EU Unveils 'Shocking' Border Force Plan

[Seamus_L]

The EU has unveiled plans for a new border force with a “right to intervene” without a country’s consent.
The 1,500-strong unit would step in when countries failed to control their borders, when they were overwhelmed or when they were simply “unwilling” to act.
Its possible creation comes as one million mainly Syrian refugees and migrants are expected to arrive in the EU this year.news.sky.com/story/1606511/eu-unveils-shocking-border-force-plan
Once again the EU demonstrates it's true totalitarian objectives.

 

[Seamus_L]

And here it is right from the EU themselves.
The right to intervene: Member States can request joint operations and rapid border interventions, and deployment of the European Border and Coast Guard Teams to support these.Where deficiencies persist or where a Member State is under significant migratory pressure putting in peril the Schengen areaand national action is not forthcoming or not enough, the Commission will be able to adopt an implementing decision determining that the situation at a particular section of the external borders requires urgent action at European level.This will allow the Agency to step in and deploy European Border and Coast Guard Teams to ensure that action is taken on the ground even when a Member State is unable or unwilling to take the necessary measures.[europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-6327_en.htm](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-6327_en.htm)

 

[Peter_Plato]

The EU has unveiled plans for a new border force with a “right to intervene” without a country’s consent.
The 1,500-strong unit would step in when countries failed to control their borders, when they were overwhelmed or when they were simply “unwilling” to act.
Its possible creation comes as one million mainly Syrian refugees and migrants are expected to arrive in the EU this year.news.sky.com/story/1606511/eu-unveils-shocking-border-force-plan

                                        Once again the EU demonstrates it's true totalitarian objectives.

Why is it considered “totalitarian” to protect the national sovereignty and integrity of one’s own nation?

 

[Elizium23]

Will the border troops be authorized to storm in and commit abortions when member states are unwilling to comply with EU directives? Not that many of them will be.

 

[Padres1969]

Why is it considered “totalitarian” to protect the national sovereignty and integrity of one’s own nation?

Because the EU isn’t a nation and this plan seems to override its member state’s national sovereignty in the name of their multinational alliance.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Because the EU isn’t a nation and this plan seems to override its member state’s national sovereignty in the name of their multinational alliance.

Actually, you are correct. I didn’t read very carefully.

:blushing:

 

[PJH_74]

Once again the EU demonstrates it’s true totalitarian objectives.

Do you understand that members of the Schengen agreement have open boarders between themselves? if one county with an external boarder does not properly maintain it, all member counties boarders are compromised. So it is in the sovereign interest of the member states to maintain their boarders; this is not totalitarianism.

What is does represent is the issue with the EU, either it needs to weaken itself or become a Federal state like the US. We tried this, but it failed, hence the US Constitution.

 

[Path_Finder]

Once again the EU demonstrates it’s true totalitarian objectives.

Really? Let’s change EU to Estados Unidos, when the 13 colonies originally united, it was for totalitarian purposes? Or was a principle reason for uniting to defend oneself? Does this not sound like a reason to defend oneself?

Thanks for the history lesson; the US was formed into a perfect union for totalitarian purposes. Now we’ve got it.

Counties form States, they are united under a state for totalitarian purposes.

And a war that was destructive like no other, World War II? And the Iron Curtain/Cold War. I think some European unity was needed.

But now, we know the reason behind it is totalitarian!

 

[Path_Finder]

Will the border troops be authorized to storm in and commit abortions when member states are unwilling to comply with EU directives? Not that many of them will be.

Let’s see, France, no abortions after 12 weeks, USA, this is not clearly defined but often it is up to the late term.

Germany:

Abortion in Germany is permitted in the first trimester upon condition of mandatory counseling, and later in pregnancy in cases of medical necessity. In both cases a waiting period of 3 days is required. The counseling, called Schwangerschaftskonfliktberatung (“unwanted-pregnancy counseling”), must take place at a state-approved centre, which afterwards gives the applicant a Beratungsschein (“certificate of counseling”).

As of 2010, the abortion rate was 6.1 abortions per 1000 women aged 15–44 years

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Germany

So, where are the laws ultimately, more respectful of life?

 

[Path_Finder]

The 1,500-strong unit would step in when countries failed to control their borders, when they were overwhelmed or when they were simply “unwilling” to act.

news.sky.com/story/1606511/eu-unveils-shocking-border-force-plan

This totally sounds reasonable to me, “fail to control borders”, send them in, “overwhelmed”, send them in, “unwilling to act”, send them in. Amazing how things are interpreted, so Poland bolts a little.

Sounds a little like the US Border Patrol, must be a symptom of totalitarianism.

 

[Path_Finder]

Because the EU isn’t a nation and this plan seems to override its member state’s national sovereignty in the name of their multinational alliance.

We have a multi-state alliance, the Border Patrol is here and not necessarily with my permission.

Let alone, let alone, France had to pursue those terrorists across borders, Belgium, Germany, I don’t know how much this could play into things but it has been said terrorists and criminals use the open borders to their advantage.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Still think Nigel Farage was wrong on the EU?

 

[Padres1969]

We have a multi-state alliance, the Border Patrol is here and not necessarily with my permission.

