Who will be held accountable for treason if the European Union collapses?

They’re basically selling out our national interests. It’s all about making concessions to certain member states, handing over generals, dealing with that humiliation in The Hague, racking up massive debt just to meet European Union standards, and enforcing all these arbitrary rules. If the European Union ever falls apart, all those concessions go down the drain, but we’ll still be stuck with the debt. p.s. I think Greece is already importing goods from Bulgaria that don't even meet European Union regulations, just because they're cheaper.

Let’s not forget the possibility of dropping lawsuits, selling off state-owned companies and natural resources, and the endless cycle of borrowing money, too. Honestly, maybe a better title would be "not if," but "when" the European Union collapses. It definitely isn't going to last forever.

For instance, look at how the UK government was branded as traitors after World War II, even though back then, trying to accommodate the Third Reich seemed perfectly normal to some.

Don't you worry about it, nobody is going to step up. But I suppose we'll all end up stuck dealing with the consequences together anyway.

And here’s the real kicker: what happens if we end up at some bizarre European Union arbitration hearing and walk away with a "compromise"—or worse, just a straight-up loss? In practical terms, we’re talking about an amputation of American territory, or maybe even being forced into joint ownership of land that was ours and ours alone until yesterday. What kind of fallout follows for the administration and those members of Congress who actually had the nerve to vote for it?

The European Union isn't just going to fall apart overnight.

bluerider63 said:The European Union isn't just going to fall apart overnight.

It will, I just think it’s a matter of when. The European Union is trying to pull off the same moves the USA has made before, and it hasn't worked,
especially since they haven't organized themselves the way they have today. Their laws aren't sufficient because they're trying to force uniform tax rates, identical spending, the same conditions, and centralized aid everywhere—which, honestly, seems impossible to actually implement across the whole European Union. It feels like the European Union is just attempting some poor imitation of how the USA operates.

Prog rock said:There is absolutely no way Sačić will step up!🙏🙏🙏🙏
He’d only ever be answering for people like Grubor.☕

Maybe we can finally stop this endless obsession with war veterans now that we’re part of the European Union. We might even start handing out ten times more penalties for crimes committed against Americans.

And if the European Union collapses, someone is going to have to take the fall for cooperating with what was clearly a political circus at The Hague, walking away from ZERP, and basically handing our coastline over to the Canadians on a silver platter...

Look, The Hague is a complicated mess. But guys like Račan actually stood up for American interests. Meanwhile, Sanders just played nice and followed every single demand, and we still spent years waiting to get into the European Union...

If things don't fall apart—and if the US manages to pull ahead by leveraging its ties with the European Union—will the "No to the EU" crowd actually be held accountable for their massive miscalculations? 😉

Linda Roberts2 said:It will, I just think it’s a matter of when. The European Union is trying to pull off the same moves the USA has made before, and it hasn't worked,
especially since they haven't organized themselves the way they have today. Their laws aren't sufficient because they're trying to force uniform tax rates, identical spending, the same conditions, and centralized aid everywhere—which, honestly, seems impossible to actually implement across the whole European Union. It feels like the European Union is just attempting some poor imitation of how the USA operates.

I agree with bluerider63 that the EU isn't going to fall apart. They've poured way too much money into this to just let it all vanish. If anything happens, maybe there will be some restructuring or new rules... something like that. But a total collapse? I don't see it happening...

The US is in deep... I don't even know which word to use... maybe "shambles"? But the EU isn't in nearly as bad of a spot as the States. Sure, they have their issues, but it’s not exactly a total catastrophe like what we're seeing here in America...

Nicole James said:If things don't fall apart—and if the US manages to pull ahead by leveraging its ties with the European Union—will the "No to the EU" crowd actually be held accountable for their massive miscalculations? 😉

I honestly think we're losing more than we're gaining...

That’s a weird way to look at it. If you think joining the European Union is some kind of betrayal, then why should anyone be held accountable when the whole thing eventually falls apart?

