Turkey Does Not Belong In the EU...

[Sierra Mike]

...says former French President and EU elder statesman Valery Giscard d'Estaing.

The elder statesman drafting a constitution for the EU sparked a furore on Friday by saying Turkey was not a European country and its entry would be "the end of the European Union."

I guess this is a little bit of that hate Ken likes to speak about.

Read all about it at Vile, Evil (and non-Christian!) Turkey! (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2002/11/10/178989)

SM

[ditch]

Well that's the French being themselves Steve. They have a bit of a reputation for opening of la mouth and putting la foot in it. I dont think they really give a le fuck who they offend though.

[ethics]

First they piss off the Americans, well, hell any chance they get (I WAS about to cite examples starting with Lybia but there were too many after that).

Then, recently, they called Israel that shitty little country. And now, since they are so pro-Islam and against Zionism, they want to show the world their hypocrisy with Turkey.

Yes, Turkey elected a more Islamic government. The PEOPLE elected it, however, and not solely so they can go through a 1979 Iran Revolution. Turkey deserves to be in the EU, but as I've stated before regarding this asinine decision not to allow Turkey, Europeans are quick to jump on everyone else outside of their realm, but when it comes to look in the mirror they only see what they want to see.

September 11th was more than an attack by terrorists for me, it really showed me what European governments are made out of.

[Coot]

Valery Giscard d'Estaing, 76. Who'd have thunk it? Frogs actually grow a pair when they get old. Given the recent election tumult in Turkey, I'd have thought no different. The EU was already set to deny Turkey entry...Camille Adaturk notwithstanding. Odd that it wasn't a German that did this as Germany's endemic population is suffering the most from the influx of Turks.

Europe has a plethora of illegal immigration problems, with muslims from muslim states being the biggest. The U.S. has its share by Catholics from hispanic states. Australia and Canada are in the same position.

At issue here is both legal and illegal immigration. Spain has closed and enforced its borders...I expect the rest of Europe to follow suit.

People don't migrate for the hell of it, they migrate to follow resources. The only way you close off human migration is to close off the resources, or the incentive to migrate. It is in the best interest of the EU to not allow free migration from the middle east. Turkey is a great way...or a gateway for Islamics to migrate freely to the EU.

Why in the hell should the EU allow its culture to be supplanted by a diaspora of muslims fleeing tyranny in its own borders? Europe fought wars to throw off tyranny...why should they allow fugitives fleeing it? The answer is that those attempting to flee be forced to either live under that yoke or discard it. The U.S. fought to free itself, Europe did the same. If we keep taking in cowards that are not willing to fight on the grounds of their own homeland for the same freedoms, then we ruin our own culture and free it up for hijacking by other cultures that have jack shit to do with its premise, but have everything to do with its demise.

[Sierra Mike]

Originally posted by ditch
Well that's the French being themselves Steve. They have a bit of a reputation for opening of la mouth and putting la foot in it. I dont think they really give a le fuck who they offend though. Le funny!

SM

[Sunriser13]

"Turkey Does Not Belong In the EU... "

- Hmmm, and just before Thanksgiving, too. I mean, just exactly what is the rest of the world supposed to do with all those turkeys?? Does the entire EU wish to ban turkey? The rest of us can only use so many, as we'll be so sick of turkey sandwiches and turkey salad by Christmas that we won't know what to do!! Does this extend to all poultry?? What about chicken and duck?

Huh? What's that you say? You mean the country Turkey?

Oh -- Never mind...

[jamming]

If Turkey's eat Turkeys is that Cannibalism?

[John R. Beanham]

If Turkey is ever admitted to the EU, then she will become a back door to mass migration from all the Muslim countries of the world, to Europe.

Not only will her own population migrate west but all that initially migrate to Turkey will rapidly follow.

This WILL cause major social disruption in Europe as it has begun to do already.

John.

[ethics]

Gentlemen.

The reason EU gave for not admitting Turkey in to it's eliticism is not for immigration purposes but for Turkey's "human rights record." Which is a blanket charge with very little integrity.

