EU awarded Nobel Peace Prize for Peace - How?

Maybe it's me having to live under the unelected, near dictatorship that is the EU, but just HOW do they deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? The EU has nothing to do with peace in Europe; that was all down to NATO. The EU is near collapse and the way they're treating Greece is despicable and likely to push them towards either the extreme left or right similar to how the League of Nations treated Germany after WWI.

I do wonder who is now in charge of the Nobel Peace Prize. First it was awarding the prize to Obama BEFORE he had time to prove himself as a President one way or another and now this nonsense about the EU.

Or is it me?

BBC News - Nobel Peace Prize awarded to European Union

BBC News - UKIP's Nigel Farage on EU wining Nobel Prize

 

But that's nothing to do with the EU but NATO. In the links I gave there were comments about how NATO got involved when Yugoslavia collapsed leaving the EU to wring their hands and do nothing. The fact that war in Europe hasn't occurred is nothing to do with the EU. It's more to do with the fact that we're all s**t scared to, or how Countries have matured or that we all now have too much to lose, in the same way that Japan hasn't had a war since, or why the two Koreas haven't wiped each other of the face of the Earth.

It's a complicated answer I'm sure and one worthy of a university dissertation, but nothing to do with rules from the EU stating how straight bananas or carrots can be. It could also be worth noting that the Nobel Peace Prize comes from Norway; a country that makes damn sure it's not a member of the EU.

Also don't understand the text in the small font. It's nothing to do with one country invading another, nor is it xenophobic to question the EU. I like the French and despite disagreeing with their politics, would never want to go to war with them. But seeing pictures of homeless Greek families and a country with over 50% unemployment caused because of the EU makes me angry that this same establishment gets a Peace Prize.

 

Humour (or lack thereof) noted

You're right though. There's a lot of shite attached to both sides of the EU argument, as there is in politics everywhere. I believe they are trying to introduce an EU military but fear it wouldn't be able to organise a piss up in a brewery as trying to get 27 nations to agree would be impossible.

There are many pro's to what the EU has achieved but they appear to be outweighed by the many cons. It was sold to the UK as a Common Market or free trade zone, but has become much much more than that. A recent grumble over here is that the EU want the UK to issue social security payments to anyone who comes here from Europe. A great idea but all that's happening is that as our payments are higher than those in Latvia or Poland, folk from there are coming here for the payments and then going home. They don't even have to actually be in the Country, just have an address here. It's like me arranging with a mate in Sydney to say I live there and then claim your welfare and have it sent to my bank account in the UK. Complete fantasyland, socialist madness, especially as we're a skint Country at the moment.

Daily Mail says 100,000 Eastern European migrants free to claim full benefits in UK worth tens of millions of pounds following EU ruling | Immigration Matters

I can't vote this nonsense idea out. I do get the chance to vote in European elections, but my vote will count for diddly squat against the millions of voters in many ex soviet countries who think it's a great idea. Not being able to change such a scenario is not conducive to peace! I would love to live in Oz, but you are fussy about who you let in and you won't have me as I don't have the skills you require. Fair enough, but in the EU some uneducated loser from down town Bulgaria who can't speak English can come and live down the road from me and claim my tax payments in in the form of social security and there's nothing I can do about it. Again, not conducive to peace. If one million Poms turned up in Australia in one 12 month period there'd be hell on, yet one million Eastern Europeans did that here and to discuss this matter is classed as xenophobia or racist. To not discuss such matters openly leads to conflict.

I hope you can see my amazement about this Peace Prize now.

 

The similarities to the early US are often quoted but you wanted to become one and had many common similarities and goals. I also appreciate that you had a civil war because of differences of opinion. The EU is different. People want to live in peace together in the same way you're happy to live in peace with your neighbours; Canada and Mexico and you also have a free trade arrangement with them. But if it were then suggested that they were both run from Washington there'd be hell on in exactly the same. Well that's how it is in Europe now. Canadians are happy to work with you but if it were suggested Washington was to set additional taxes on them there'd be a right royal stink.

How? Why? There's confusion between the EU and the Euro currency zone countries. I agree that members of the €uro need to move closer but you need the peoples support and many do have actual concerns about it all being headed by Germany. The modern Germans have nothing to do with the extreme politics at the first half of the last century, but obviously there is concern that they are calling all the shots (the many protesters in Greece dressing in Nazi uniforms when the German Chancellor visited shows the strength of feeling). Is it a cheap shot to say that what they didn't achieve in war, they're now achieving through trade? Possibly, but it's still a significant fear with many - and not just the UK.

Much that I like and respect the French or the Bulgarians, we are all very different peoples with completely differing laws and customs. Americans have much in common with each other; a language for a start. Look at the fun and games in Canada with Quebec and now imagine that x 27 countries. There are many benefits to a free trade agreement, but a common government is not wanted by many in Europe and to force it on people will end in tears. You only have to see the problems that caused between England and Ireland over the centuries.

 

Hear hear

It sounds like you understand the problem much better than most your side of the pond and put it in a way more eloquent than I.

 

"Unlike many member countries, Britain always paid more into the Union in contributions than it received in subsidies."

Who would want to be a member of a club where you pay more in than most and yet get less out? There are many analogies one could use here, but I think you get the picture. Our £billions are paying for roads and rail projects in Eastern Europe or Spain, whilst our own fall apart due to lack of funds. In the good times one could overlook this, but now when we're struggling, losing medical services and facing increased taxation, those £billions spent subsidising others to blow it, yet not collect their own taxation is now a sore subject.

There gets to a point where enough is enough. Those £billions could be put to use here, helping the taxpayers who provided the money. We are often reminded that Britain is no longer the world power it was 60 years ago. Fine, so why should we subsidise mismanaged, 1st World Countries?

Chart: How much does Britain pay into the EU and what does it get back? | This is Money

"In total since 1979, Britain has paid in about €260 billion (£228 billion). It has received back in benefits just €163 billion (£143 billion). The difference of €97 billion (£85 billion at today’s exchange rate) has been Britain’s subsidy to the European project."