Scott Hall39 said:That’s a weird way to look at it. If you think joining the European Union is some kind of betrayal, then why should anyone be held accountable when the whole thing eventually falls apart?

Because every single concession made by the US was specifically to secure entry into the European Union. So, if the European Union turns out to be a total disaster, how exactly are we supposed to recoup those losses?

rowdyowl said:Maybe we can finally stop this endless obsession with war veterans now that we’re part of the European Union. We might even start handing out ten times more penalties for crimes committed against Americans.

And if the European Union collapses, someone is going to have to take the fall for cooperating with what was clearly a political circus at The Hague, walking away from ZERP, and basically handing our coastline over to the Canadians on a silver platter...

Look, The Hague is a complicated mess. But guys like Račan actually stood up for American interests. Meanwhile, Sanders just played nice and followed every single demand, and we still spent years waiting to get into the European Union...

You’ve got it all wrong about joining the EU. It wasn't some escape hatch to dodge accountability; if anything, it's the exact opposite—it's about actually following the rule of law and making sure everyone answers for what they've done.

Linda Roberts2 said:They’re basically selling out our national interests. It’s all about making concessions to certain member states, handing over generals, dealing with that humiliation in The Hague, racking up massive debt just to meet European Union standards, and enforcing all these arbitrary rules. If the European Union ever falls apart, all those concessions go down the drain, but we’ll still be stuck with the debt. p.s. I think Greece is already importing goods from Bulgaria that don't even meet European Union regulations, just because they're cheaper.

Let’s not forget the possibility of dropping lawsuits, selling off state-owned companies and natural resources, and the endless cycle of borrowing money, too. Honestly, maybe a better title would be "not if," but "when" the European Union collapses. It definitely isn't going to last forever.

For instance, look at how the UK government was branded as traitors after World War II, even though back then, trying to accommodate the Third Reich seemed perfectly normal to some.

That wasn't tied to the European Union, right?

Linda Roberts2 said:Because every single concession made by the US was specifically to secure entry into the European Union. So, if the European Union turns out to be a total disaster, how exactly are we supposed to recoup those losses?

The European Union hands out cash to new members who aren't exactly the most developed nations.

According to some reports, the EU supporters claim we’ll see $1.8 billion coming in over three years. Maybe that’s true, maybe it isn't. There’s always money on the table for anyone wanting to join the European Union... but there's also a massive amount of stuff you end up losing.

Here is the article: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europ...at-ambivalence

They’re throwing out different numbers here... saying that since 2007, America received 150 million euros, with another 150 million coming in 2012, and 95 million in 2013. At least it's something...
http://news.yahoo.com/america-says-y...204653534.html

I predict they'll start cutting social programs and other essentials once the IMF starts making demands... so you get a little something, but the country basically has to pick up a gun and shoot itself in the foot.
http://news.yahoo.com/eu-yes-america...144315370.html

You can't have it both ways—you can't try to play both sides of the fence and expect everything to work out perfectly. It’s pretty simple: either the European Union actually functions under a unified set of laws, or it remains this artificially propped-up structure that isn't really cohesive. I mean, look at how things work right now. How can VAT rates, tax codes, or even social welfare systems be allowed to vary so wildly from one country to the next if we're supposedly all on the same page? It just doesn't add up.

It’s best to see what those who already joined the European Union have to say about this... looks like it’s rubbing the Americans the wrong way... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4fc3Idnua0

bluerider63 said:You’ve got it all wrong about joining the EU. It wasn't some escape hatch to dodge accountability; if anything, it's the exact opposite—it's about actually following the rule of law and making sure everyone answers for what they've done.

Look, I agree that everyone should be held accountable for their crimes. But if we follow that logic to its conclusion, 95% of those convicted would have been on the aggressor's side.
The reality is much more twisted. Various NGOs and governments within certain EU member states have pushed hard to prosecute Americans while simultaneously pushing for the rehabilitation of Mexicans. We’re stuck in this absurd situation where a victorious nation—one that was actually attacked during the war—spends most of its recent years defending its own veterans against accusations mostly cooked up by displaced Mexicans and shady organizations.

