Time to burn Greece?

Raskolnikov

beeftotheheels wrote: »

It is not the job of the German ministers to look out for the interests of the Greek people, that is the job of the Greek politicians. The job of the German politicians is to look out for the German people, the job of the ECB is to police price stability in the Eurozone, not to look out for the interests of the Greek people.

If that's the case, why have Irish politicians taken it upon themselves to look out for the interests of any person, or country, who would have been affected by a default by the Irish banking sector, or the State?

Morgan Kelly wrote:

Ireland’s Last Stand began less shambolically than you might expect. The IMF, which believes that lenders should pay for their stupidity before it has to reach into its pocket, presented the Irish with a plan to haircut €30 billion of unguaranteed bonds by two-thirds on average. Lenihan was overjoyed, according to a source who was there, telling the IMF team: “You are Ireland’s salvation.”

The deal was torpedoed from an unexpected direction. At a conference call with the G7 finance ministers, the haircut was vetoed by US treasury secretary Timothy Geithner who, as his payment of $13 billion from government-owned AIG to Goldman Sachs showed, believes that bankers take priority over taxpayers. The only one to speak up for the Irish was UK chancellor George Osborne, but Geithner, as always, got his way. An instructive, if painful, lesson in the extent of US soft power, and in who our friends really are.

Ireland has done exactly what was asked of it by the United States and Europe. We have instituted savage austerity programs upon ourselves (unlike the Greeks, who are being bailed out with a cheaper rate despite basically lying about their austerity) and we have been given nothing to show for it.

Perhaps it's time for Ireland to grow some cojones and take some real leadership. Can you imagine the horror in the United States and Europe if we sent a man in who would announced that we were broke, and were going to repudiate all their debt?

I bet they would would come to the negotiating table pretty quick then.

Scofflaw

Raskolnikov wrote: »

If that's the case, why have Irish politicians taken it upon themselves to look out for the interests of any person, or country, who would have been affected by a default by the Irish banking sector, or the State?
Ireland has done exactly what was asked of it by the United States and Europe. We have instituted savage austerity programs upon ourselves (unlike the Greeks, who are being bailed out with a cheaper rate despite basically lying about their austerity) and we have been given nothing to show for it.

Perhaps it's time for Ireland to grow some cojones and take some real leadership. Can you imagine the horror in the United States and Europe if we sent a man in who would announced that we were broke, and were going to repudiate all their debt?

I bet they would would come to the negotiating table pretty quick then.

And we'd be asked to take on further debt, submit to tighter controls, and hand over state assets straight away, either to private companies or to the creditors themselves, much like Greece.

Then what?

expectantly,
Scofflaw

Raskolnikov

Scofflaw wrote: »

And we'd be asked to take on further debt, submit to tighter controls, and hand over state assets straight away, either to private companies or to the creditors themselves, much like Greece.

Then what?

expectantly,
Scofflaw

Let's be clear on one thing, Greece has done very little so far. No state assets have been handed over, no real austerity has been imposed. Indeed it's only now that they have talked seriously about increasing income taxes (the same kind of increases that Ireland has had for nearly 3 years now through the income levy).

Ask yourself one question, who at this stage is holding the bag? The ECB is holding tens of billions worth of crappy Irish assets through the ELG scheme, they are holding tens of billions more through the "bailout". If we confront Europe directly, there's no question that it will be a high stakes game. Where I differ from you, is that I think if Europe is faced with a difficult situation, they will blink first.

Scofflaw

Raskolnikov wrote: »

Let's be clear on one thing, Greece has done very little so far. No state assets have been handed over, no real austerity has been imposed. Indeed it's only now that they have talked seriously about increasing income taxes (the same kind of increases that Ireland has had for nearly 3 years now through the income levy).

Ask yourself one question, who at this stage is holding the bag? The ECB is holding tens of billions worth of crappy Irish assets through the ELG scheme, they are holding tens of billions more through the "bailout". If we confront Europe directly, there's no question that it will be a high stakes game. Where I differ from you, is that I think if Europe is faced with a difficult situation, they will blink first.

In your book, though, why does the government not simply do that. Why has neither government done so?

