TCS Daily


Does Europe Want Turkey or Not?

By T.K. Vogel - November 13, 2006 12:00 AM

To anyone sitting at one of the little café tables perched on the quayside above Kyrenia's pretty harbor in northern Cyprus, the Turkish mainland just across a few miles of water, it must seem fanciful that this small island should make or break Turkey's bid to join the European Union. After all, a lot is riding on the ongoing membership talks -- the welfare of Turkey's 72 million citizens, the stability of a region of strategic importance, and the EU's own shape and identity. But on Wednesday, mainly prompted by the Cyprus question, the European Commission (the Union's executive) put a stark choice before Turkey: shape up ahead of an EU summit in December or face the prospect of a suspension of the ongoing membership talks. While Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn studiously avoided the words "ultimatum" and "suspension," he made it clear that the implications of a failure would be unpleasant for everyone involved. (The Times of London headline the next day read, "Ultimatum may end Turkey EU hope.") It was equally clear that of the two problem areas Rehn pointed to -- the slacking pace of reform in Turkey, especially in the field of human rights, and the unresolved status of Cyprus -- Cyprus is by far tougher to settle, for Europe or indeed the Turkish government.

The Cyprus problem is, at this stage, really two problems. The first is the continued refusal by Turkey to open its ports and airports to aircraft and vessels originating in the Greek part of the island, whose government is internationally recognized as the rightful representative of all of Cyprus. The Turkish government knows that it will have to cave in eventually but says it will do so only once the EU ends the isolation of the Turkish north of Cyprus. For this isn't just a trade dispute: it is about Europe's most intractable diplomatic problem, the continued division of Cyprus into Greek south and Turkish north.


That division, which goes back to the last days of British rule in 1960 and the Turkish invasion of 1974, is no longer a problem at Europe's doorsteps. Despite its rejection of a UN-brokered peace plan, the Greek south of the island was admitted to the EU in May 2004 while the Turkish-occupied north, which had approved the plan in a referendum, was left out in the cold. In order to entice the Turkish Cypriots, seen at the time as the party more inclined to reject the deal, the EU had offered membership to Cyprus regardless of the outcome of the referendum. This had the perverse effect of encouraging the Greek Cypriots to step up their opposition to Kofi Annan's plan, since they would reap the benefits of EU membership one way or another. And so it happened; international policy lay in shambles.

Faced with a disaster that was partially of its own making, the EU then suggested it might end the isolation of the Turkish north in exchange for Turkish recognition of the Republic of Cyprus. But the first part of this implicit deal never materialized, while Turkey agreed to trade with all EU members, Cyprus included, but promptly failed to follow through on its commitment.

Here lies the core of the problem. The feeling in Ankara is that the country's profound economic and political transformation over the last few years, driven largely by the prospect of EU membership, has not been properly recognized by European governments, which instead put ever-new obstacles in Turkey's way. Every time association and membership talks hit a snag, Europe descended into another round of tortured debate about its identity and whether Turkey was "European" enough. The fact that EU accession has become tougher for everyone -- witness the stern warnings delivered to Bulgaria and Romania ahead of their accession, set for January 2007 -- has not diminished Turkish exasperation, and public support for EU membership has gone into a tailspin.

Has the EU been negotiating in bad faith? European policymakers have certainly been clumsy in dealing with a problematic applicant, and in taking their own constituencies along for the ride. When they offered membership talks to Turkey just under two years ago, they were far ahead of their electorates. But instead of taking the time to explain to skeptical citizens why it would be good for both sides to have Turkey in the EU, they skirted the issue -- only to find themselves trapped by their own commitments just as public opinion in Western Europe decisively turned against Turkish membership. On the other hand, Ankara knew from the start that several members -- France, Germany, and Austria in particular -- were opposed to its application. (Membership decisions must be taken unanimously; France will have to hold a referendum on the matter.) The only way out is now for Turkey to turn itself into a model applicant, thereby denying the Turkey-bashers inside the EU any pretext for stopping the process that might one day lead to Turkish membership. At the same time, it is of critical importance that the EU stick to its commitment to Turkey, or else the prospect of membership will loose whatever power of attraction it still holds. The fact that the Commission has not recommended or openly threatened a suspension of membership talks suggests that Brussels understands this. Convincing the 25 member states of the wisdom of this approach, however, is a different matter altogether.


Categories:

76 Comments

Why does the E.U. want Turkey...
as a member in the first place? The idea is historically crazy. Turkey is in Asia Minor, not Europe. So Turkey is a "democracy" (well, sort of, at least as much as Russia and Belarus)...so what? Is that the criteria for applying for admission and acceptance? If so, Japan and some Latin American countries should be admitted. Or is it that the E.U. is really Eurabia and wants Turkey admitted as a sop to its Muslim minority? Turkey in the E.U. is another one of those Cold War ideas that might have made some sense in the days when NATO was relevant to the West's security but whose time has passed. The issue today is the penetration of Europe by Islam. Admitting Turkey to the E.U. would be to open the door wider at a time when the E.U. ought to be slamming it shut. What have the Turks done for the West lately? Nothing postive that I can think of, but I sure can remember how important getting a U.S. armored division into the Iraq war from the north through Turkey was to our ability to kill the Republican Guard in the Sunni Triangle and how the Turks said NO to that request by Colin Powell, with the result that the leadership of the Guard now runs the insurgency that will soon cause us to leave Iraq with our tails between our legs. Is Turkey doing anything to promote freedom and democracy and the security of Israel in the Middle East? Nothing that I know of. In fact, it is not even apparent that they are committed to pluralism and tolerance in their own country. There is no reason to let the Turks into the E.U. and plenty of reasons to keep them out.

Why does EU want Turkey
Thornton--

Yes, I agree with much of what you said.

Most of the advantages of inviting in Turkey have to do with keeping her solidly in NATO and the like. That can probably be finessed without full EU membership, though the Turks won't like it.


Actually I found the article itself quite irritating -- the fundamental premise, which is anything but settled among the EU electorates, is that the EU should want the Turks to become full members is simply assumed, and never discussed or argued. That's of course a disingenuous polemical technique.


Of course that premise has tended to be assumed to be settled at the elite policymaker level, particularly in left of center Euro governments. All this without consulting their electorates, of course.


It's all part of the idiotic and throughly non empirically based dogma that all cultures are completely compatible so long as some formal governmental structural issues are satisfied. The prospective massive inflow of Muslims, substantial numbers of whom have fundamentalist leanings, at a time when a substantial part of the Muslim world regards itself in some level of civilizational conflict with the West, is clearly something to avoid for so long as Jihadi terrorist attacks remain a real threat and reality.


Which only goes to further underline the heavily undemocratic nature of much EU decision making.


PC on steroids.


Time to end, as the French and Dutch referendums started to make clear even to political classes that didn't want to hear.

