Earlier quoted context omitted.
IIRC this was done by threatening to leave NATO, which put pressure on the USA who really didn't want to lose a perfect base location to help monitor/contain the USSR, who in turn put pressure on the UK. But this is from memory; and given the sources I read may have been politicised (I'm British by birth), take with a pinch of salt.
Nah, that wasn't it. It was done by Iceland having shorter supply lines and both sides not willing to start killing each other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars
Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
431–440 of 497 posts
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s unlikely NATO members will fight the US with bullets and bombs, but I guarantee they can still seriously hurt them. I am not even sure the US would be able to completely dominate a conflict. While it obviously has the largest military, it's set up to depend on European military defensive and complementary roles in a large scale conflict. In particular US aggression supply and comms critically depend on Europe…
> I am not even sure the US would be able to completely dominate a conflict While everything you said may be correct (I’m not an expert), I doubt NATO countries want to get in an energetic war with the US. It’s simply so costly in lives and resources and effort. Hypothetically if the US “takes” Greenland I fully expect all the NATO countries to declare war on them (as article 5 requires), but not attack with military…
Not sure Europe could afford to abstain from a military response after being actually attacked. It would look extremely weak, disrespectful to their attacked/fallen troops and puts their military deterrent in question globally. You can wreak the economy only once cutting ties with the US and it got more impact domestically with a costly war starting. To deescalate, US society's pain expectations must max out immediately, before the people, media and economy can adapt to a new normal/narrative. Look at Ukraine, a slow, reluctant response makes everything worse. If Europe/US had maxed out their support immediately, Russia would have like pulled out. Years of extreme pain must be the message, another costly war dragging on forever, something Americans understand and feel tired of.
And I presume Canada would also not be too pleased, potentially having to up the stakes for a war in their neighborhood. A war which may just as well have fallen onto their own soil. It would be wise for them to stand with Europe, if they want to keep their own independence.
The US military leadership actually having to plan an all-out war with Europe, possibly Canada, may prompt some introspection and a chance for internal conflict. Rumor has it, behind the scenes, the US NATO generals already apologized to their European counterparts for Trump's remarks on Greenland. There is probably a non-zero chance, any attack order would cause a coup rather than a war with Europe. Domestic revolt will only happen, if such conflict is credibly the stupidest thing imaginable on every axis and when relevant actors are actually confronted with that reality.
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
Has this been tried? It's been tried with housing (that's the current housing system).
No idea. But it is quite similar to how public transport works for archipelago ferries in Scandinavia. 15 year contracts when large investments are required. Otherwise 5-10 years. And you get a ”quota” for a guaranteed traffic to run for that period based on the requirements in the contract. Just took the same idea and applied to fishing, to prevent the ”legacies” from monopolizing it while giving the public the inco…
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because the PM's party brokered that half-way deal with EU against the will of the people, after they had voted no to EU for the second time[1]. Not saying some of our export companies aren't enjoying the access to EU, but the people was against it. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Norwegian_European_Union_...
Since 1994 the will of the people had a lot of time to express itself...
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#435These debates are hard to watch. 'Loss of sovereignty' for some reason is perfectly fine for Iceland, Switzerland and Norway, but not UK or others wanting to leave. 'Fisheries' was a small but founding and perennial concern before and during Brexit but they were labelled 'ugly nationalists'. The EU has benefits obviously but it's been failing Europe in critical ways for about 20 yeas now, and the crazy paradox is tha…
I think a big difference is that Iceland, like Norway, has agreements in place that give it most of the real benefits of EU membership. The UK had to go the other route, lose all the benefits and hope they can get the good parts back.
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope that Trump doesn't represent US policies in the long term.
Trumps short term actions will have long term consequences on the alliance. Specifically on how the alliance views reliance on the US. Trump has shown how unreliable an ally the US can be. Putting that cat bag in the bag doesn’t reverse the realisation that there’s a cat in that bag. This will likely strengthen NATO in the long term. But only if it doesn’t get tested by Russia in the short term.
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
No idea. But it is quite similar to how public transport works for archipelago ferries in Scandinavia. 15 year contracts when large investments are required. Otherwise 5-10 years. And you get a ”quota” for a guaranteed traffic to run for that period based on the requirements in the contract. Just took the same idea and applied to fishing, to prevent the ”legacies” from monopolizing it while giving the public the inco…
A government contract isn't the same as a rights system. Presumably anyone else is also allowed to set up a ferry?
What’s the difference between a ferry and a fishing boat?
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since 1994 the will of the people had a lot of time to express itself...
Polls have consistently been favoring No to EU side since.
what polls have to do with it? if the will of the people was against the eu deal, they should've voted against, they had 30 years to do it. norway is a democracy, right?
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
A government contract isn't the same as a rights system. Presumably anyone else is also allowed to set up a ferry?
And anyone would be allowed to bid on the fishing quotas? What’s the difference between a ferry and a fishing boat?
Re: Iceland votes on whether to restart talks on joining EU
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I feel the UK were wrong to leave [..] Whether it was the correct decision or not, it was done via a democratic vote. Now the leaders of the UK look to entangle the UK into the EU structure that is evidently against their mandate.
The current UK government was also elected by democratic vote, so they have a mandate that postdates the referendum. You can argue their mandate is invalid due to the first-past-the-post system, but in that case the original decision to hold a referendum, and all subsequent governments that negotiated the terms of the EU exit are also invalid, since they all derived from first-past-the-post elections.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendums_in_the_United_King...