Practically Classics Forum

I agree with Martin Evans on this. I think that the 20th Century was, basically, an ongoing conflict for much of length, 1914-18, followed by a 21 year ceasefire, then 1939-45, then a 45 year stand off. The threat of mutual destruction by nuclear weapons kept the peace. Since then end of the Soviet Union, I think the world has become more unstable and the emphasis has shifted to the Middle East and the Islamic states, who are more unpredictable than the Eastern Bloc was.

As for a vote on the EU. Personally, I dont think we will get one, the political and business elite, who rule us, and for whose benefit, the country is run want it, so the electorate cant be trusted with the decision. I did'nt have a problem with the EEC, a group of countries trading with each other, but a federal superstate I am not keen on. Part of the problem with the EU is that opposition to it is fragmented, it tends to be the right of the Tory party, on nationalistic, xenophobic, Daily Mail foaming at the mouth, little englandism, and the left of the Labour party, who see it as a rich man's capitalist club, undemocratic and unelected. The middle ground is in favour of it.

Ultimately I think it may well collapse, it has moved out from its core area and incorporated Southern European countries who cant seem to manage their economies and backward East European countries which swallow huge subsidis, sooner or later, I feel one of the big core countries will pull out, this will set off a domino effect and others will folllow, causing it to collapse, as happened with the Eastern bloc when Poland went its own way, and the British Empire, when India got independence.

We will see.

v

Note though that the Yugoslavian wars came soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union. They may not have been a member of the Warsaw Pact but I am sure the Soviet Union kept a lid on things.

Oh no, Yugoslavia was Tito's creation and no-one else's, he was an extraordinarily astute politician who outmanouvered Stalin on numerous occasions. Big Joe was never going to get his hands on Yugoslavia and it was purely Tito's iron grip that held all those disparate Balkan folks together-nothing to do with the Soviet bloc, and it was clear it was going to explode the moment Tito went.

Tito died before the Soviet Union; I am sure the break up would have come sooner, if the Berlin Wall had fallen sooner. Tito and Stalin may not have always seen eye to eye but they were essentially variations on the same theme. Stalin would not have stood for a Western style government east of Churchill's iron curtain, which ran west of Yugoslavia.

suffolkpete wrote:I'm old enough to have voted in the 1975 referendum and I voted in favour. At the time it was sold to us as a trading partnership and nobody foresaw the extent to which it would grow and meddle in the affairs of sovereign states. The Euro crisis will lead to still greater integration which I don't think the British public would find acceptable. If we don't leave altogether, we should retreat to the fringes and go back to the original concept of a trading organisation.

And me! Really that's how it should have stayed, just as a trading partnership... I'd agree that greater integration is not what the majority of British people want... I'd agree with your last comment too...

As to whether we'll actually get a vote, who knows! But probably not... If we do, though, just how will we be expected to sort out the truth from the lies/statistics coming from the two sides - just reading this thread proves that even history can be read several ways!

mr rusty wrote: ........none other than observation, but I suspect without political and economic union European conflict would have been more likely rather than less

I suspect that it's simply a matter of a change of attitudes following the horrors of the world wars - the scale of casualties, mass bombing of civilians, nuclear weapons etc. The more powerful countries are thankfully infinitely more wary of taking on any neighbour who has a significant military capability than 100 years ago. Wars like Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afganistan, Falklands etc. were far away against ostensibly inferior and less capable opponents (In the event often the enemy wasn't quite as inferior as first thought!)

I would say that the EU is a result of this change of attitude, not a cause of it.

ask a Texan!That's where secessionist movements are most vocal and a Texan is usually a Texan first and an American second, but there's quite a large movement in the North Western states and you'd be surprised how many people do not actually consider themselves to be 'American'.

I am sure that you can find loony secessionist movements anywhere - try Cornwall for example! The point is that if we're all European then you should find it easy to find people who describe their nationality as "European" and agree that we should be bailing out the Greek economy! If it is true that England subsidises the Scottish economy then I have no problem with that because I am British. I do not see why I should bail out Greece as I am not European.

Don't mind admitting that I voted against membership of the 'Common Market' back in 1975 and would do so again given the opportunity.

I also voted against the Welsh Assembly. IMHO most of these things are an excuse for 'connected' but generally non productive members of society to get a very comfortable gravy train rolling at the expense of the rest of us.

One government is enough for me thanks, perfectly happy for it to be in Westminster.

Here here I was too young to vote in the 1970s but the Common Market was not the EU. However I voted "No" in 1999 and 2011 and would gladly push the Senedd and Plaid Cymru into Cardiff Docks....I mean Bay