Thank you for...
making the point (which I missed) about European elitism calling the shots on this issue and the foolish naivety of the reasons why they think it's a good idea. All of the benefits, economic and otherwise, of the E.U. having a positive relationship with Turkey can be achieved by other means and do not require Turkish membership in the E.U.

Does Europe Want Turkey or Not?
To distill to the essentials:

EU electorates:
NOT.

EU political elites, center to left:
Yes.
(But not until sometime in the future, which they hope will ever recede.)

The EU elite answer is for multicultural ideological reasons. Since Turkey is a key member of NATO, and since the tendency has been to eventually invite all members of NATO into the EU so long as they meet certain formal governmental tests, then if Turkey manages to meet those tests, on what basis other than rank discrimination by religion could Turkey no be invited through the door?

Well because Islamist ideologues continue to declare and wage low intensity terror war with the West, and Muslims unfortunately pose the very real and very substantial risk of further swelling the ranks of Fifth Column jihadis with the EU.

As Britain's experience with those 30 (so far in some manner detected) ongoing Muslim terror plots originating on her soil would seem to rather well indicate.



We don't
The answer is actually very clear. We do not want Turkey.

That said, one might wonder why the accession negotiations started in the first place. Much of it has to do with US pressure, at every major decision point since 1999. Now, the US is not known to be sensitive, knowledgeable or unselfish when meddling with European issues, and that simply annoys the heck out of us.

If you look at the public opinion (Eurobarometer is a good place to start), it's squarely against Turkey in many EU member states - interestingly enough most significant in the states closest to Turkey, who must be assumed to know the Turks best. Only the countries really far from Turkey have clear majorities for membership. The support inside Turkey is also plummeting, as it becomes clear that the conditions of 'good neighbourship relations', 'protection of minorities', 'religious freedom' etc. are actually to be taken seriously...

One also wonders why the EU Commission is working so hard for Turkish membership. First, we have a Commissionar for Enlargement (Olli Rehn, Finland). If he fails to make the EU enlarge, he's presumably doing a poor job and might risk to be fired. Enlargement is the air he breathes, his drive to make it go forward is amazing. When the process faces trouble, he sees it as another problem to be solved, not a sign that something is inherently wrong with the idea of having Turkey be a member of the European Union.

Another reason for the enlargement to proceed without regards to the public opinion or the rules (Copenhagen Criteria etc) set out for enlargements might be the desire for empire-building. The larger EU becomes, the stronger the voice it should have internationally. In theory, of course. Historically we have had so much trouble with the Turks that we can only expect more internal strife and unrest if we permit them to sit at our internal decision table.

We do not want Turkey. And it's shameful that the politicians even try to push them to us.

Ask the French about more muslims coming into Europe......
is Paris still burning......or is it just the rest of the nation and cities???
Hitler could not do it in 1944, but the muslims today will manage it.
A recent union police commander said it is now "intifada" and not just locals rioting and looting.
The police can not control the violence so why dont they bring in the regular army and blast these rioters to hell?
The current insurrections in France are heavily covered up by the media and you have to dig to find anything about it.
No, Europe does not need any more muslims on the continent, but needs to encourage them to go home or forcibly repatriate them to their ancestral homelands.
As numbers of muslims increase in Europe, so will the open insurrections and Europe will resemble Beirut of the 1970's where Christians and muslims battle each other into oblivion.
Goodbye Europe.....hello Eurabia.

What a turkey
The islamo-facisist deniers say that the muslims don't bother invading their neighbours, or europe; but as recently as 1974 we saw Turkey invade a Christian, european country, and got away with it, and wimpy europeans flirt with rewarding even more with eu membership. Why not instead tell them to give up their conquered lands instead? I know, wimpy liberals will say this will only drive them into the hands of the terrorists. It could also be seen as another humiliation to the loser palestinians, who in their rage will kill more women and children. I think Euroland has pretty much conceeded defeat to the muslims.

Growing Population
The US wants turkey in the EU because it helps keep them tied in to NATO but the disadvantages which acrue to the EU countries alone are same that the US would have with union with Mexico.

Not only has Turkey got 72 million people, making it marginally smaller than Germany, it has a growth rate of 1.13% http://www.geographyiq.com/ranking/ranking_Population_growth_Rate_dall.htm
which means that it will be up to 144 million by 2070.

Since it is far poorer than all other members & is the only solidly Moslem one the problems should be obvious. The fact that turkey, overwhlmingly, is in Asia rather than Europe is a , relatively, minor consideration.

Abolishing trade barriers anyone?!?
'The idea is historically crazy. Turkey is in Asia Minor, not Europe. So Turkey is a "democracy" (well, sort of, at least as much as Russia and Belarus)...so what? Is that the criteria for applying for admission and acceptance? If so, Japan and some Latin American countries should be admitted. Or is it that the E.U. is really Eurabia and wants Turkey admitted as a sop to its Muslim minority?'

All of Turkey is to the West of what is considered European Russia. Who would seriously say that Russia isn't part of Europe? Ankara is to the West of Moscow and Tblisi.
Prior to the end of the Cold War, we had the absurdity of Prague being considered 'Eastern' while Vienna (to its East) was considered Western. The difference was clearly political rather than geographic. What is considered Western, Central and Eastern Europe changed the day after the Berlin Wall came down. The geographical argument concerning Turkey's accession is similarly nonsense.
Turkey should be allowed membership on the basis of smashing down barriers to trade. That's why the ex-Eastern Bloc countries were offered membership albeit after much gnashing of teeth from the EU elite.
On the same basis, trade barriers with the rest of the world should be abolished. So yes Japan, Africa etc would be part of this trading 'bloc'. Or do the self-professed libertarians among you not follow through the logic of your alleged position? The advantages of EU membership from ex-fascist Spain, Portugal and Greece and ex-clerical Ireland are obvious! All four were on a par with the Eastern Bloc prior to their membership.

Clearly the anti-Muslim sentiment is greater than the commitment to economic freedom. This is expressed in the form of a static view of culture and pig ignorance of the proud secular history and traditions of the modern Turkish republic. It has, for instance, more restrictions on the wearing of the veil and headscarf than most EU members.

To portray Turkey as just another Muslim state is patently ludicrous. Even it's present government is so tame that there is no danger of it giving up its secular ways.

Interestingly, the very barriers that were insisted on by EU beauracrats to unfairly delay the admission of the ex-communist states are insisted by the anti-Muslim crowd! God bless freedom!

Re: Why does EU want Turkey?
'...the fundamental premise, which is anything but settled among the EU electorates, is that the EU should want the Turks to become full members is simply assumed, and never discussed or argued. That's of course a disingenuous polemical technique.


Of course that premise has tended to be assumed to be settled at the elite policymaker level, particularly in left of center Euro governments. All this without consulting their electorates, of course.'

