| Bursche said: What I just dont see plausible is that the European nations will give up most of their sovereignty for the EU. Theyve fought for thousands of years to secure just that and in a matter of a decade, they will unite under one banner? I dont think they will give it up that easily. I know I wouldnt. Maybe its just me but if there was a United States of North America, and a Canadian was elected, I would be wish washy because he wouldnt have the US' best interests in mind, only the North American. It would be this even more so in Europe as there are so many nations with so many cultures and histories. I do not know the personal biases of Europe or even if there are any that warrant observing, but I dont see a United Europe (a truly united) in the recent future. I see a confederacy at most, with a figure-head of a President that has very limited power, but in the end, besides the economic aspect of it, I dont see it being all that important. But if the EU was branching into the direction of a completely united nation, I dont know if it would work or not.
As for the internal conflict, whose to say that it will makeit more stabler? What if Slovakia has a dispute with Hungary and a small war happens? Of course the EU would try to stabilize it but I just can imagine a large civil split in a country that is not united by a single interest besides the Euro. |
Other groups have surived that fine. For example when the United States was fairly young Ohio and Michigan fought a war over Toledo. (Over who gets to keep it surpringly, not who has to take it.)