Could it be because "Europe" in this case is actually made of other states, not all of whom can be relied upon to blink first, and only one of whom need not do so for our bluff to be called? Who do you reckon is madder - Enda (or Gerry, or your choice) or Sarkozy? I'd bet on Sarkozy, myself.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Raskolnikov

Scofflaw wrote: »

In your book, though, why does the government not simply do that. Why has neither government done so?

Could it be because "Europe" in this case is actually made of other states, not all of whom can be relied upon to blink first, and only one of whom need not do so for our bluff to be called? Who do you reckon is madder - Enda (or Gerry, or your choice) or Sarkozy? I'd bet on Sarkozy, myself.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The government is unwilling to do it because they fear they have too much to lose at this stage. I believe, they are under the naive misapprehension that our fiscal situation can be remedied by their current course of action, despite the implicit disagreement from the bond markets (may I remind you that the Irish 10 year has reached another all-time high at 11.24% today? - http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=GIGB10YR:IND).

You make a great point that Europe is no individual country, or one personality; I think we can use that to our benefit. If we were to confront Europe (as opposed to Merkel and Sarkozy) with the notion of default, I suspect that consensus would not be reached from the other 16 members of the Eurozone. Infact, I think they would take the path of least (immediate resistance at least) and they would acceed to most of our demands with the thought of reaching a compromise that would not spread immediate contagion.

Scofflaw

Raskolnikov wrote: »

The government is unwilling to do it because they fear they have too much to lose at this stage. I believe, they are under the naive misapprehension that our fiscal situation can be remedied by their current course of action, despite the implicit disagreement from the bond markets (may I remind you that the Irish 10 year has reached another all-time high at 11.24% today? - http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=GIGB10YR:IND).

That can equally well be given several other explanations - that the markets think the government will not stick to the course of action, that the markets think Europe will blink and allow us to restructure, that the markets think the course of action will result in social unrest, that the markets aren't distinguishing particularly between us and Portugal/Greece, and so on. It's not possible to simply say "it doesn't contradict me, so I'm right", although I appreciate that's a method that seems to be in vogue with some very well qualified academic economists.

Raskolnikov wrote: »

You make a great point that Europe is no individual country, or one personality; I think we can use that to our benefit. If we were to confront Europe (as opposed to Merkel and Sarkozy) with the notion of default, I suspect that consensus would not be reached from the other 16 members of the Eurozone. Infact, I think they would take the path of least (immediate resistance at least) and they would acceed to most of our demands with the thought of reaching a compromise that would not spread immediate contagion.

The problem there is that we have 25 of the 27 on board, but neither France nor Germany have blinked. And these matters are subject to unanimity, so we need 27 out of 27.

Look at it this way - if the brown stuff hits the fan, which European economy will come out on top? And which other European economy will almost certainly also come out well, and certainly has the hubris to believe they'll come out smiling? What have we got to put up against that, exactly? The mistaken belief that we have their banks by the short and curlies? Because the available evidence says we don't.

And afterwards? When we've repudiated, say, the €160bn in the ECB, and burned the bondholders? Then we owe Germany €45bn, and France about €40bn, and the other EU states the remaining €35bn. And we're still in Europe. Even if we leave the euro, leave the EU, we're still in Europe. And we've burned the Americans too. We don't owe anybody enough to bring any one country down (bar ourselves), but we owe enough to make everybody - and that's everybody everybody - highly pissed off with us.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Cannibal Ox

@beeftotheheels

Ignoring Raskolnikov's point about why we are paying for other peoples interests in other countries, what happens to the Greek people is very much in the interest of the German people. If German politicians are looking out for the interests of their people then, logically, they should be quite attentive to the interests of the Greek people so far as they extend to the interests of their own people.

There is just no way to bail out Greece, while allowing the Greek people free reign to spend the money as they see fit...

That ain't going to happen in any shape or form.

...without trampling all over the democratic rights of the German and French and Finnish people, because the taxpayers in the bailing out countries have a right to expect that their governments will only invest their taxes abroad, if there is some hope of getting that money back.

If that is the problem, what's the most effective solution?