I agree to a point. The referendums were not dominated by Turkish membership, however. In fact they had little to do with it. Primarily, the 'No' votes were a 'two-fingers' to the presumptions of the EU elite concerning the EU (bureaucrat-imposed) constitution. The fact is that all Euro elites are afraid of any argument that they fear they may lose. They don't have the confidence to argue in favour of the free movement of peoples despite it being to the obvious advntage of the three countries who permitted it. Thus, the chances of the elites advoating the abolition of trade barriers is negligible.

'The prospective massive inflow of Muslims, substantial numbers of whom have fundamentalist leanings, at a time when a substantial part of the Muslim world regards itself in some level of civilizational conflict with the West, is clearly something to avoid for so long as Jihadi terrorist attacks remain a real threat and reality.'

Are you talking about Turkey?! This is plain wrong. Do you have any knowledge of Turkey? Secular Turkey is now some jihaddie base of operations??? Ludicrous! The greater danger to the Turkish state comes from the tiny band of Kurdish separatists!


dougjnn
'To distill to the essentials:

EU electorates:
NOT.

EU political elites, center to left:
Yes.'

You inadvertently demonstrate that the Right is not interested in free trade. The Left is afriad of reactionary arguments about muslims and the Right is involved in shamelss opportunism for similar reasons. Neither side is willing to stand up for its own arguments, leaving the far-Right to shout bigoted comments from stage right.

'Well because Islamist ideologues continue to declare and wage low intensity terror war with the West, and Muslims unfortunately pose the very real and very substantial risk of further swelling the ranks of Fifth Column jihadis with the EU.'

Again, what connection has this to Turkey? Unless your argument is that all Muslims are fifth columnist and jihaddie terrorists. Which of course it is!

Frodo42 wrong on so many points
'If you look at the public opinion (Eurobarometer is a good place to start), it's squarely against Turkey in many EU member states - interestingly enough most significant in the states closest to Turkey, who must be assumed to know the Turks best. Only the countries really far from Turkey have clear majorities for membership. The support inside Turkey is also plummeting, as it becomes clear that the conditions of 'good neighbourship relations', 'protection of minorities', 'religious freedom' etc. are actually to be taken seriously...'

1-France appears to be against Turkish membership and you can't get much further away from Turkey can you?
2-Since when has popular prejudice about near neighbours been a barometer of the accuracy of said opinions?!
3-Turkish support is plummeting because the barriers to entry increase by the week. It has no relation to with fears of carrying out democratic reforms. It is frustration brought about by the EU asking them to jump through more and more hoops.

'Another reason for the enlargement to proceed without regards to the public opinion or the rules (Copenhagen Criteria etc) set out for enlargements might be the desire for empire-building. The larger EU becomes, the stronger the voice it should have internationally. In theory, of course. Historically we have had so much trouble with the Turks that we can only expect more internal strife and unrest if we permit them to sit at our internal decision table.'

If destroying trade barriers is akin to empire-building then I'm all for it! The problem with the EU is its undemocratic structure and decision-making. This makes it all the more ludicrous that it can dictate terms of membership based on democratic criteria!
The rest of your paragraph is reactionary garbage. To compare Turkey today to the Ottoman Empire is disgraceful and plain silly! On the same basis, should Germany and Britain be expelled for its crimes?


Heavyvinter
'is Paris still burning......or is it just the rest of the nation and cities???'

None of them are.

'Hitler could not do it in 1944, but the muslims today will manage it.'

So now Muslims are worse than Hitler? And seemingly more powerful in France? Can your anti-Muslim prejudice get any lower?
Hitler easily occupied France. Why would he need to burn it?
Provide evidence before making your ludicrous exaggerations!

'The current insurrections in France are heavily covered up by the media and you have to dig to find anything about it.'

How convenient! How would you know it's been covered up? You don't live anywhere near France! Saves time on having to post evidence of your claims.
Insurrections? Do you actually know what an insurrection is?

'No, Europe does not need any more muslims on the continent, but needs to encourage them to go home or forcibly repatriate them to their ancestral homelands.'

The essential message of heavyvinter - let the race war begin! The one issue that you obsess about!
Again, I'll ask you a couple of questions:
What is the percentage of muslims in the UK, for example and how do they exercise their influence?
Considering your previous claims of the success of the 'Islamic insurrection' in France, tell me how well the Islamic parties are doing in recent elections. A few stats would come in handy.

Dietmar
'The islamo-facisist deniers say that the muslims don't bother invading their neighbours, or europe; but as recently as 1974 we saw Turkey invade a Christian, european country,'

Come on now, Dietmar. You're not seriously implying that Turkey's invasion of northern Cyprus was an Islamo-fascist plot??? As you are probably aware, it was ostensibly to protect Turks living there from Greek Cypriot attack. It was more of a civil war compounded by outside intervention.
I'm not justifying the Turkish invasion - far from it - but it has nothing whatsoever to do with religion.

'I think Euroland has pretty much conceeded defeat to the muslims.'

How so, Dietmar? By negotiating with Turkey for its long-promised EU membership?
I thought you were a libertarian. Do you not prefer trade barriers to be abolished to benefit all parties?

Political vs. geographical nomenclature.
Who has portrayed Turkey as just another Muslim state?

As to trade, I wrote: "All of the benefits, economic and otherwise, of the E.U. having a positive relationship with Turkey can be achieved by other means and do not require Turkish membership in the E.U."

Re Turkey's location compared with "European" Russia east of the Urals, geographical place names are not determined only by longitude. It has always been an open question as to whether Russia is more European or Asiatic. There is no question that Turkey is in Asia Minor, not Europe.

Re: Political vs. geographical nomenclature.
Firstly, can you expalin what you mean by your subject heading?

'Who has portrayed Turkey as just another Muslim state?'

You have portrayed Turkey as a danger thus:
'The issue today is the penetration of Europe by Islam. Admitting Turkey to the E.U. would be to open the door wider at a time when the E.U. ought to be slamming it shut.'
You can see no diiference between secular Turkey and an invented 'Islamic' Turkey.

'As to trade, I wrote: "All of the benefits, economic and otherwise, of the E.U. having a positive relationship with Turkey can be achieved by other means and do not require Turkish membership in the E.U." '

So why make an exception? Clearly there are trade rules to joining the club. Not being a member would give the EU the excuse to raise and lower trade barriers at will. Turkey, and the recent entrants, are perfectly well aware of the importance of membership.

'Re Turkey's location compared with "European" Russia east of the Urals, geographical place names are not determined only by longitude. It has always been an open question as to whether Russia is more European or Asiatic. There is no question that Turkey is in Asia Minor, not Europe.'

This was what I was saying when pointing out the contrdcition of Prague and Vienna. It is arbitrary. Poltical fault lines are the important factor.
(Incidentally, even 'Europe' has been a contested area throught the ages.)
Part of Turkey IS in Europe though isn't it?
Basically, you're objection is 'cultural' rather than economic. I'm more interested in the benefits of trade than preserving cultural difference which, given the ever-changing nature of capitalism, sweeps away cultural traditions through development and trade.

