Subject:
|
Re: A question of remembrance...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 1 May 2001 10:34:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
718 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Selçuk Göre writes:
>
>
> Scott A wrote:
> >
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Selçuk Göre writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Selçuk Göre writes:
> > > > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > > > > You appear to view human rights a luxury which is great if it can be
> > > > > > afforded economically. I view them as being rather more fundamental than
> > > > > > that. As I said before, Turkey will not get in the EU until it gets itself
> > > > > > in order.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Scott A
> > > > >
> > > > > You are completely clueless again. I neither said nor mean anything like
> > > > > that. All I tried to explain is was you are not defending human rights, you
> > > > > are just musterbating. Continue, though. It is quite relieving I believe.
> > > >
> > > > I believe I understand the differnce between defending human rights & and
> > > > masterbation.
> > >
> > >
> > > I still didn't get this impression, though.
> >
> > Then perhaps it is you who does not understand the difference
> >
> > >
> > > > > And for the EU issue read again (you really seem to be not understanding
> > > > > anything at the first time):
> > > > >
> > > > > "And believe me, if your dearest country and its allies see it as a
> > > > > profitable thing, whether there is a Kurdish/Cyprus/Agean Sea/whatever
> > > > > you call problem exist or not, we will be part of your very dear union,
> > > > > and believe me, you won't have any ways to "vote" about it. Not that I
> > > > > believe putting us inside EU is profitable from any of the participant
> > > > > countries right now."
> > > >
> > > > You are quite wrong.
> > >
> > >
> > > So, seeing that you tend to prefer simple two-three word answers instead of
> > > making a point, could you able to explain two simple questions as How and Why?
> >
> >
> > Turkey would have to bring its legislation in line with the EU. I read a
> > poll yesterday in the Guardian which said Turkey was the nation which was
> > least likely to join. Further only around 15% of the EU puplic wnat it to join.
> >
> > The on-line version may be read here:
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4177720,00.html
> >
> > > Especially, when and if EU politicians decide to put us inside (I don't think
> > > they would do, but not for not respecting human rights and such, which are just
> > > minor nitpicks without any real value in international politics) how can you
> > > make it otherwise? Do you go to the streets marching and shouting with big
> > > signs on hand? And someone care? Or someone care more than making your police
> > > beating you with a bat on your head?
> >
> > Read the text from the Guardian : Turkey is not wanted.
>
> Don't need to read it I already know it.
>
> So, could you please reread my post and several other previous ones? I
> ALREADY said that Turkey is not wanted. I already said that I BELIEVE
> PUTTING TURKEY IN IS NOT GOOD FOR ANY EUROPEAN COUNTRY RIGHT NOW. I also
> said that this is not because our legislation or some other thing like
> respecting human rights or not (which is a major nitpick for you and me
> and other individuals, but very very minor in international politics),
> and not because only 15% of the population want it. All because it is
> not profitable.
That is your opinion.
>
> So, I reword my question for your convenience. Assume making us a member
> is profitable in anyway for your country and other EU members. And
> assume we still have a stupid legislation. Do you believe they don't
> make us a member just because of this?
Yes.
> And assume otherwise is true
> (i.e. they make us a member) Do you believe *you* (i.e. common Joe,
> Hans, Jacques, etc.) have the power to stop it or turn it back?
If Turkey's legislation is not in line with the EU, Joe could take Turkey to
court. Read the papers, it happens to EU members when they do not implement
legislation.
> And what
> is this power than? Do you have any evidences of this in recent past
> (i.e. respecting human rights and general tendency of average citizen is
> a big affect on international politics)?
Banning the use use by UK forces and manufacture by UK companies of
anti-personnel landmines. The UK made big ££ from these little things, but
yet the UK went against the flow and has been one of the leaders in the
international debate against them.
> And as a further study, could
> you please conclude about last several years of conflicts and positions
> of dear civilized EU countries' and other western civilizations'
> positions on international politics arena during the conflicts?
To what point? Does the bombing of bosnia make the rape of women in Turkish
jails OK? Is that your point? Do two wrongs make a right?
>
> > > Don't even try to explain how kind and gentle your police are. I already read
> > > your country's page from AI site.
> >
> > Ah, but the police in my country go to jail when it can be shown, in court,
> > they have broken the law.
>
> Just like the way it is here. With a minor(!) difference. Showing it, in
> a court, requires some ball.
>
> So what? Is it your or other average Joe's success? You are just lucky,
> nothing more. And the way of life you have now, is based up on suffering
> of the others. Either in the past, or not.
So what is your point? You talk like the UK was acting the brute in the
world of today. The fact is that most nations in the past wanted an empire.
Britain got one. We may well have explioted it, but I doubt we were any
worse than any other at the time. Show me what other European empires have
left in their wake - pretty much the same errors as the UK. But if you take
a closer look at what we left behind, you will see that we left a basis for
nationhood in many instances : Oz, NZ, India, Canada etc. I am not asking
for the UK to be thanked in any way or justifying the past of the UK, but do
you think any other empire at the time would have done any better?
Scott A
>
> Selçuk
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Don't need to read it I already know it. So, could you please reread my post and several other previous ones? I ALREADY said that Turkey is not wanted. I already said that I BELIEVE PUTTING TURKEY IN IS NOT GOOD FOR ANY EUROPEAN COUNTRY RIGHT (...) (23 years ago, 3-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
197 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