[claire]

Europeans politics are mostly reluctant to see Turkey
join the EU of course for the human rights issue but
surely more because the european population is afraid
of a massive coming of islamic people who don't share
the same values as the majority of europeans .
In my tiny country we have unfortunately a lot of problems with some islamics activists who are asking for
them more rights(and of course no duty) than a foreigner has in any of these countries. I must admit
that the turkish population in Belgium in her vast
majority does not create problems but is unfortunately
not so well integrated(they mostly stick with Turks and
don' t have many contacts with Belgians).The problem
is with others arabs inhabitants(from Algeria,Marocco etc) but Europeans instinctively extend their(justified) fears of islamic extremists to Turkey.But as someone already pointed out all the populations that have already gone to Turkey will fast enter Europe and that's what most Europeans refuse fearing for their culture and way of life.

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Whether Turkey could or should join the European Union is a rather complicated geopolitical issue.

That Turkey joining the EU seems to be in the interest of the U.S.A. is one thing. And there are very obvious POLITICAL reasons for it.

Whether it is in the interest of Europe is another.

The whole issue, however,certainly should not be reduced to a moralistic debate or quibble, to pointing of fingers - on who is nicer or more open than the other. And so on, and so forth.

More on the complexity, see:

http://www.iht.com/articles/79684.html

If there be any fight over this, do it without your servant. I'll be absent as of tomorrow and till Monday 16. Not in Turkey. Only in Germany. :)

Leopoldo

[ethics]

I love how you skirt the topic, Leopoldo. Shaking your finger on the moralists but yet don't offer what the real reason Turkey is being shunned from EU.

Your infusion of the US is noted but not reacted to.

[ethics]

Originally posted by claire
Europeans politics are mostly reluctant to see Turkey
join the EU of course for the human rights issue but
surely more because the european population is afraid
of a massive coming of islamic people who don't share
the same values as the majority of europeans .

Well said, Claire. Of course many Europeans would raise their noses at that statement and tell the rest of us "arrogant" people that that is not true, they love Muslims. :rolleyes:

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by ethics
I love how you skirt the topic, Leopoldo. Shaking your finger on the moralists but yet don't offer what the real reason Turkey is being shunned from EU.

Your infusion of the US is noted but not reacted to.

And I, Leon, love how you skirted Pfaff's article. If you didn't read it, you should.

That piece gives you a series of reasons for admitting or not admitting Turkey to the EU, with possible consequences in one case or the other. The jury still being out. Pfaff, aware that the issue is complicated, does not divide the matter between those in white hats and those in black ones. There is no one "real reason." Thus is most of reality - I can't help it.

And what, pray, is an "infusion of the US?"

[Sierra Mike]

Leopoldo,

I think the only thing Pfaff's article was able to clearly convey is that the Europeans do not yet have a clear idea of what the EU is, will, and should be. Backing up his thesis as to why Turkey should not be admitted to the EU with such claims as the following--

Whe Giscard reopened that investigation...if Turkey were admitted to the EU, he said, then Morocco and other non-European states, such as Lebanon and Israel, would reasonably expect to follow. The result "would be the end of the European Union."--is, with all due respect, nothing more than protectionist, isolationist tripe which flies in the face of what the EU has, to my small mind, purported to stand for at this point in time. It is an attempt at obfuscation, both on the part of Giscard, and on the part of the author for attempting to further this discord.

SM

[ethics]

Originally posted by Leopoldo Niilus

That piece gives you a series of reasons for admitting or not admitting Turkey to the EU, with possible consequences in one case or the other. The jury still being out. Pfaff, aware that the issue is complicated, does not divide the matter between those in white hats and those in black ones. There is no one "real reason." Thus is most of reality - I can't help it.

No there isn't but there ARE major reasons and minor reasons.


I am no fan of IHT nor their writing, it's like reading dumbed down version of NYTimes. I can tolerate the leftist NYT but I lost a lot of respect to IHT a while back.

And what, pray, is an "infusion of the US?"

Infusion of US in a topic that has very little to do with US.

[ethics]

Originally posted by Steve Moore


--is, with all due respect, nothing more than protectionist, isolationist tripe which flies in the face of what the EU has, to my small mind, purported to stand for at this point in time. It is an attempt at obfuscation, both on the part of Giscard, and on the part of the author for attempting to further this discord.


And people take IHT seriously? Pleaase.