AGAIN "Casius" defends these damn muslims!!
What is with you and muslims??
You say I dont live near Europe so I dont know anything about the situation?
I READ Financial Times, western resistance, CNN, FOX News, and a host of others and I seriously dont believe thousands of US and European media employees and reporters would lie just to **** off the glorious Cassius.
Do you want to read something today NOT FROM LOWLY ME??
Go here if you dare......www.nysun.com/article/42376
Another answer for you glorious defender of muzzies EVERYWHERE is England...part of Eurabia....unfortunately has 1.6 million of the infidels living in the nation.
They march, threaten, rape, and kill Brits as if there are 16 million of the bastards.
They manage to commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers.
I dread to see England when they do grow to 6 or 7 million.
Maybe at that point dhimmis as you-or dimwits-will be protected under the new sharia law that will be promoted and installed by the next monkey PM who will kowtow to your friends.
Cassisus, there is NO muslim party as they dont need one.
They have LABOR and "conservative".... what a rape of the word.
Those 2 parties of halfwits do all their bidding regarding unbridled immigration, mosque construction, welfare abuse to the 3rd degree, forbidding dogs to enter muslim homes during a police search, DID YOU FORGET THE DEATH THREAT THEY MADE LAST SPRING AGAINST YOUR QUEEN...just a detail to you I guess.
Tell me what does my geographical location have to do with my knowledge of the French nation burning?
Surely you have heard of computers, internet, CNN, BBC-also known as the Balogney Broadcasting Corportation?
Sadly Casius seems to ignore, blockout, or refuse to believe the main news outlets of the world as they are just "spreading hate and propaganada."
The race war again you say I am encourageing has begun last year with the FIRST wave of arsons across France and eventually it will spread all over.
Muslims started it and not me...you like to put words and ideas in other peoples mouths I see.
I am advocating common sense, repatriation with a 1 time generous cash bonus-as if they deserve it anyway-and assistance for new homes to be built in the islamic nation of their choice.
Again, I thank the ESTEEMED Cassius for tiptoeing around my Beirut comment and prediction as he knows that will be the future of Europe if muslims are not checked in their rampages around Europe.
Oh YES, Cassius, muslim are MUCH worse than Hitler as he wanted continental Europe NOT ALL 7 CONTINENTS with women covered by burkhas and all forcibly converted to Christianity.
You are hopeless and still manage to churn my stomach.

What is it with you and Muslims?
You're the one who brings it up every time!!!
The article is about Turkey's EU membership and instead of referring to economics and democratic accountability you want to go off on one about muslims!

If you're going to abuse me with your asterixes, give me a clue as to what it is, p*ick!

One minute you say it's difficult to assess the size of the 'insurrection' because of a media blackout, then you claim to have seen all these articles from your aforemntioned outlets. Which is it?? If they're available, provide evidence of the intifada! Put up or shut up!

The one article you give contains no hard evidence - just conjecture. Let's see - a police union official (a substantial number of whose members are your FN mates) is anxious for more resources and so inflates the threat in the streets of Paris? Quelle surprise! What an objective source you provide!
None of it proves that it is being orchestrated. In fact, it's the imams that were trying to control it. It is working-class youth, primarily Arab, who are involved in venting their anger on notoriously racist CRS cops. I presume you'd have as much sympathy with those uppity blacks in 50s and 60s Alabama eh?

'The way out for France is two-fold. Firstly to reform its welfare state and allow the Muslim dominated slums to integrate into French society.' That doesn't quite chime with your 'send 'em all back' mantra does it? Even your right-wing buddies aren't as extreme as you!

'Another answer for you glorious defender of muzzies EVERYWHERE is England...part of Eurabia....unfortunately has 1.6 million of the infidels living in the nation.
They march, threaten, rape, and kill Brits as if there are 16 million of the bastards.
They manage to commit crimes out of proportion to their numbers.'

Well done! You can't exaggerate that, can you! 1.6 million = 2.5%!! That is minute by anyone's reckoning! It is YOU and bigots like you who exaggerate their influence!
But wait! Why let awakward facts get in the way of a good story eh? They act like they're 16 million? And how does that work, you cretin?! Oh and please give me sources for all these huge Islamist demonstrations! The only ones I've seen number no more than a hundred nutcases! If that looks like 16 million then you need your eyes testing!
Rape, murder and pillage? Maybe you should lynch them all like your segregationist brothers from days of yore. Go on, give us some hard info on murder and rape rates while you're at it!

'Cassisus, there is NO muslim party as they dont need one.
They have LABOR and "conservative".... what a rape of the word.
Those 2 parties of halfwits do all their bidding regarding unbridled immigration, mosque construction, welfare abuse to the 3rd degree, forbidding dogs to enter muslim homes during a police search, DID YOU FORGET THE DEATH THREAT THEY MADE LAST SPRING AGAINST YOUR QUEEN...just a detail to you I guess.'

Haha! You know nothing about British politics! The last party you were heard advocating was the anti-black, anti-semitic BNP! Nice choice, heavy!
Are you really such in inbred f***wit that you can't tell the difference between a rabid socially inadequate Islamisist fantasist and the average muslim? Grow up and peddle your filth on some Aryan Nation site!

'Tell me what does my geographical location have to do with my knowledge of the French nation burning?'

Clearly everything if you think it's an intifada!

'I am advocating common sense, repatriation with a 1 time generous cash bonus-as if they deserve it anyway-and assistance for new homes to be built in the islamic nation of their choice.'

Are you a gameshow host with your wonderful array of prizes for those lucky muslims??? And if my girlfriend decides she doesn't want to go to a land she's never been before? What are you going to do then?!

'Oh YES, Cassius, muslim are MUCH worse than Hitler as he wanted continental Europe NOT ALL 7 CONTINENTS with women covered by burkhas and all forcibly converted to Christianity.'

Muslims are worse than Hitler! You heard it here first!!
What warped world do you live in? One where childish racst rants reign supreme!
And Antarctica as well?

'Again, I thank the ESTEEMED Cassius for tiptoeing around my Beirut comment and prediction as he knows that will be the future of Europe if muslims are not checked in their rampages around Europe.'

Utter nonesense! You have a distorted and false impression of ordinary muslims in the here and now so how can anyone but those in your fantasy circle take any of your 'predictions seriously?!

'You are hopeless and still manage to churn my stomach.'

Excellent! I must be doing something right then! I'd get as much pleasure from that then I would if a KKK nut said it!