Would you trust Greek politicians to do this? Do you trust the Greek political establishment, which has been in control throughout this entire period, to handle German, French and Finnish money? Do you think they are capable of doing this without the support of their people?

I think the part of the solution is with the protestors. If you could get the people in those squares on board and in some form of control, and convince them that they can make their country a better place, and get the right people supporting them to make the changes they need to make, you have a far better chance of this actually working.

In a nice, democratic manner according to the principles of the EU.

beeftotheheels

Cannibal Ox wrote: »

what happens to the Greek people is very much in the interest of the German people. If German politicians are looking out for the interests of their people then, logically, they should be quite attentive to the interests of the Greek people so far as they extend to the interests of their own people.

Huh? The interests of the German people, right now, are served by trying to protect the global economy, while mitigating any risk to their own funds which are being used to protect the global economy. How do you possibly think that it is in the interests of the German people to help the Greek people repudiate the debt caused by their own ineffective government over so many decades when the German people have had effective government and restraint over the same period?

Democracy is not the bee all and end all here, Greek democracy founded on State jobs for all, ineffective tax collection etc is part of what caused the Greek problem just as Irish democracy founded on making everyone richer by inflating a property bubble is part of the problem.

Cannibal Ox wrote: »

If that is the problem, what's the most effective solution?

The one we will see, more money being lent to Greece with very strict controls on what can be done and outside assistance in terms of the privatization of assets and the collection of taxes i.e. the creditors will behave like sensible creditors and only lend on conditions which they view as giving them a fighting chance of getting repaid.

Cannibal Ox wrote: »

Would you trust Greek politicians to do this? Do you trust the Greek political establishment, which has been in control throughout this entire period, to handle German, French and Finnish money? Do you think they are capable of doing this without the support of their people?

See above, they have been incapable of doing this with the support of their own people so the rules change if they want to borrow more money.

Cannibal Ox wrote: »

I think the part of the solution is with the protestors. If you could get the people in those squares on board and in some form of control, and convince them that they can make their country a better place, and get the right people supporting them to make the changes they need to make, you have a far better chance of this actually working.

1. There is no time, two weeks is nothing in terms of funding a country through a multilateral agreement
2. There is no chance that the Greek people will favor the protections necessary to protect the lenders so there is no point in going there
3. The Greeks have had a hell of a long time to sort out their country and they have failed to do so, so any arguments about giving them "one last chance" when there is no time will not wash with their creditors

Cannibal Ox wrote: »

In a nice, democratic manner according to the principles of the EU.

...yet so many times the allegations of being undemocratic are flung a the EU, and not without some basis it must be said.

Do you think for one moment that if a pan European referendum was held tomorrow on whether to continue "bailing out" Greece, Ireland and Portugal it would pass? No chance! Were this to be put to a democratic vote the peoples of Europe would cut us loose so lets not try to pretend that the Greeks should have unfettered democracy while we deny it to their creditors.

Scofflaw

I remain slightly confused over who we're supposed to be considering as the biggest baddy - wasn't it supposed to be Germany? Or is it the ECB? Isn't the ECB supposed to serve Germany's interests?

Germany wants to burn bondholders, ECB doesn't.

A WAR of words between the ECB and Germany intensified last night, sending the yield on Greek and Irish government bonds sky high.

Germany is insisting that bondholders should have to share the cost of a second Greek rescue, defying the views of ECB president Jean-Claude Trichet who is opposed to a policy he believes would damage financial confidence inside the eurozone.

With no consensus emerging, investors offloaded Greek, Irish and Portuguese bonds yesterday.

The yield -- or cost of borrowing -- on Ireland's 10-year bonds was back to over 11pc last night, losing all of the gains seen since the market welcomed the bank stress test at the end of March.

Restructuring

The yield on the Greek bonds due to be paid back in two years hit 25pc. The yield on Irish two-year bonds was 11.33pc. Yields should be lower for shorter dated bonds but investors now see a real risk that bonds due to be paid soon are most likely to be caught up in a restructuring.

"We have to insist on the participation of the private sector," Germany's finance minister Wolfgang Schaeuble told policy makers in Berlin yesterday.

He wants bondholders to extend the repayment date on Greek debt by seven years. Mr Schaeuble is pressing ahead with his policy despite ratings agencies saying it's likely to be classes as a default by Greece.

