augmentedfourth wrote:1) If you think something is irrelevant, that doesn't make it "mean". 2) Not every single thing in the world is positive. Unless you want everything uttered on this board to be sunshine and rainbows?
1) Context and the way it's phrased is key. I can't imagine you're this dense.
2) Please stop being so flippant. You know as well as I do that that's not the point.
If you questioned why she should be considered, that already implies you think her less worthy than other past winners or current candidates.
A valid point, but that was not my intent.
My opinion is if you blow someone off, claiming their points are irrelevant and unworthy of debate, that just suggests you don't have a valid rebuttal.
I guess that's fair. Xander's statement, however, like I pointed out, was in such bad faith that I didn't consider it worthy of debate.
Greece joined the EU by lying about their finances so they could loan money from the EU financial market at low interest rates. When the truth was revealed, it meant that the value of interests other countries and financial institutes dropped significantly. This, coupled with the economic crisis, caused a snowball effect throughout the EU. The EU did its best to fix things up, but before they had recovered, financial markets started to speculate negatively against debts that individual countries had. This meant that interest rates on those debts climbed up rapidly, and debts that could be paid back before became more expensive for countries. Some countries have more debts than others, and this is why Italy and Spain needed outside financial help to get them back on their feet.
In short, Greece and the financial markets are to blame, not the European Union.
(Can we make this into a drinking game involving the words "valid" and "flippant"? They seem to be coming up an awful lot, so we might as well make it more fun!)
If this isn't a troll considering our conversation history, I don't know what is.
Wing-0 wrote:For starters, I don't think the EU is such a good organism.. It didn't do much to help the people that were fleeing Libya when decisive action was needed. Some paragon of peace. Let's also not forget that they turn a blind eye to their neighbor's plights. Like the systematic genocide of the Israeli government against Palestine in the Gaza strip.
The European Union isn't trying to be the police of the world, though. You don't just swoop in into a conflict like that. The NATO, of which many European countries are a member, came through in the end.
As for the situation in the Gaza strip, I understand that there is lots of diplomatic pressure on Israel to stop it, but there isn't much more you can do. They do try to send help, but then Israel stops them from entering the Gaza strip. In short, I think they try, but I don't think there's much that they can do.
The EU's main mission, though, is to promote peace and cooperation within its own union, and I think they are quite successful at that.