Indeed, why make an exception...
when the "fault lines" are "political" (you really mean cultural and ideological) and not geographical. On the basis of that criteria, the term "European Union" has no meaning and the E.U. should admit Japan and all of South America. Perhaps the USA should apply. In this context the subject heading is self-evident, illustrated by the example of Russia, a political state that is located in both Europe and Asia. It's the incorrect use of English words and geographical nomenclature that I'm objecting to.

My objection is also cultural, as you point out, rather than economic, and I do not apologize for that. Beneath the secular pluralistic surface of modern Turkey lies Islam, as it has since Byzantium fell. It has been kept in check since Ataturk and WWI by the military. The situation may look benign today, but political Islam is on the rise in Turkey. There's no question about it. What happens politically in Turkey is worth watching for an indication of the prospects of Islamic fundamentalism's imperialistic ambitions in nation-states that are Western and modern in their urban areas but have large, uneducated and poor Muslim populations.

Whatever the economic benefits are, they can be achieved without Turkey joining the political entity that the E.U., once solely an economic entity, became in recent years. There are no economic benefits for the Turks or anyone else, the Brits and former COMECON states included, in joining a political entity as conceptually flawed as the E.U.

Why make Turkey the exception?
I'd agree with you that the political entity of the EU is a failed one. IMO, this is a convenient apparatus for European elites to hide behind - they don't have to involve the populace in decision-making, they just adopt a paternalistic stance. Even those anti-EU conservatives can blame Brussels rather than having the debates head on. Unfortunately, the EU is the only game in town so Turkey and the ex-Eastern Bloc countries have no choice but to join. Their exclusion allows a more powerful economic bloc to dictate trade terms.

The EU should just be one stop on the way to a free trade world. The name EU would be superfluous. So yes, the sooner the rest of the trade barriers can come down the better for everyone. Isn't that the logic of the FREE MARKET?

When I say political, I mean political, not cultural. The cultural apology you put forth is false on two counts.
1 - it is based on ahistoricism. Culture is not fixed and resistant to change. By its very nature it is fluid. It only fits a reading of histroy that is linear and doesn't take into account economic and social development - the keys to progress. Ultimately, it is a pessimistic and defensive reading of history. Conservatives used to proclaim their superiority over the Left by defending capital's ability to transform nations and continents out of backwardness. These days, quite a number seem to have given up on the project and exaggerate the ideological strength of fundamentalists.
2 - The assumption that underneath the secular facade lies an aggressive and imperialist Islamisist Turkey is pure conjecture. There is nothing that proves your theory. To prove your point we'd have to wait years. Until then we can assume it's false.

Cassius the dhimmi enjoys losing every argument???
You insult all my statements and facts....that is what you always do with no rebuttal.
When you refer to Turkey it is only about islam.
The 2 can not be disconected no matter what you say.
Let me give you more proof that you will just deny and dismiss.
The Turks are doing a great job assimilating today in Germany...police officials there report there are now "no-go" areas in all major cities with muslim immigrants so how do you explain that peaceful behavior?
More German school principals are resigning their commissions due to an environment of increasing violence, students refusal to assimilate, demands to have an islamic menu, threats against staff, and increasing attacks on the outnumbered German students.
Is this what you wish on all of us with your islamic propaganda?
Muslims in Germany are attacking non-muslims regularly---and only German women--brave chaps those muzzies you love so much.
My article is "conjecture"...it is news from a French police official ON THE GROUND what else would you want?
Are you working there and know more than the French commander?
As I said you love to dismiss everything.
Now you say French police are racist for doing their job in a losing situation with no support from the government?
What working arabs are you referring...the bastards who abuse welfare benefits for generations and reward this generosity with riots and arson to the host nation?
You are simply a 5th columnist and I would slap cuffs on you along with the rest of your muzzie comrades on their way out of Europe.
Muslims dont want jobs, they dont want work, they dont want to go to school and prefer to attack women and cops.
Muslims want to only live as muslims in a non-islamic nation with the eventual intent of replacing the democracy in all host nations with sharia law?
No, you will say I am wrong, misinformed, inbred....insulting is all you can do.
I know EVERYTHING about British politics as I follow it almost daily so save the insults.
I am not inbred so dont insult my family you self-hating, loathsome poor excuse for a Jew who obviously hates himself.
Israel would never accept you as an immigrant as you are good as a muslim terrorist who cares nothing for anything western or democratic.
You are the only here who believes Hitler is worse than muslims so dont try to pull in anybody else with your beliefs.
Hitler is dead and has not killed anyone since 1945, but your muzzie-Paki friends are here NOW killing everyday and everywhere on this planet.
I love to see your pathetic attempts of justifying, denying, or covering up islamic atrocities until you are blue in the face.
You are now Cassius....aka Cassius THE DHIMMI!!
Thanks for never taking up my offer of visiting an islamic nation for several months to see islam in action....another cowardly response of denial.
"Islam is good, peaceful, the people are great, but oh no, I dont have to go there and try it myself?"
Coward.
LONG LIVE THE BNP....are you frothing yet at the mouth dhimmi?

Nonsense masquerading as intelligence
"The cultural apology you put forth is false on two counts.
1 - it is based on ahistoricism. Culture is not fixed and resistant to change. By its very nature it is fluid. It only fits a reading of histroy that is linear and doesn't take into account economic and social development - the keys to progress. Ultimately, it is a pessimistic and defensive reading of history. Conservatives used to proclaim their superiority over the Left by defending capital's ability to transform nations and continents out of backwardness. These days, quite a number seem to have given up on the project and exaggerate the ideological strength of fundamentalists.
2 - The assumption that underneath the secular facade lies an aggressive and imperialist Islamisist Turkey is pure conjecture. There is nothing that proves your theory. To prove your point we'd have to wait years. Until then we can assume it's false."

The above is pure gobbledegook and has no relationship whatsoever to anything I've written this exchange. You have a reading disability.

Safe assumptiion
"There is nothing that proves your theory. To prove your point we'd have to wait years. Until then we can assume it's false."

If you say that it is impossible to prove, or by definition to disprove, that union with Turkey will cuase irreconcileable problems then thje precautionery assumption would be not to do it.

I have a suggestion for Turkey........
if they give back Constantinople to Greece intact, make financial reperations, vacate the city of all Turks, and apologize to the Greek nation for the slaughter, rape, enslavement, and desecrations of St. Hagia Church that followed the attack of 1453 by Mehmet than MAYBE the EU should CONSIDER allowing Turkey into the group........of course it will NEVER happen.
Muslims will be muslims and nothing else.

to Cassius re; flying with eagles or running with turkeys
I mean to imply that I saw Turks already invade and conquer Constantinople and other Christian lands in Asia, then cross over and conquer chris. Greek lands there, then up to the Balkans till they were finally beaten off at Vienna. Then 74 to Cypress when all euroland should have delclared war on them, kicked them out of both cypress AND Constantinople. I realize thought that would have been un PC to liberals. RE the rest of Eurabia, what's your opion about the quaint french-islamo practice they call: 'tournant', accepted by the police even though against all french and eurabia laws?