He made the comments just one day after Mr Trichet absolutely rejected such a plan.

Mr Trichet said he would back a plan that sees bond investors voluntarily agree to buy new Greek bonds when the ones they already hold mature, but nothing more drastic.

cordially,
Scofflaw

beeftotheheels

I guess given all the public posturing on this it should also be noted that somewhere, there is a room, with advisers and representatives from all the interested parties here (possibly excluding Greece) trying to figure out a compromise that allows the German politicians claim a victory while avoiding all out financial armageddon.

Existing private lenders won't benefit from armageddon so they'll look at rolling over their debt and trying to make it look voluntary.

The ratings agencies don't want armageddon so if the private investors give them wiggle room they will take it.

The ECB doesn't want armageddon so will compromise on anything which has less severe consequences than an all out credit event if the ratings agencies tell them that such a thing is possible.

The German politicians and people don't want armageddon so they won't push for burden sharing if it cannot be done without triggering a credit event.

The only reason I doubt that Greece is in the room is because Greece's best interests could converge whereas the other's best interests align so they need to work out a solution together, regardless of what they say in public.

McDave

Scofflaw wrote: »

I remain slightly confused over who we're supposed to be considering as the biggest baddy - wasn't it supposed to be Germany? Or is it the ECB? Isn't the ECB supposed to serve Germany's interests?

Germany wants to burn bondholders, ECB doesn't.

Germany has the luxury of being able to talk politics; the ECB has to stick to it's technical brief. The politics involves generating a legal and economic instrument which will enable the EU/Eurozone to implement solutions funded by the member states and private sector, while the ECB retains its primacy within its own sphere.

Nothing meaningful can actually be done before those new instruments are put in place. And in the meantime, ideal solutions are hard for either to advance. Which makes them both look like baddies fiddling while Athens burns.

beeftotheheels

The private investors, well the German banks in any event, are clearly at the table

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/06/11/uk-eurozone-idUKTRE7584HE20110611

BdB Managing Director Michael Kemmer told a radio interview: "What Herr Schaeuble has proposed is in principle not unreasonable. Our members would also participate."

It was not clear if that meant he supported the idea of a swap or just of private creditors becoming involved.
...

The BdB had taken a stiffer line earlier this week, saying that the banks' involvement -- previously planned only for after 2013 -- was a "last step" and that that point had not been reached.

Kemmer reiterated that the participation of private creditors should only be on a voluntary basis but that a "disorderly" default for Greece must be avoided.

"In principle, it is correct that the investor who is holding the paper, which is filled with risks, has to attend to those risks too," he said.

"We cannot afford to have a further crisis of confidence. On top of that it is not only the banks which are affected... A disorderly default could also affect life insurers and old age retirement payments," he added.

Highlighting the fact that it is not just banks who stand to be burned...

Let's just hope that they figure out a way to bring the hedgies along.

At the same time, the Eurogroup are acknowledging that they cannot ignore the views of the ECB, and that this is all being worked on

The head of the Eurogroup of euro zone finance ministers, Jean-Claude Juncker, rowed in behind Berlin's hard line in an interview on German radio, but said that any solution must be agreed with the ECB.

"I am of the opinion that there will have to be a contribution from private creditors. There must be a voluntary, soft restructuring," he told Inforadio.

"We cannot push this private creditor participation through without the European Central Bank, or against it."

Asked how such participation could be arranged and kept voluntary, he said: "We are discussing it."

Damian_ir

srsly78 wrote: »

Pay your damn taxes!

A young man, that start to work in Greece, will be payed 500 Euros monthly(net monthly salary). This is, if he is lucky enough to get a full time job of more than 40h/per week. Unemployment in Greece exceeds 20% and if we talk for the young people is more than 40%.

Rent of a small apartment(1 bedroom) in Greece is about 300 Euros.

That young fellow has the huuuuuuge (!!!!) amount of 200 euros per month, that he can use it to pay the Electricity company, to pay the phone bill, to pay the tap water company, to buy basic goods from supermarket and the road-markets. He should do all these every week, by using the astronomical amount of 50 euros.