[Sierra Mike]

Hey, if someone cites it as a source, then it can almost certainly be held up for subjective and/or objective review. The same thing happened when I posted stuff from Parameters some time ago, so big deal. I rarely if ever take IHT seriously; if nothing else, they're just not very skilled at hiding an agenda. :haha:

SM

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by ethics
No there isn't but there ARE major reasons and minor reasons.


I am no fan of IHT nor their writing, it's like reading dumbed down version of NYTimes. I can tolerate the leftist NYT but I lost a lot of respect to IHT a while back.



Infusion of US in a topic that has very little to do with US.

Leon,

OK, let's get down to brass tacks and spell out everything, step by step and most carefully.

If you only react to a SOURCE of an information and are not even willing to consider the arguments you are being offered, that is your privilege. Does not exactly foster a reasoned debate, but we can live with that.

Infusion of the U.S. Introducing matters non germane to the issue.

Here I really have to beg your pardon. United States is greatly relevant to the inclusion or non-inclusion of Turkey into the European Union. In fact, it has been constantly pressing for such inclusion. To an extent that one does not need to quote specific sources, kosher or not.

The U.S.A. of course has an interest - and most legitimate from its point of view - that Turkey be included in the EU. To give you just the most basic and simplistic reasons:

1. It is a favor to Turkey for being, up to now, a most steadfast NATO ally, and a possible one in the case of a war against Iraq.

2. Turkey’s inclusion into the EU might well diminish the cohesion of Europe; introduce a big and trusted American ally into Europe, thus making Europe less competitive in regard to the U.S.A., diminishing its potential to collectively take anti-American positions.

Europe might also have reasons to include Turkey, but they certainly would be different from those of the U.S.A.

2b) To some extent the U.S.A. has already been able, mutatis mutandi, to achieve some of the goals mentioned under 2.

The big bang of NATO and the EU Union immediate new candidate states, introduce into Europe - directly or through NATO - new elements (countries) which for historical and other reasons rely, for their survival, basically on the U.S.A. rather than the European “big powers.” Mind you, Estonia, is among such new elements. All this also diminishes Europe'a potential collectively to take anti-American stances.

All of which I have said is not meant to be a criticism against the U.S.A. It just is trying to look out for its own interests. And so it should.

And Europe will have to see to, that is defends its own perceived interests in the best possible manner.

What bothers me is a moralizing simplification of these fairly complicated matters, such as claiming from the U.S.A. that Europe is not willing to admit Turkey because it is anti-Islamic, more racist than America and what not. And Europe arguing that America is just being arrogant and should keep its nose out of European matters.

Or to simplify it even more: American policies are moral. Those who are against them are immoral.

Or to come back to Salvador de Madariaga’s quote (which I already have mentioned elsewhere in this forum):

“The Monroe Doctrine is not a doctrine but, in actual fact two dogmas:

a) the dogma of the virgin birth of America’s foreing policy.

b) the dogma of the infallibility of the president of the U.S.A."


I hope you see what I mean. No offense meant to the U.S.A. It is just doing what it should to.

I only plead that we cut through the moralistic smoke and mirrors. On both sides. On all sides. And do some political analysis.

Yours truly

Leopoldo

[ethics]

Turkey has been a NATO member prior to September 11th and any talk of terrorism. They have been asking to get in to EU since it's admittance to NATO.

TO say that Americans are saying Europe is more racist more than America for not allowing Turkey in is something that you said, not Americans. Americans only mention how arrogant of Europe to raise their noses at American reaction to Muslims IN America and yet do the same thing to the Muslims via rejection of Turkey. Other than that, Americans could give a flying squirrel.

But I love how Europeans always look for the ulterior motives of America, no matter how distant the effects would be to US. The decision to include Turkey in to EU will NOT affect whether US uses Turkey's bases for attack (if any) on Iraq. Sure, the US can say, "Hey, come on EU, can you let in Turkey? I mean, they have been asking for an awful long time and there's really very little you can reject them on." If that's what you call US getting involved in EU affairs, I am afraid that that is sort of bs.

The issue, Leopoldo, no matter how IHT or other European press (who love nothing but to point fingers across the ocean instead of looking at internal problems), paints this, is the issue between EU and Turkey and no one else.

On the sidelines, we can comment at what is happening just as much as the rest of the world comments on everything America does.