Avoid making judgements?
Cassius (talking to someone else)--
Can your anti-Muslim prejudice get any lower?

How about JUDGEMENT based on evidence, rather than prejudice?

Or do your postmodern idiotic anti-empirical belifs preclude making any judgments about the central current tendencies of any other cultures at all?

Well said.
Well said.

Much simpler.
Exclude Muslims from immigrating / joining EU.

With exceptions for the highly skilled or very bright who can demonstrate estrangement from Jihadis and most of what they believe in.

Probably gets down to only rather secular sorts of Muslims. Rather a few.

Just fine.

Time to discriminate, full throatedly, and for very good reason.

Do you think the Allies discriminated against Germans in their midst during WWII? Was it maybe a good idea?

How about answering the points?
Do you have trouble with comprehension, hence the accuastion of gobbledegook?

The relationship to what you have written is with the nature of culture, something you believe is essential, perhaps paramount, in Turkey's prospective membership with the EU.

A nonsensical response
'If you say that it is impossible to prove, or by definition to disprove, that union with Turkey will cuase irreconcileable problems then thje precautionery assumption would be not to do it.'

On that reading of the precautionary principle, I wouldn't get out of bed in the morning on the off-chance I run into a rampaging elephant.
The precautionary principle needs to be based on hard evidence, rather than the worst case scenario. If the latter was the accepted wisdom we'd still be living in caves.

To Dietmar
Re: 74 Cypriot civil war - this conflict, its causes and motivations have no connection whatsover to Constantinople, Vienna etc. It's disingenuous to read history backwards to incorporate all conflicts from the past to fit into the War on Terror.

Turkey was an important bulwark against the Soviets before and during the Cold War so the chances of invasion of Turkey were zero.

Tournant? You mean they pirouette people to death now? ;-)
No, I've not heard of it in any other context.

dougjnn
'How about JUDGEMENT based on evidence, rather than prejudice?

Or do your postmodern idiotic anti-empirical belifs preclude making any judgments about the central current tendencies of any other cultures at all?'

The person I'm replying to believes ALL muslims are out to rape, murder, convert EVERYONE in SEVEN continents. Not only that, NONE of them work and only claim benefits. Oh and they ALL lie through their teeth. If that isn't prejudice rather than empiricism then I don't know what is! Read his 'contribution' again and tell me my judgement ISN'T based on the evidence of his bigotry.

All muslims are guilty in his eyes because of the crimes of a few! Perhaps we should all shoulder the blame for Western colonialism, segregation and the Oklahoma bombing? It's crass generalisations and you know it!

I love a good libertarian position!
Yeah bang 'em up! Dispose of that bizarre concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' eh?

'With exceptions for the highly skilled or very bright who can demonstrate estrangement from Jihadis and most of what they believe in.'

For one, your pal heavyvinter would disagree with you letting any muslim remain in the EU.
Secondly, the onus is on YOU to prove my girlfriend and her family are jihaddie terrorists, not them.


'Probably gets down to only rather secular sorts of Muslims. Rather a few.'

You don't know many muslims do you?!

'Time to discriminate, full throatedly, and for very good reason.'

Nice! Freedom of religion along with the rule of law and basic justice and equality are thrown out of the window! You have more in common with the fundis you claim to hate so.


Civel War?
You can't call it a civil war if a foreign place, Turkey, comes in invading and taking over a part of the island. It was invasion and conquest, as Turkey has been doing for the plast thousand years or so. Sure, during the cold war, Turkey was supposed to be on the west's side, and for lots of aid, and imagine how useful they would have been had there been open war. Re 'tournant' see you don't even know what muslims are doing in Eurabia. It means something like 'turn-taking', muslim young punks intimidate muslim girls to cover up, never go out dating, discoing etc. under threat; and even if you do, whenever they feel like it they do the turn taking when they rape them. Muslims like to control their women thru such intimidation, and police let it happen cus it's part of muslim culture there, and they're also afraid of those guys. Just take a look at what happened last new years.

I have a suggestion for ....
UK - give back the Malvinas to Argentina, Gibralter to Spain and leave the north of Ireland to the Irish. Apologies should be made and compensation should be paid to families of all the Argentinian dead and dead Catholics murdered by Brit occupying forces.
Further aplogies and compenastion should then be made to all lands occupied by the British.
Until then, they should be suspended from all international bodies, including the EU.

The same shopuld apply to:
Spain for the occupied parts of Morocco.
France for its former colonies in North and Central Africa.


Is this likely to happen? Of course not! It's pure fantasy!

Nice comment Dougie? No, I thought you wouldn't agree with that.

Yes, UK should give back Malvinas.
No problem with that.
Britain did not kill millions and enslave Ireland, they did occupy, but nowhere the sheer numbers of murdered as in Constantinople
Spain occupied Morroco as part of their counter-offensive drive to destroy the islamic threat to Europe and actually that time period was closer to the Goths and Vandals who occupied Morroco and they in turn were driven out by the muslim hordes, and later the Spanish drove the muslims out.
Maybe Spain should apologise to the Vandals?
England and France have 0 to apologise.
At least when those nations left the former colonies had major canals, railroads, airports, dams, and shipbuilding facilities in place built during the European colonial days.
No apology for that.
Yes, actually the way it has become thoroughly useless, the EU should be disbanded and all nations there should withdraw from the flotsam.
It does nothing except usurp European national laws to the whims of a tiny group of bureaucrats that only serve to waste tens billions in taxes ignore the common good of European citizens, and perpetuate the destruction of Europe with the OPEN DOOR POLICY OF THIRD WORLD IMMIGRATION.
Good ideas here.

Territories in Africa and the Caribbean are part of the EU but not one square inch of Turkey -europe
Britain still occupies part of Ireland and certainly did enslave it. You are unaware of the Cromwellian terror, the Famine of 1845-8.
Spain still occupies part of Morocco - Ceuta and Melilla. These have no association with muslim occupation, Vandals etc. They are far more the result of conflict between Spain and Portugal and their respective colonies.

The terror of Constantinople has more in common with the Crusades and the religious wars in Europe in terms of brutality? Why? Because thy were all from similar periods when barbarism was the common currency of warfare.

So you think colonial empires were expanded for the good of the colonised?! As it happens, the technological advances were a positive by-product of Western driven expansion. But that came at a great cost in terms of lives and liberty. You appear to have a rose-tinted view of colonialism since vast swathes of the colonies experienced virtually no progress as the colonialists only brought advances where it was feasible and profitable to do so.

Whoa there, heavy! You're not saying we agree about the undemocratic nature of the EU?!