Even if this young man is a superman, and can "persuade his stomach" not to bother him, what makes you think that even he finds money to pay taxes, the taxes wont go to the economic killers that is in charge in Greece instead of the Greek Goverments vault ?

I hope that a few people in Ireland has seen what this man says in the European Parliament.

http://youtu.be/V7fnJCmbuPU

Yes Greek people must be blamed for a huge mistake, the mistake of trusting their politicians without checking their acts.

thebman

If they all paid taxes, they would probably factor more into average wages.

femur61

Damian_ir wrote: »

http://youtu.be/V7fnJCmbuPU

.

I'm glad what you told what the stroy was about, could have been about making cheese because my secondary school French is not that good.

rocksteady36

femur61 wrote: »

I'm glad what you told what the stroy was about, could have been about making cheese because my secondary school French is not that good.

There is an option on the youtube clip to play subtitles, its those coloured boxes on the actual screen..

Thats not what the guy was saying in you tube clip, he was saying that Germany and France have lent the Greeks billions through the bailout, but they have been forced to continue to buy submarines, fighters jets etc worth around 3 billion, pretty insane, shame on the french and germans...

It is a race to the bottom between Sarkozy and Merkel..

I feel for the Greeks, we as a people should be united not divided..We should see how they get on..The reason they are on the streets protesting so much should show us how their government is sooooo corrupt far more corrupt than Ireland.....and the people realise now they have been shafted....At least were not buying 3 billion in weapons with bailout money...I hope...

Scofflaw

rocksteady36 wrote: »

There is an option on the youtube clip to play subtitles, its those coloured boxes on the actual screen..

Thats not what the guy was saying in you tube clip, he was saying that Germany and France have lent the Greeks billions through the bailout, but they have been forced to continue to buy submarines, fighters jets etc worth around 3 billion, pretty insane, shame on the french and germans...

It is a race to the bottom between Sarkozy and Merkel..

I feel for the Greeks, we as a people should be united not divided..We should see how they get on..The reason they are on the streets protesting so much should show us how their government is sooooo corrupt far more corrupt than Ireland.....and the people realise now they have been shafted....At least were not buying 3 billion in weapons with bailout money...I hope...

Nobody forces the Greeks to have a high military spend. They do it in order to face off against Turkey.

cordially,
Scofflaw

beeftotheheels

The sabre rattling continues... or is it something more than that?

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fc261efe-95de-11e0-ba20-00144feab49a.html#axzz1P8zQIRje

Standard & Poor’s cut Greece’s long-term sovereign credit rating three notches to triple C in a sign the rating agency thinks it will be forced to downgrade Athens to default as private creditors are likely to be involved in the country’s next bail-out.

Greece is now the lowest-rated sovereign in the world, having fallen below Ecuador, Jamaica, Pakistan and Grenada.

S&P said: “In our view Greece is increasingly likely to restructure its debt in a manner that, under the conditions of any package of additional funding provided by Greece’s official creditors, would result in one or more defaults under our criteria.”

Greek 10-year bonds jumped over 17 per cent for the second time this year before closing at 16.97 per cent in response to the S&P move, which puts Athens only four notches above default

thebman

Maybe time to change thread title to has Greece decided to burn Greece,

rocksteady36

Scofflaw wrote: »

Nobody forces the Greeks to have a high military spend. They do it in order to face off against Turkey.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Forgot about that issue..But I don't think that Turkey would invade the EU...

So I think that the politician is right its hypocritical to loan them money for a bailout and then make them buy weapons and tell them to pass it on to the people.....But they want to sell weapons for 3 billion..

So the point the politician is making and that documentary is that France and Germany ARE forcing the Greeks to have a high military spend to buy their weapons..with the bailout money..

thebman

I thought they already changed some contracts to the US from the EU since the bailout was announced.

rocksteady36

thebman wrote: »

I thought they already changed some contracts to the US from the EU since the bailout was announced.

I just watched the Doc Debtocracy...Interesting stuff about auditing the national debt..I am not really an expert on Greece's situation..I have just believe the Greeks were not in the same situation and that their debt is their debt where as ours is Lenihans blunder...So gave the Greeks little thought...

