Posted on 05/05/2006 10:41:50 AM PDT by lizol
The coalition between the conservative party and the two small populist parties in Poland is politics. Prior to the election, the conservative party was happy to be allied with the liberal party. The economic and social parties of this alliance would have been very similar to the U.S. Republican Party and to center-right ruling coalitions elsewhere in the world. But, when these two parties emerged as the largest in Poland, and the socialist parties receded to minority status, the conservatives turned on the liberals, and described them as heartless. This gained them enough votes to be in position to rule with help from small, almost fringe parties. But, the coalition between the conservatives and populists may turn off some of the members of the conservative party who may shift to the liberals.
What issues? Forming coalition? “Good reasons” sounds “if we (Brussels) like”
All of those countries lack the basic premises (democracy, wealth, development and stability) to be a EU-member in the moment. Sorry - no way.
As I wrote above (#39), NOT tomorrow.
I.e. Many technical things, some basic economical things, some things concering foreign policy etc. etc. etc. A alliance like the EU only can work if the member nations renounce some of their sovereign rights.
As I wrote above (#39), NOT tomorrow.
In the long them I agree with you, in short terms it is simply not possible.
But you still don’t want to say wherever EU should interfere because of the new Polish coalition or not. So?
The EU should keep itself out of Polish interior affairs as long as the country does not topple into a unhealty extremist or undemocratic direction. This is absolutely not given in the moment.
Besides of that I thought that the "Austria" affair was not helpful either although Haider is a complete a**hole and it is not understandable to pull him and his party into the gouvernment. Democracy in Austria was never in danger. Therefore the harsh reaction of the other EU-members was exaggerated.
I’m just curious which “Central Committee” will be responsible for monitoring of what is extremist and undemocratic? In these hard times that we live in some people and organizations claim that lack of Homo-marriages or abortion is already lack of basic human rights and profanation of democracy. It is Christian fundamentalism (very dangerous form of extremism)…
Uh well. I.e. you Poles lined up with the US to free a extremist and undemocratic country - Iraq. You even broke international law to do that (I understand the reasons for it quite well - we do not have to discuss this). If the European nations would have joined Poland against Hitler in 1934 - 35 the history would have turned out better. Nobody can define the necessity when there is the right moment to react from the outside. Sometimes it is nessecary. Anyway this has nothing to do with the current political situation in your country since there is for sure no need for such drastic action. In fact there is no need for any foreign action at all. It is your own problem and -as a friend of Poland- I have to say that it would be intelligent if you would do something about it.
Although I am in opposition to the "Austria" case it worked quite well. The isolation was one of the reasons why Haider doesn't play a role in contemporary Austrian politics anymore. The Austrians understood that it is not helpful for them to elect a sugar coated nazi.
There are some points that would split up our ways if your gouvernment will push its whole agenda through.
"On the other hand i.e. capital punishment is something that is simply not accepted in western Europe anymore."
It's time to change that.
That might be true in some special cases, but it is unlikely that it will happen in the next decades. Western Europe has completely different values in certain issues than i.e. the US or even your country. Maybe the cultural imprint plays a much bigger role than we all are thinking.
Besides - personally I share for sure a much more conservative view on punishment than most of my compatriots although I think that capital punishment should be restricted to really horrible crimes. For most murderers it is suitable enough to work for the rest of their lives in a quarry.
I remember that you reacted quite angry on the suggestion of some other Freepers that your soldiers should go into some certain countries throughout this world (I will not mention any names here ;-)) just to play the world-police. You asked corresponding the logical question: When this is none of our business why should we waste our blood, sweat, tears and... ...money here?
This is the problem of a too exaggerated NATO. Personally I do not see any sense to defend countries or people without any practical benefit as long as they have no real connection to me or my country. I.e. why should conflicts in Africa be of any relevance to Germany or Poland as long as we have no vital interests there? It is understandable to help its neighbours in the case of a conflict but... ...defending a strange, foreign country 7000 miles away?
Therefore I think that NATO is dying if it is overblown. Ah - we did not talk about ethnical coherence: Would you prefer fighting for Pakistan or Australia??!
"Would you prefer fighting for Pakistan or Australia??!"
Well, on the other hand I would rather fight for let's say Turkey than some of European countries.
I agree with the rest of your comments but you need to clarify this statement, which ones? ;-)
"which ones?"
That's a secret.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.