Here's a direct political question, Leopoldo, what is the REAL reason EU is not allowing Turkey in for? Or MAJOR reason.

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by ethics
Turkey has been a NATO member prior to September 11th and any talk of terrorism. They have been asking to get in to EU since it's admittance to NATO.

TO say that Americans are saying Europe is more racist more than America for not allowing Turkey in is something that you said, not Americans. Americans only mention how arrogant of Europe to raise their noses at American reaction to Muslims IN America and yet do the same thing to the Muslims via rejection of Turkey. Other than that, Americans could give a flying squirrel.

But I love how Europeans always look for the ulterior motives of America, no matter how distant the effects would be to US. The decision to include Turkey in to EU will NOT affect whether US uses Turkey's bases for attack (if any) on Iraq. Sure, the US can say, "Hey, come on EU, can you let in Turkey? I mean, they have been asking for an awful long time and there's really very little you can reject them on." If that's what you call US getting involved in EU affairs, I am afraid that that is sort of bs.

The issue, Leopoldo, no matter how IHT or other European press (who love nothing but to point fingers across the ocean instead of looking at internal problems), paints this, is the issue between EU and Turkey and no one else.

On the sidelines, we can comment at what is happening just as much as the rest of the world comments on everything America does.

Here's a direct political question, Leopoldo, what is the REAL reason EU is not allowing Turkey in for? Or MAJOR reason.

Leon,

We apparently speak at cross purposes. And whatever one says is re-interpreted by the other and, I am afraid, not really listened to.

Perhaps we can leave it as one more sample of Euro-American dialogue (or lack of it).

I honestly don't know what else I could add. Perhaps other participants in this thread can produce more wisdom and, hopefully, light.

I just add that I am on my way to Bamberg and Nuremberg in Germany. Back on Monday 16.


:beer: :beer: :beer:

All the best :)

Leopoldo

[claire]

According to Europeans newspapers Erdogan disgusted by european refusal to start talks for accepting Turkey
in Europe would have ask to Mr BUSH to support
Turkey's adhesion to ALENA the free exchange zone
between USA/CANADA and Mexico.The answer of President Bush is unknown

[jamming]

We are presently working on expanding our free trade zone with countries in South America like Brazil.

[ethics]

Originally posted by Leopoldo Niilus
Perhaps we can leave it as one more sample of Euro-American dialogue (or lack of it).



I asked for your opinion as to why Turkey is not allowed in to EU, IHT article didn't mention enough that would picque my interest, do you have an opinion of your own or do you follow the one proposed by IHT?

[Paladin]

I think people are ignoring that the northwest corner of Turkey *IS* in Europe. The line between Europe and Asia runs through the center of Istanbul. Russia is another country that spans Europe and Asia.

[claire]

Hi,

The "European part" of Turkey is so small compaired to the rest of the country.

[Perry Stroika]

Leo will not answer, Leon because he knows the answer.

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by ethics
I asked for your opinion as to why Turkey is not allowed in to EU, IHT article didn't mention enough that would picque my interest, do you have an opinion of your own or do you follow the one proposed by IHT?

Leon,

Try the following.

Why is not the USA fully opening (abolishing) the frontier between USA and Mexico?

And include all the Central Americans.

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by Perry Stroika
Leo will not answer, Leon because he knows the answer.

Perry,

Could you be a bit more explicit?

In other words, what the hell do you mean?

Leopoldo

[ethics]

Originally posted by Leopoldo Niilus
Leon,

Try the following.

Why is not the USA fully opening (abolishing) the frontier between USA and Mexico?



That's reverse of what EU is doing with Turkey. Or I am lost in your analogy.

Here's another suggestion, how about answering dead on instead of using US in all of your examples? The issue, as I am trying to tell you over and over again, is between EU and Turkey. Let's approach it from that angle?

If you can't just say so.

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by ethics
That's reverse of what EU is doing with Turkey. Or I am lost in your analogy.

Here's another suggestion, how about answering dead on instead of using US in all of your examples? The issue, as I am trying to tell you over and over again, is between EU and Turkey. Let's approach it from that angle?

If you can't just say so.

Fine with me.

The issue is beween EU and Turkey.

So, leave it alone.

Over and out.