Could easily agree that europe burns greece to establish moral hazard..Let the Greek people burn their politicians..

It seems moral hazard has gone out the window when it comes to banking..

But after watching the documentary I feel for the Greek ppl...This EU bailout is a joke...Especially the interest rate we pay..Everyone knows it..

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/british-mep-condemns-punitive-bailout-interest-rate-2660209.html

Scofflaw

rocksteady36 wrote: »

Forgot about that issue..But I don't think that Turkey would invade the EU...

I don't think that's how the Greeks look at the situation:

The historic reason behind Greece’s massive arms spending lies with neighbor Turkey with whom it entertains, shall we say, difficult relations. Beglitis noted “Turkish provocations” from the Turkish army’s occupation of the northern part of the island of Cyprus in 1974 to the “continued violations of Greek air space”.

Jean-Paul Hébert, a defense analyst, notes that “when one of the two countries buys 50 tanks the other orders 60.” The two nations ranked amongst the world’s top arms importers in 2008 with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and India.

Defence spending in Greece has been reduced by 6.6% in the latest budget, but Greece has historically had very high levels of defence spending, because of their uneasy relationship with Turkey. That might not make sense to you or me, but it makes sense to Greeks.

rocksteady36 wrote: »

So I think that the politician is right its hypocritical to loan them money for a bailout and then make them buy weapons and tell them to pass it on to the people.....But they want to sell weapons for 3 billion..

So the point the politician is making and that documentary is that France and Germany ARE forcing the Greeks to have a high military spend to buy their weapons..with the bailout money..

But it's not actually the case, because they're not being forced to have high military spending. On the contrary, they're reducing their defence spending. A minor issue, of course, but somewhat relevant.

Ask yourself this - what evidence has the politician offered you for the claim? His word? And why are you taking his word, exactly?

cordially,
Scofflaw

rocksteady36

Scofflaw wrote: »

I don't think that's how the Greeks look at the situation:



Defence spending in Greece has been reduced by 6.6% in the latest budget, but Greece has historically had very high levels of defence spending, because of their uneasy relationship with Turkey. That might not make sense to you or me, but it makes sense to Greeks.



But it's not actually the case, because they're not being forced to have high military spending. On the contrary, they're reducing their defence spending. A minor issue, of course, but somewhat relevant.

Ask yourself this - what evidence has the politician offered you for the claim? His word? And why are you taking his word, exactly?

cordially,
Scofflaw

There defence spending may have reduced 6.6%, but what was the actual amount spent...'Greece directs approximately 4.3% of its GDP to military expenditures, the 2nd highest percentage in Europe (behind the Republic of Macedonia)' I get the feeling you think a reduction of 6.6% of 4.3% of GDP is a lot..I don't really think thats much in their situation..

And again I don't believe the US or the EU would allow Turkey mess with Greece, Doesn't Turkey want to get into the EU anyway..

And your point that they are not being forced and their reducing spending is after this particular time when the money was spent...So things changed after France and Germany got paid...

No disrespect to you, but I will take his word over your word on this one...I don't think it would be too hard to verify greece got a new submarine, fighter jets or tanks..

Here is an bit from an article

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4616433

Franco-German lawmaker Daniel Cohn-Bendit said that Paris and Berlin are seeking to force Prime Minister George Papandreou to spend Greece's scarce cash on submarines, a fleet of warships, helicopters and war planes.

"I met Mr. Papandreou last week. I was in Athens. I've known him for a long time," Cohn-Bendit told reporters, accusing Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel and France's President Nicolas Sarkozy of blackmailing his friend.

Cohn-Bendit accused France and Germany of making their contributions to an IMF-led rescue package for the debt-ridden Greek economy contingent on Athens honoring massive arms deals signed by Papandreou's predecessor.

"It's incredible the way the Merkels and Sarkozys of this world treat a Greek prime minister," he declared, adding that Papandreou had recently met Sarkozy and French Prime Minister Francois Fillon in Paris.

"Mr. Fillon and Mr. Sarkozy told Mr. Papandreou: 'We're going to raise the money to help you, but you are going to have to continue to pay the arms contracts that we have with you'," Cohn-Bendit said.

