Cameron Will Fight To Let Turkey Join EU

[Gerald]

11:24am UK, Tuesday July 27, 2010
David Williams, Sky News Online

David Cameron has declared himself the "strongest possible advocate" of Turkey's ambition to join the European Union.The Prime Minister, who is visiting the country, hailed it as central to unifying East and West and reducing international security fears.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/David-Cameron-Turkey-Visit-Prime-Minister-Backs-Countrys-Bid-To-Join-European-Union/Article/201007415671404?lpos=Politics_First_Home_Article_T easer_Region_3&lid=ARTICLE_15671404_David_Cameron_Turkey_Visit%3A _Prime_Minister_Backs_Countrys_Bid_To_Join_Europea n_Union

[Betonov]

I never really decided what I really think about Turkey being in EU. Only I was more or less leaning towards NO. Simply because Turkey isn't europe. And her eastern side stretching so far into the midle east, imagine the cost of protecting that border if Turkey is inside the schengen agreement.
It's hard to be a liberal when an issue arises when you want to protect a certain status quo that you happen to like.... I guess it's true, when one gets older, one goes conservative

[Schroeder]

I don't see any benefit for us to have Turkey in the EU...and to be honest I also don't look much forward for the next wave of mass immigration that this might cause.
I also don't understand why European politicians would want to have them in the EU. We already have plenty of problems and finding solutions is not getting any easier with more and more members. Especially not if those members don't have a stellar economy and are very differently cultural wise.

Especially with the latest tendencies towards islamization and turning towards Iran, we should be very careful about who we let in.
I actually see more possible harm than good from that.

Besides, maybe the UK should get properly into the EU first, before they are start fighting for getting others in.:O:

[Respenus]

Over cold, dead bodies of Europeans will Turkey ever join the EU. Hell, most of the current countries aren't in their place right now and should the EU take the course which has been indicated recently with the Lisbon treaty, then Turkey is definitely out. Forever.

Apart from the purely economic reasons, such as social and regional cohesion, there is the question of human rights (not that they are that well protected in some EU states, but that's beside the point), security and immigration. Do you really think that Turks, when given the option, will opt to stay in Turkey? While I am not against immigration and even support it as it is healthy for any society, I'm not really that sure about expanding further south. Even the Balkans are a mistake if you ask me (Slovenia of course is a middle European state historically, Croatia is somewhere in between, depending on which part was under Austrian or Hungarian control).

Plus, if the superstate is to be created, then it will stall and disintegrate due to the frustration that no policy could be agreed upon or put into action. EU27 can't decide on a single foreign policy issue, yet along EU32 or even more. Expansion, yet not at every cost. The European project should be re-though and our options re-examined and then, a new system set up. Here, I must agree with Skybird. We may not agree on the European idea, yet I mostly share his criticism of what is currently going on. Concerning transfers between states and its critique (read here (http://euobserver.com/?aid=30530)), a number of state were mentioned which would form a new, stable core. Even when the European Coal and Steel Community was established, and afterwards the EEC, the core 6 were in a way already too far apart and de Gaulle was well aware of that and the reason why he opposed expansion (although there were others and he generally wasn't as pro-European as the previous government).