write it better than me -- but I at least know that I need to use capital letters when adressing cities. Besides, if you really would know what you are talking about you would know what Germany has three "capital cities" sort of speak: (1) Munich (industry), (2) Berlin (political and cultural) and Frankfurt (financial). Now -- could you please tell me where the European Central Bank has her HQ?! And no, Brussels is far more suited to be the capital of the EU. Ever been to Brussels? Ever caught the train there? You would be bombarded with announcments in the train stations (not Brussels Airport since that is a "silent airport" -- a blessing for the ears, Americans could learn something from us in that regard) in Dutch, French, English and German. It's were Germanic and Latin culture meet. Not to mention we are a heartbeat away for Paris, London and Amsterdam -- all accesable under 2hr by high-speed-rail. Berlin is a nicer city than Brussels -- but it really is unimaginable for her to be the capital of the EU. Not going to happen. Sorry, but you really have no point whatsoever.
1) Tell that to the learned PhD editors of encyclopedia britannica. Your profile says "student". I appreciate you're starting out on your learning venture, but on this point you have gone from ignorant to stupid. You have no idea what my comfort zone is; a zone you could not even know how to enter. Stop playing the semantics game and try learning something. 2) Any of them would be more suitable an EU capital than Brussels. My point is that the EU is all about economics. Germany is by far the leading economic power and should be the centerpoint/capital of the organization. Placing it elsewhere by "luck" or other emotional pettinesses will only continue to lessen the seriousness of the union in the view of the rest of the world. 3) the natioinalistic and ethnic fervors among most of the EU states is probably why you make this statement. Europe needs to grow up and come to grips with the fact that WWII is over and since then the victors have squandered their chances at leading while Germany once again has shown its great talent to succeed and effectively compete. Not placing the centerpoint of the EU in Germany, both physically and administratively, is like putting your 2nd, 3rd, or 4th best soccer team in the Olympics while the #1 team coaches from the sidelines. 4) I've made my points and supported them. that you do not understand or make valid counterpoints does not make my points disappear.
So he gave you a link from from Encyclopedia Britannica, which says the EU is an organization, and all you are able to bring is saying "nayyyy, nayyy, nayyyy, nayyyyyyyyyeeehhhh! ... http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/196399/European-Union-EU This is pathetic. Germany has one capital city, which is Berlin. Why should Munich be the industrial capital of Germany? This makes no sense. So what, Strasbourg has the European Parliament, is Strasbourg the capital of France?
You really need to learn to read my posts properly. "Germany has three capital cities sort of speak" -- just like the USA has several ones: Washington DC (political), New York (financial), Detroit (industrial), Los Angeles (cultural), etc.
These are not capitals, but industrial or cultural centers. New York is culturally important, Chicago is important in finance, Dallas is important in industry, you only tried to make a point, when there is none.
Yep! I really have no point whatsoever when I call Frankfurt or New York the financial capital of Germany and the USA respectively. Same with Los Angeles being the cultural capital of the USA. Yep, I'm soooo wrong. Grow the F off and just acknowledge I'm right on this.
No, they do not. You really have some probs reading, don't you. No worries, a lot of people wrestle with reading problems.
You still don't get the difference between capital and center? Do you stomp with your feet when saying this?
Hahaha! Proclaiming the EU is an organization is simply hilarious. Quite funny indeed that you went all deep to make it sound that the EU sees herself as an organization when you completely ignore the paragraph that literally deals with the issue, in which it is said the EU isn't an organization. Although I need to admit I'm not really amazed since you have real problems when it comes down to comprehending stuff, make a thorough analysis etc. I literally stopped taking you seriously when you put the Hagia Sophia and the St. Louis Gateway Arch on the same footing (LMAO!).
There is no paragraph in this text saying the EU isn't an organization. If you don't agree, quote the paragraph, which does. The Belgian loses an argument and starts stupid personal attacks. This is not new. This was only another situation, where you couldn't find an argument. Probably you did not even know the St. Louis Gateway Arch ...
Yes there is, it's called "What is the EU?!". ... Are you for real? It's isn't me that uses personal slurs all the time. You are involved in too many personal vendettas around the forum to start to mention. LOL! Yeah, I was the one that couldn't find an argument... There isn't anything good to expect to argue with a fool... comparing the Hagia Sophia with the Gateway. Haha.