"In the past three months we have forced Greece to confirm several billion dollars in arms contracts. French frigates that the Greeks will have to buy for 2.5 billion euros. Helicopters, planes, German submarines."

Despite its economic woes, which recently deepened spectacularly when its credit rating was downgraded, Greece is one of Europe's biggest arms buyers, seeking to keep pace with its regional rival Turkey.

Cohn-Bendit, a former leader of the 1968 student revolt in Paris, is leader of the Green group in the European parliament.

We can agree to disagree and let others make their own minds up..Thats all I have to say on the issue cheers..I am actually defending some one elses post.

Scofflaw

rocksteady36 wrote: »

No disrespect to you, but I will take his word over your word on this one...We can agree to disagree and let others make their own minds up..

You shouldn't take either my word or his, and neither should anyone else. This is the age of Google - go read up on Greek military spending commitments for the 2006-2010 period. And don't believe what you hear in some video unless you've checked that they have evidence for what they're claiming. As it is, you clearly haven't, so you have no idea whether the guy in the video (who you know no more than you know me) is telling you anything remotely like the truth.

As I said, you don't seem to be asking yourself basic and obvious questions about what you're being told by someone who has enough of an agenda to put together a video pushing his views.

regards,
Scofflaw

rocksteady36

Scofflaw wrote: »

You shouldn't take either my word or his, and neither should anyone else. This is the age of Google - go read up on Greek military spending commitments for the 2006-2010 period. And don't believe what you hear in some video unless you've checked that they have evidence for what they're claiming. As it is, you clearly haven't, so you have no idea whether the guy in the video (who you know no more than you know me) is telling you anything remotely like the truth.

As I said, you don't seem to be asking yourself basic and obvious questions about what you're being told by someone who has enough of an agenda to put together a video pushing his views.

regards,
Scofflaw

No, I already stated I am not an expert on this issue....

I said let others make their own mind up...That means look into themselves...

Why do you feel the need to reiterate my statements and claim them as your own lol

I didn't think the Mod was going to take such an active part in trying to discredit me..Who cares...

As for what you say..

"As I said, you don't seem to be asking yourself basic and obvious questions about what you're being told by someone who has enough of an agenda to put together a video pushing his views."

What video did he put together..Are you talking about the video of him in his capacity as an MEP in the European Parliament..


More info.............

Both the French and German governments flatly denied the allegations.

Greek Defense Minister Evangelos Venizelos has said Greece aims to slash military operating costs by up to 25 percent in 2010 from the previous year, although that would not affect arms procurement programs.

What Athens must do, however, is be more efficient in its arms programs, he noted.

Greece has said it needs 40 fighter jets, and both Germany and France are vying for the contract: Germany wants Greece to buy Eurofighter planes — made by a consortium of German, Italian, Spanish and British companies — while France is eager to sell Athens its Rafale fighter aircraft, produced by Dassault.

Germany is Greece's largest supplier of arms, according to a report published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in March, with Athens receiving 35 percent of the weapons it bought last year from there. Germany sent 13 percent of its arms exports to Greece, making Greece the second largest recipient behind Turkey, SIPRI said.




So the French and Germans deny this but still compete for business, the greek govt say they will not stop buying but become more efficient..

I think I am a realist...I think they are being told to keep buying weapons..Either way I am not one of those conspiracy theorists and don't really care if ppl think the same..

You should be the moderator on the conspiracy theory thread, that advice would work best there..

I just chose to believe him not you. I don't think everyone needs your guidance on what to do...I think your taking this moderator role too serious lol, Of course ppl are going to look into it, IF they actually care...I am not here to go into every fact and research everything, were shooting the breeze here, I don't have time to go on and on.

The fact you tell everyone not to believe either of us is a bit odd, its like your arguing and knowing ppl are watching, now you want to tell them were both wrong? Then you tell them to look into themselves but feel the need to guide them and tell them where to look..Thats just a contradiction, its like you still want ppl to belive you but not me, I get the feeling you like to be right all the time..

AND having read your other posts your constantly arguing with ppl..Here is a cut and paste of the type of posts, have you ever asked yourself why you argue so much Anonymously..Are you a barrister lol, if not you should be..