BTW since you claim to be aware of the current state of British politics you will know that the PERCEIVED danger, in terms of immigration, comes from East Europeans. Poles seem to come in for most criticsm since they are the largest group of incomers (500,000 or so). The resistance to their arrival has only been tempered by the obvious benefits they bring. If there were Hungarians 'flooding' into the country I would defend their right to come here, despite your desire to send my girlfriend and her family back to their country of orogin - wherever that is!

It is all hypocritical.
You tell me things I know, but I refuse to post all of it here on a casual, fun blogsite, pleeeeeeease.
Perhaps my suggestion would be to tell Spain get out of those tiny enclaves and they can send their muslims to those areas.
Independence for the states and the muslims peacefully locate there, great.
I dont think colonialism was peaceful or for the good, but when it ended there were good perks for the new nations to manage....or was it mismanage into the ground?
Yes, the EU is disgusting and is worse in bureaucracy than the UN.
I read the discrimination against the easterners and find it no surprise.
It is so easy to tell eastern Europeans...who also have advanced degrees-minus the BS stories of political persecution of the middle east.....to stay out or drop dead, (They are not bombers or rioters) but the fools and traitors of the Labor Party and the "CONSERVATIVES" open their arms to muslim bombers and economic dregs and beg "Oh please come 1 come all.... we cant have enough of you people."
PS. "Oh, but you cant live near us as we are ministers of parliament, but you can all go live next door to the Winstons, Jones', and the Carlsons."
Hypocrisy to the 3rd degree.

In your dreams, heavy!
The basis of your hatred of Muslims is that the crimes of one should be visited on the many. Ergo it is irrational.
I'm not disputing the crimes by individulal Muslims that you list. (Although I'd suspect that you'd believe anything people tell you if it feeds your racism.) It is the extrapolation of a few criminals to 1.6 billion people that demonstrates your bigotry. Would you care to extrapolate out the crimes of indivdual white people to demonstrate the evil of ALL white people? No. Your concern is to exaggertae the criminal behaviour of a few to blame the many when muslims are in your crossight.
The Muslims I know are no more guilty of 9/11 or 7/7 than you are guilty of the Oklahoma bombing.
You insult my girlfriend because she happens to be a (non-practising) Muslim and expect me not to insult you?!

'My article is "conjecture"...it is news from a French police official ON THE GROUND what else would you want?
Are you working there and know more than the French commander?
As I said you love to dismiss everything.
Now you say French police are racist for doing their job in a losing situation with no support from the government?'

You take one quote from a union official without any reference to other sources and you think you've discovered the truth? You need to learn a thing or two about sources and truth.
fact: A large number of police officers are menmbers of the FN - a racist party.

'What working arabs are you referring...the bastards who abuse welfare benefits for generations and reward this generosity with riots and arson to the host nation?
You are simply a 5th columnist and I would slap cuffs on you along with the rest of your muzzie comrades on their way out of Europe.'

Open your eyes and you will see that most Arabs in France work! I know that doesn't fit with your bigoted world view but that's your problem.
Nice touch at the end there! I defend INNOCENT muslims and condemn GUILTY muslims and you want to imprison and deport me? haha! What a silly little boy you are. You'd have loved the Soviet Union, N*zi Germany etc. You're certainly no lover of freedom!

'Muslims want to only live as muslims in a non-islamic nation with the eventual intent of replacing the democracy in all host nations with sharia law?
No, you will say I am wrong, misinformed, inbred....insulting is all you can do.'

You're wrong! You base your belief on a tiny minority of Islamist fantasists! Provide evidence that all muslims have a masterplan. Your previous comment about Labour and the Tories doing the Islamists work for them is pure fantasy. Again, I won't expect anything to back up your infantile assertions.

'You are the only here who believes Hitler is worse than muslims so dont try to pull in anybody else with your beliefs.'

Try telling that to a few Holocaust survivors. Your moral relativism stinks!

'your muzzie-Paki friends are here NOW killing everyday and everywhere on this planet.'

Mine aren't. Proof? No, thought not. Nice racist terminology, you backward eejit!

'"Islam is good, peaceful, the people are great, but oh no, I dont have to go there and try it myself?"'

The one quote you provide is the one you invent! As it happens I would rather live in a democracy than an authoritarian state. Everything you say flies in the face of democracy and freedom - collective punishments, deportation of millions of innocent people who happen to follow a religion you disaprove of, imprisoning people for defending people guilty of no crime!

I defend people, of whatever religion or race, that are INNOCENT! You condemn them!

Back to reality, heavy
'You tell me things I know, but I refuse to post all of it here on a casual, fun blogsite, pleeeeeeease.'

What????

You can ask Spain and Britain to get out of said colonies til you're blue in the face but it's not going to happen is it? You can similarly fantasise about sending muslims 'home'. It isn't going to happen!

'I read the discrimination against the easterners and find it no surprise.'

Why is it no suprise?

'the fools and traitors of the Labor Party and the "CONSERVATIVES" open their arms to muslim bombers and economic dregs and beg "Oh please come 1 come all.... we cant have enough of you people."'

People from outside the EU - the 'bombers' and 'dregs' you fantasise of - can only claim asylum and cannot work by law. East Europeans can work as much as they want. Their only restriction is that they cannot claim benefits for 12 months. You stand reality on its head! The Poles, Latvians etc have a BETTER deal than anyone from outside the EU borders! Wake up!

Deportations DO happen...and will occur again after.......
the next future bombing whether they be nuclear, conventional, or resort to chemical attacks that is very successful killing hundreds of thousands or several million Europeans or Americans.
Imagine the outcry of the survivors, widows, orphans, parents, and maybe even the liberals will drop the poison of political correctness as the west will violently turn against islam and its followers.
England deported huges numbers to Australia as did many other nations. Deportation is just relocation...not murder.
Yes, the Europeans are free to work themselves to death and the muslims are free to abuse public aid for several generations.
Nothing wrong with that system.
Hey, they just dropped this aritcle off the page.
I'm gone.

In your wildest fantsies!
Presuming every last muslim took part in the massacre. Until it happens then, it's just your dream and an idle fantasy!

'England deported huges numbers to Australia as did many other nations.'

Those that were deported to serve prison terms were criminals 200 years ago!
Those children sent in the 50s were merely orphans. A damning indictment of Britain, as most people agree. Except you it seems.

'Deportation is just relocation...not murder.'

Such humanity! I shall tell my friends. They'll be so pleased!

'Yes, the Europeans are free to work themselves to death and the muslims are free to abuse public aid for several generations.
Nothing wrong with that system.'

If you want to distort the facts I've just given you then there's not much I can do except point out your own hypocrisy.

Dietmar - Greek annexation, civil war and Turkish invasion
There were Turks already there, Dietmar, with as much right to live there as Germans had to live in the Sudetenland, Poland, Russia etc., and Protestants to live in Ireland. You would know all this since you are old enough to remember. Incidentally, what was your opinion of it at the time?