P.S. Still, mere curiosity. Why is the American rejection of free entry of Mexicans into America the "reverse of what EU is doing with Turkey"?

[Sierra Mike]

I believe your original question was, "Why is the US not abolishing the frontier (I presume you mean border?) between the US and Mexico?"

If so, that's easy--Mexico is a separate country, and even Vincente Fox prefers it that way. :)

SM

[ethics]

Originally posted by Leopoldo Niilus
Fine with me.

The issue is beween EU and Turkey.

So, leave it alone.

Over and out.


A cop out if I ever saw one.

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by Steve Moore
I believe your original question was, "Why is the US not abolishing the frontier (I presume you mean border?) between the US and Mexico?"

If so, that's easy--Mexico is a separate country, and even Vincente Fox prefers it that way. :)

SM

Steve.

So is Turkey. A separate country. For the time being.

Has anyone of you gentlemen (and possibly ladies) figured out what the European Union implies in regard to its members?

If Turkey becomes member of the EU just now, it may mean a massive influx of KURDS (refugees, both political and economic) unto Europe with no legal means of stopping it.

All of which also means that certain internal Turkish matters need to be fixed before Turkey can become a member of the EU.

And, yes, in regard to Mexico-USA I meant "borders". English not my mother tongue. However, the analogy is still there. That is, is the USA ready to make a similar move to that of the European Union in regard Latin America, also called its back yard?

If not, it may, perhaps, want to stop pontificating about Europe.

If you see what I mean.

[EMIG]

Originally posted by Coot
...why should they allow fugitives fleeing it? The answer is that those attempting to flee be forced to either live under that yoke or discard it. The U.S. fought to free itself, Europe did the same. If we keep taking in cowards that are not willing to fight on the grounds of their own homeland for the same freedoms, then we ruin our own culture and free it up for hijacking by other cultures that have jack shit to do with its premise, but have everything to do with its demise. The Pilgrims were not fleeing from religious persecution in Jolly Ole England?

This new learning amazes me!

[Leopoldo Niilus]

Originally posted by ethics
A cop out if I ever saw one.

Just a moment.

YOU said in an earlier post that this is question between the European Union and Turkey.

So now it is up to you to say what is wrong, one way or the other.

And you still haven't told me why the USA should not open its borders (linguistic compliments to Steve) in regard to Mexico and, why not, Central America and a few other Latin American countries? Ecuador, Peru.

[Sierra Mike]

Perhaps because Mexico is not lobbying the US to admit it into the Union? That would be one key difference. Mexico already has NAFTA, which gives it free trade with the US and Canada. Does Turkey enjoy a similar relationship with Europe?

SM

[ShinyTop]

How about because the US is not proposing a continent wide government. Last I heard neither was Mexico or Canada.

Europe, on the other hand is. That would seem to me to be a pretty big difference.

[Sierra Mike]

Well, yes, that was the linchpin to my argument. :haha:

SM

[ShinyTop]

Sorry, did not read your post in depth. Duh. My bad.

[Basilio]

As one who is familiar with EU concerns, I do know that the border with some Eastern European states like Belarus are being restricted from immigrating to the EU, so some of the Eastern European states that are being admitted are getting updated border security to deal with that... The same can be done for Turkey, and I am quite sure Turkey can enforce its border with its neighbors.
I do believe there is a fear of Muslims by many Europeans and that is one reason there is a reticense to admit them, but from my experience a Turkish Muslim is far more moderate than a Morrocan or Algerian Muslim and more educated and more able to integrate. This is, of course, a generalization. I do think the human rights record of Turkey needs to improve to make life better for the Kurds and the Turkish people in general, for quite some time Kurds would try to get political asylum. If there are real reforms, there will be no place for it....
I can understand why the EU is holding off on admitting Turkey, as it should improve its situation. Howevever, holding off on admitting them for a long time if they make the necessary adjustments would not be acceptable. I don't think Turks in general have the same integration problems as the North Africans, they seem to fit better into the mosaic...... The Turks who came to Germany came as guest workers, they were not illegals. I wouldn't say Turkey should be admitted, I would rather say Turkey needs to apply some serious reforms, and then the EU should reciprocate by incorporating Turkey. It could make the EU very powerful with a foothold in Cyprus and Turkey and looking over the Middle East and Israel.