I live in Toronto, Canada. I don't have much of an opinion about the European Union, so I would definitely have to go with being 100% neutral.
Not necessarily. If Scotland did leave the UK, it'd be very likely they would continue to allow free travel over the border. If they didn't, then it'd be a massive shock to the system.
Not read all posts, but someone talked about universal power outlet. sofar i know there's no universal power outlet. most countries use already the same one, except UK. What the EU wanted, and you see that at many places and is good is to have a universal plug (USB) to charge devices. so you can use one charger for all your devices. Well that's a smart action, people that go on vacation know why. It saves you a big with adapters and chargers. google for "EU votes in favour of universal mobile charger" nothing todo with outlets. You mean it's complete crazy this days because the USA is a bit very bossy and demands everything from european people on information that fly to the USA. Shame the never did do the same for USA people to europe.
I was the one who posted about outlets and I saw an article on USB when I was trying to figure out what SoulPunisher was referring to. When I posted about different power outlets I was trying to relate USB connectors and what they are wanting to do with them with power outlets and what maybe should be done. I think standardization is generally a good idea, but a balance needs to be struck with market freedom to choose between different technologies. A government can support one over another and make whole corporations(and usually politicians) rich or break them in spite of what is the better choice. Personally I would never go anywhere without a power adapter AND cable even if the place I was going to was supposed to have them, but I'm goofy like that.
European union is a bureaucratic body that truly has nothing to do. So they create something to do and insert themselves where they do not belong causing havoc in a myriad of realms. From commerce to human rights issues the EU can be found doing nothing more than stirring the pot, like any good political henchman. When it comes to defense, there is no real physical defense to be had between Britain/England+US alliance. Any wars had on borders are purely political and profit driven and have nothing to do with actual physical defense so saying that it is a militaristic alliance is moot.
Considering the United States pretty much saved the day in world war 1 and 2, I think that the US has a right to feel worried about Europeans coming into the country considering that both sides have extremely different views, and historically, Europe has caused the US soooo many problems. Either way, its not like the US is targeting Europeans. The only reason so much information is required is because duh 9/11 and hundreds of more terrorist attacks. I do agree that the US can be bossy, but if European countries had to deal with all the crap that the US does, Europe would be just as bad if not more. You can not deny, however, that the EU isn't bossy and full of itself unless you are politically uninformed or 1984 is happening in your life.
No, no, no and no. The USA only got involved with WWI because Germany sunk some of its ships which were taking weapons to the UK and its allies. Also, it only provided reinforcements. Then with WWII they only get involved, again because of the sinking, but as a way to getting revenge on Germany for being allies with Japan. The USA didn't get involved to help its allies but to get revenge on who had wrong it. The USA has caused more problems than Europe. The constant annoyance of the middle-east has caused terrorist groups, country corruption and a whole range of other problems.
In both wars, it is true that the US only came for revenge due to Europe giving them crap, however in both cases the allies were pushed back and were losing until the US entered the war. For example in WWII, may on remind you, that the UK was being choked out of its resources and had lost all ground in continental Europe and were expected to lose the war. The Soviets probably could of won the war, but no one wanted Soviet control of Europe other than the Soviets? On the issue of terrorism, Europe caused its own terrorism problems. The US fighting the terrorists in the middle-east only effected Europe when they themselves angered the terrorists by joining in on the fight. Sure terrorism wasn't as large of a problem before the US campaigns, but it is not the US's fault that Europe gained more terror issues. Europe didn't have to jump on the bandwagon, and they brought it on itself by pissing off the middle-east with its crap. Note: I am not hating on Europe. I personally believe that Europe has a huge potential to regain its awesomeness if the EU is done correctly.
Porphos, the us was not instrumental in pushing back the Germans. Germany lost their ground all on their own through over stretching. Had they not, perhaps the US would have played a larger role in Europe. I do howwever agree that the us involvement kept the soviets from pushing into or past Germany by strengthening allied morale and "intimidation" factor. The us role in world war 2 was almost exclusive to the Pacific theatre. The only thing we really accomplished in Europe was losing a lot of good men and supplying the French and English forces with war machines and humanitarian aid.
ikr, however we were necessary to the D-day effort (mostly with supplies) and to the bombing campaigns.
The US joined in on World War II because Japan attacked them and gave no reason. Europe had nothing to do with it other than Germany getting Japan on its side.