Let alone, let alone, France had to pursue those terrorists across borders, Belgium, Germany, I don’t know how much this could play into things but it has been said terrorists and criminals use the open borders to their advantage.

Yes but our states are not sovereign nations. Each are subordinate to the Federal government in areas constitution delegates power to the Fed via our Federal System system. Some of those things being national defense and foreign relations, which is why you don’t get a say on where the border patrol goes. All 50 are members of one sovereign nation, the United States. The same is not true in the EU. The EU’s members are all fully sovereign and independent nations who are members of a multinational alliance. As someone said previously, the EU as set up today is somewhat similar to the US in the very early years under the Articles of Confederation, a system our founders quickly found didn’t work that well.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Do you understand that members of the Schengen agreement have open boarders between themselves? if one county with an external boarder does not properly maintain it, all member counties boarders are compromised. So it is in the sovereign interest of the member states to maintain their boarders; this is not totalitarianism.

What is does represent is the issue with the EU, either it needs to weaken itself or become a Federal state like the US. We tried this, but it failed, hence the US Constitution.

This is the crucial point. Since the borders between the member countries are virtually open, one country could become the open fissure to all the other countries.

So the measure isn’t totalitarian because each nation agreed to the open borders as part of their entry into the EU. That would be the source of problem, then.

 

[Path_Finder]

Paris suspect may have slipped past Belgian police: media

The government has angrily denied accusations in France and elsewhere that Belgium is a “weak link” in Europe’s defenses

that has failed to take action to contain hundreds of Syria-linked Islamist radicals. But ministers have pledged much more money and new powers for the security services.

news.yahoo.com/paris-suspect-may-slipped-past-belgian-police-media-212542102.html

Ahem.

 

[PJH_74]

So the measure isn’t totalitarian because each nation agreed to the open borders as part of their entry into the EU. That would be the source of problem, then.

I absolutely love Europe. However the way the EU is structured between the Euro and the EU government being like a UN style organization, something has to give. Either the counties need to be further or less integrated.

 

[Trader]

Really? Let’s change EU to Estados Unidos, when the 13 colonies originally united, it was for totalitarian purposes? Or was a principle reason for uniting to defend oneself? Does this not sound like a reason to defend oneself?

Thanks for the history lesson; the US was formed into a perfect union for totalitarian purposes. Now we’ve got it.

Counties form States, they are united under a state for totalitarian purposes.

And a war that was destructive like no other, World War II? And the Iron Curtain/Cold War. I think some European unity was needed.

But now, we know the reason behind it is totalitarian!

The big difference between the United States of America and the possible United States of Europe is that one had a common culture and the other does not. When peoples speak different languages, with different established religions, and different values, everyone is going to have to give up some of those differences to get along. The USA has a history of assimilation where immigrants want to change and blend into a common culture, at least until multiculturalism became trendy, but European countries lack that history. They tend to have immigrants form separate sub-cultures rather than evolve a common culture.

 

[Padres1969]

This is the crucial point. Since the borders between the member countries are virtually open, one country could become the open fissure to all the other countries.

So the measure isn’t totalitarian because each nation agreed to the open borders as part of their entry into the EU. That would be the source of problem, then.

And there in lies their problem. To join the EU they surrendered one aspect of what it typically part of national sovereignty. It would be akin to if the US joining NAFTA removed border controls between the US, Mexico and Canada. I mean the US and Canada are about as friendly and intertwined as two nations can get but you still have to stop and show you passport at the border as it should be.

 

[Padres1969]

I absolutely love Europe. However the way the EU is structured between the Euro and the EU government being like a UN style organization, something has to give. Either the counties need to be further or less integrated.

Probably a little less integrated. I think the UK had it right when they held off on integrating any more than they did. They’re still productive partial members of the EU, but they don’t seem to run into as many issues as a result.

 

[Path_Finder]

Yes but our states are not sovereign nations. Each are subordinate to the Federal government in areas constitution delegates power to the Fed via our Federal System system. Some of those things being national defense and foreign relations, which is why you don’t get a say on where the border patrol goes. All 50 are members of one sovereign nation, the United States. The same is not true in the EU. The EU’s members are all fully sovereign and independent nations who are members of a multinational alliance. As someone said previously, the EU as set up today is somewhat similar to the US in the very early years under the Articles of Confederation, a system our founders quickly found didn’t work that well.

But apparently, the EU already has laws that can be invoked for the self-defense of the Union or an individual member. We found this out about France.

Also, I don’t know if it is an apt analogy to compare the EU to the States during the Articles of Confederation. Did we not still have a National Standing Army?

Article III:
Article III.

The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

usconstitution.net/articles.html#Article3

Sovereignty as in the States did not mean lack of cooperation.

Article IV:

If any person guilty of, or charged with, treason, felony, or other high misdemeanor in any State, shall flee from justice, and be found in any of the united States, he shall, upon demand of the Governor or executive power of the State from which he fled, be delivered up and removed to the State having jurisdiction of his offense.

And here, we find a difference with the EU:

**Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determination of the united States in congress assembled, **on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a congress of the united States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.

Thank goodness, the EU members do not have to obey by every law from a centralized government.