Ron Paul Says A New European Superstate Is Hardly The Answer

If the UK actually succeeds in exiting the EU, what will be the fate of the remaining members? According to a report yesterday, the French and Germans are looking to create what would essentially be a single European “superstate” that would put an end to national sovereignty. Will this idea fly with the 27 remaining members? We take a look at the post-Brexit landscape in today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

18 thoughts on “Ron Paul Says A New European Superstate Is Hardly The Answer”

  1. The big joke is that the original reasons cited for forming the EU was to prevent Germany from dominating Europe and creating a totalitarian super state.

    1. Germany has control of about what Adolph did And Putin isn’t happy about it .If we had listened to Russia Yugoslavia would have never been destroyed . As I see it NATO is equal to NAZI and radical Islam are the Brown shirts .

    1. What would Thomas say ? was Adolph a German or a Austrian If I should study history .

  2. Who ever allowed Germany to reunite made a big mistake . They had only been united a few months and they attack Yugoslavia again . Every 20 or thirty Years Germany attacks Yugoslavia . This has always made Russia mad before and I bet it did this time too . Now Germany is ruling about as much of Europe as Hitler did and wondering why they can’t have Russia too . Putin warned Germany what was likely to happen to them in 2006 after they recognized the new country of Kosovo .

    1. “Every 20 or thirty Years Germany attacks Yugoslavia”

      That’s kind of an odd statement. Germany has attacked Yugoslavia twice (Yugoslavia didn’t exist until after World War I).

      1. Austria Germany what the difference This attack started the first w war against Serbia Yugoslavia what’s the difference Germany has always wanted to control the Balkans The Serbs controlled the Balkans So Hitler made the second attack about 25 yrs after the 1st attack Germany had only been United about one yr before they started training the KLA terrorists to be freedom fighters in Kosovo . As communism fell apart The United States and the EU countries voted on what to do with Yugoslavia . Everyone seemed to agree Yugoslavia should survive because this is what the largest ethnic group in Yugoslavia wanted . votes were taken on what to do with Yugoslavia . Germany was the only country voting against keeping Yugoslavia whole . And Germany quickly recognized every rebel state . Some people claim they even seen German troops helping Croatia win their independence . Germany got their way this time again . I call it the third attack in the last century . What could Serbia do with the Rebels voting where ever they were a majority to leave Yugoslavia and NATO bombers backing up the rebels at every turn . Russia was weak at this time under Yeltsin . Putin would never have let happen it today .

        1. If you don’t know the difference between Austria and Germany or Serbia and Yugoslavia, there’s not much I can do to help you except suggest courses in geography and history.

          1. Thank you , I will consider there is some a difference My wife is always complaining about my lies . But I don’t know how else to get my point across better

      2. Four times, if you consider “Yugoslavia” to refer to the region which contained Yugoslavia. The two world wars, plus they were involved in the Nato actions in 1991–1995, and 1999.

        1. Q: How many legs does a dog have if you call a tail a leg?

          A: Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.

          “The region which contained Yugoslavia” was only Yugoslavia when it was Yugoslavia — just as, and for the same reasons, that the Sixth Coalition was only the Sixth Coalition between March of 1813 and May of 1814 (before and after that, Austria, Prussia, Russia, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Sweden, Spain and some German statelets were the same territories, they just weren’t parts of the Sixth Coalition).

          1. I get your point, but it seems you have little experience with axiomatic systems. If one defines a “leg” to be a tail or an appendage with a paw, then a standard dog does have five legs.

            You may call call such arguments specious, but a major effort by the belligerents in Yugoslavia in the 1990’s was precisely in such efforts to apply different labels to the same events: a civil war versus an international war of aggression, an isolated act versus a systematic policy, an act of revenge versus genocide, etc.

  3. “a major effort by the belligerents in Yugoslavia in the 1990’s”

    Yugoslavia only existed for a tiny sliver of the 1990s — its constituent parts began seceding by mid-1991, that secession was recognized internationally (by the EEC’s Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia) in November 1991, the UN recognized the independence of Croatia and Slovenia in January of 1992 and Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia were admitted to the UN as member states in mid-1992.

    Since then, “Yugoslavia” has enjoyed the same status as the Kingdom of Ruthenia, the Margraviate of Brandenburg, the Confederate States of America, and other states which USED to exist but don’t any longer.

  4. In my opinion the British are so bad live, in fact they were not fully in the European Union.
    Their money, their rules of entry…

  5. If the UK does succeed and leaves the EU I see several things happening. Scotland suceeds from UK to remain part of the EU as will Northern Ireland and Wales. Northern Ireland will want to join with the Republic of Ireland to stay EU, Scotland and Wales succeed to remain EU but also become independent nations in their own rights. The EU is where their military might is as well as economic status,the treaties with the other member nations of the EU is too valuable to risk.

Comments are closed.