The Turkish invasion was to prevent the allies of the colonels' coup in Greece from carrying out their stated aim - uniting Cyprus with Greece. The fascists had just overthrown President Makarios.
Since Turkey was one of three parties (along with Greece and the ex colonial power, Britain) that had agreed to preserve the constitutional status of an independent Cyprus, it felt it had no choice but to invade to protect the Turks living there. Since Greece had already reneged on the 3-party agreement, Turkey did the same. Neither party comes out of it particularly well.
Thus it was no more a continuation of the Ottoman empire, the battle of Tours etc etc than the Greeks' annexation was a continuation of the Crusades.

Re:tournant-of course there is repulsive behaviour going on some estates. That doesn't mean that it is widespread and that it is in the nature of muslims ('Muslims like to control their women thru such intimidation') to carry it out. It sounds like these macho d*ckheads are more concerned with getting their end away than following the qu'ran. Anyone accused of rape (black or white, Arab or non-Arab) should be arrested and charged if there is enough evidence.
It is one thing to see examples of disgraceful behaviour, it's quite another to extrapolate that out to a whole people.
Would you like me to assassinate the character of every last German for the crimes of WW2?

old enough
I'm sure old enough to remember it and it even seems like very recent to me. At the time I was shocked and appalled that Turkey was allowed to get away with it. But if you're on their side, I don't care. If you're a liberal, then away your tendency will be to side with the west's enemies. To me Turks are just a tribe of muslims, out of asia, who took over Christian lands, fairly recently. So also if there were many Volk-germans in eastern europe, I wouldn't wipe them out, but I also wouldn't expect Germany to come around and try to take over the whole place. BTW, after they lost the war, about 14 or 15 million of those ethnic germans were kicked out, some say the largest ethnic cleansing in the history of the world. RE tournant, all that kind of thing is growing, not decreasing, even to places like Sweden, etc. not just france and the UK. Europe's replacement population is already in place it's just a matter of how messy the transfer of real estate will be. I lament it and will probably never ever bother going back to see euope anymore. Glad i got to see it decades ago. It will be a shame when notre dame and the cologne cathedrals go the way of St. Sophia's cathedral in constantinople.

Balance of proof
That is the extreme precautionary principle used by "environmentalists/Luddites/loonies to explain why we should never use GM food, believe global warming etc. The less extreme one - that you don't do something unless the balance of evidence suggests it would be beneficial is perfectly sensible.

On the latter basis the idea that we should join with Turkey unless opponents can undeniably prove that it will cause disater in a generation or 2 falls. The burden of proof, or at least evidence, lies with those who want to do it.

Old enough to remember what kick-started it then.
So the Greek annexation of Cyprus by a dictatorship should have been ignored and they should have been allowed to 'get away with it'?

As I said, neither side comes out of it well and I'm not on either side. Neither am I liberal, or a conservative for that matter. I don't really care much if you're a reactionary who will side with anyone against any muslims whatever the origins of a problem since they are 'just a tribe'.

Muslims have taken over Christian lands relatively recently? How recently is relative? Turkey was about as secular a state as southern Ireland and Italy in 1974.
Are we not permitted to mention the wholesale conquering of African, Asian, South American, Australian lands by Christians?

'So also if there were many Volk-germans in eastern europe, I wouldn't wipe them out, but I also wouldn't expect Germany to come around and try to take over the whole place. BTW, after they lost the war, about 14 or 15 million of those ethnic germans were kicked out, some say the largest ethnic cleansing in the history of the world.'

The Germans justified their expansion into central and eastern Europe as the first step of the colonial policy of lebensraum by claiming they were defending the minority rights of ethnic Germans in Czechoslovakia, Poland etc. The full implementation of lebensraum DID involve them 'taking over the whole place'. I mentioned the Germans precisely because they had a right to live outside Germany and should not have been kicked out after the end of WW2. I can understand the Poles, Czechs, Hungarians and Russians wanting to kick them out of their country but to collectively blame a whole people for the crimes of the collaborators was clearly wrong. Just string up or slit the throats of the collaborators!

It's a shame you can't be equally discriminating when discussing muslims. Instead you want to exaggerate the threat of a tiny minority of headcases.

'It will be a shame when notre dame and the cologne cathedrals go the way of St. Sophia's cathedral in constantinople.'

To suggest that Notre Dame and Cologne cathedrals will become mosques is just hyperbole and utterly groundless.

The Precautionary principle
is used and abused in so many ways from environmentalists to big business and government.

The Luddites and loonies that you rightly mock have their bretheren on these threads. Both extrapolate out from scant evidence a doom-laden scenario to declare the end of the world is nigh, and that in order to save the environment/Christian world we must take extreme measures! The evidence is far from balanced and is merely the product of a distorted and extreme world view.

How on earth can one prove what will definitively happen in the future? We can look at the examples of how Spain, Greece, Ireland, Portugal and now the former Eastern Bloc have progressed and estimate that Turkey will similarly benefit. As will those trading more equitably with it. The 'evidence' to the contrary is doom-mongering as a cover for chauvanism and based on a worst-case scenario that bears little relation to Turkey's recent development and prospects.

Balance of evidence
Except that Turkey is 72 million Moslems starting from a poorer base than eastern Europe whose populatin doubles in 64 years.

"How on earth can one prove what will definitively happen in the future?"

Precisely. The previous post had said that the onus was on those opposed to "prove" it would be a disaster. This obviously cannot be done but it seems to me a fairly good bet - but a bet with no desireable stake for us.

Re: Balance of evidence
'Except that Turkey is 72 million Moslems starting from a poorer base than eastern Europe whose populatin doubles in 64 years.'

Besides having a larger economy than the East European countries, Turkey's GDP per capita is higher than a 2007 member, Bulgaria.

History tells us that the tendency is for birth rates to fall as a country develops economically and socially. To leave Turkey out in the cold will not contribute to a decline in birth rates. I suspect that if its population fell by 10% a year it would still be too many Muslims for your liking.

'Precisely. The previous post had said that the onus was on those opposed to "prove" it would be a disaster. This obviously cannot be done but it seems to me a fairly good bet - but a bet with no desireable stake for us.'

Which is why I pointed to the lessons of economically backward countries like Spain, Portugal, Greece and Ireland having benefited from their membership of the EU. Those countries are virtually unrecognisable compared to their emergence from dictatorship or clerical dominance. We can only make assumptions from the reliable and accurate information we have to hand, not to assume that worst-case scenarios will become reality.
And 'a fairly good bet' based on what evidence?

Birth rate and economical development
"History tells us that the tendency is for birth rates to fall as a country develops economically and socially."

Interestingly, that does not seem to be the case in Islamic countries. Daniel Pipes has pointed out that even in the small, rich Islamic countries, the birth rate remains high.

Probably has to do with Islamic resistance to anything that would diminish the size and force of the Umma, as well as the situation for women there.

TCS Daily Archives