Here is your reply post to another poster....

[SNIP][MOD]Not relevant.[/MOD][/SNIP]

Scofflaw

Oh - I'm not moderating you. I'm just arguing with you. If I need to give you some instruction as a mod it will be in bold, so that you know that's what I'm doing.

I just think you're taking a lot on faith here - you've more or less said you don't have any particular reason to believe what he's saying - you're not an expert, you say, you know it's been denied, and he hasn't offered any evidence - but you do nonetheless.

Seems odd to me.

As to procurement - yes, Germany and France supply arms to Greece. So does the US - as far as I know the fighter order is actually going to be F-16s. But your argument - or the argument of the guy whose argument you're repeating - is that Greece has had to increase military spending. And you believe that, even though you've quoted an article pointing out that they're cutting military spending.

And, er, arguing with people? It's a discussion forum.

eh, well,
Scofflaw

rocksteady36

Scofflaw wrote: »

Oh - I'm not moderating you. I'm just arguing with you. If I need to give you some instruction as a mod it will be in bold, so that you know that's what I'm doing.

I just think you're taking a lot on faith here - you've more or less said you don't have any particular reason to believe what he's saying - you're not an expert, you say, you know it's been denied, and he hasn't offered any evidence - but you do nonetheless.

Seems odd to me.

As to procurement - yes, Germany and France supply arms to Greece. So does the US - as far as I know the fighter order is actually going to be F-16s. But your argument - or the argument of the guy whose argument you're repeating - is that Greece has had to increase military spending. And you believe that, even though you've quoted an article pointing out that they're cutting military spending.

eh, well,
Scofflaw

Your hilarious, no one cares if your right or wrong, your also anonymous, but you still feel the need to win an argument, you started...

For the laff, I will entertain you,,,My argument or his argument is that they spent 3 billion on weapons using the money that was for the bailout..I never said they were increasing spending in any of my posts..

Now your just making stuff up, manipulating facts to try and win an argument that you think anyone here cares about.. No one cares. lol..

I already said that they have reduced spending but not till they got paid..It was you who said 'high spending'.

As for "And, er, arguing with people? It's a discussion forum." read on...your own words, lol

The argument will go no where - the most value anyone could extract from it is if we cite references, but neither of us are likely to accept the other's references as authoritative, because with so many variables in play, conclusions are rarely constrained within worthwhile limits.

As such, we'll just leave it, I think.

cordially,
Rocksteady36

Cant believe your cutting my posts to win an "argument" lol

Thats a bit shy of you to cut my last post..Lets leave it there, you have a history of having arguments...So like I said lets agree to disagree..Can you leave it there or is it too much for you to resist lol

Scofflaw

OK, perhaps you haven't quite grasped the point of the forum, which is to have discussions. As such, you can discuss whatever you like, and take whatever position you like, but you don't get to play personal with another poster, as you're doing.

And, yes, this is me with my mod hat on. Before you argue, do read the Charter.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

rocksteady36 wrote: »

For the laff, I will entertain you,,,My argument or his argument is that they spent 3 billion on weapons using the money that was for the bailout..I never said they were increasing spending in any of my posts..

Now your just making stuff up, manipulating facts to try and win an argument that you think anyone here cares about.. No one cares. lol..

I already said that they have reduced spending but not till they got paid..It was you who said 'high spending'.

OK, leaving out all the personal stuff - for which, see above - you're correct that I said 'increase spending', not you, so I retract that, obviously. But still you don't have any evidence that Germany and France are "forcing" Greece to keep spending money. What you have - or, rather, what Cohn-Bendit has - is that German and French arms companies, who have been the main suppliers of arms to Greece, are continuing to be the main suppliers. The Greeks, meanwhile, are continuing to spend money on arms, as they historically always have done, but are reducing their spending.

How does any of that add up to Germany and France "forcing" Greece to keep spending on arms?

[MOD]Again, please pay attention to the mod notice about the personal stuff - and please do read the Charter before arguing with a mod notice on thread. If you feel I'm trying to moderate your argument rather than the stuff I've pointed out, you can take that up elsewhere.[/MOD]

cordially,
Scofflaw