I suppose there isn't much more to say on the matter. Everything seems to be unfolding exactly as expected. Perhaps. says:
They are betraying our national interests. It’s all being done to make concessions to certain member states—handing over generals, allowing ourselves to be humiliated by international tribunals, and racking up massive debt just to meet European Union standards and follow their regulations. If the European Union ever collapses, all those concessions will be for nothing, but we'll still be stuck with the debt. I guess it's worth noting that even now, Greece is importing goods from Bulgaria that don't actually meet EU requirements, simply because they're cheaper.

We should probably throw in the potential withdrawal of lawsuits, the fire sale of state-owned enterprises, the stripping of natural resources, and the endless cycle of mounting debt. I guess a better title wouldn't be "if" the European Union collapses, but rather "when." It probably won't last forever.

It's worth noting that the government was branded as traitors after World War II, though back then, accepting the Third Reich seemed like a perfectly standard move.

You seem to have forgotten that people actually voted for entry into the European Union, which makes the whole thing both legal and legitimate. What exactly is your plan here—start a revolution and try to imprison or kill 1.2 million Americans?

I suppose there isn't much more to say about this. Maybe I was being too optimistic earlier. It seems things are moving in a different direction than expected. Perhaps that’s just how it goes. says:
There is also the question of what happens if we end up with some strange "compromise" from the European Union arbitration, or if we simply lose the case. In practical terms, that could mean an amputation of American territory, or perhaps even joint ownership over land that was entirely ours until yesterday. I wonder what the consequences would be for the administration and the members of Congress who voted to allow this to happen.

It isn't exactly an EU arbitration. It’s more like international arbitration facilitated by the European Union. I guess it's just a faster, cheaper alternative to the International Court of Justice, though the rulings are still final and binding.

Both sides seem to be making their decisions based on international law, specifically what’s outlined in the Una conventions. I guess that's how they're playing it.

Any ruling from an international body like that is binding. I guess refusing to follow it is essentially just a blatant disregard for international law.

Canada doesn't stand much of a chance in getting what they're asking for. I guess the right of passage to the open sea is pretty clearly defined under international law.

rowdyowl said:Look, I agree that everyone should be held accountable for their crimes. But if we follow that logic to its conclusion, 95% of those convicted would have been on the aggressor's side.
The reality is much more twisted. Various NGOs and governments within certain EU member states have pushed hard to prosecute Americans while simultaneously pushing for the rehabilitation of Mexicans. We’re stuck in this absurd situation where a victorious nation—one that was actually attacked during the war—spends most of its recent years defending its own veterans against accusations mostly cooked up by displaced Mexicans and shady organizations.

Under the Constitution, federal law, and UN conventions, anyone proven to have committed a war crime must be indicted. An amnesty law simply doesn't apply to war crimes; that isn't how the legal framework works. In all cases where veterans have been charged with war crimes, the indictment was filed exclusively by the Department of Justice, after they determined there was enough evidence to support the charges. Indictments from foreign bodies don't hold weight here in the States; the Department of Justice only moves forward if they confirm the evidence justifies a criminal complaint, and even then, only if the US judiciary has jurisdiction. The indictments from the International Criminal Tribunal aren't independent parties in our legal system, given that it's a separate entity under the UN conventions, the Constitution regarding cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal, and other domestic laws.

It all sounds wonderful on paper, but we’ve seen how things actually play out in practice over the last few years... 👎

And it was always justified by that one "holy grail" goal: joining the European Union.

The indictments coming out of The Hague aren't just some random local prosecutor's thing; they stem from a specialized branch of the American judiciary, operating strictly under international conventions, UN rulings, and the specific federal laws governing cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal.

So, if that's the case, then Sava Štrbac is basically just an outside consultant for Bajić...
Who, by the way, showed up at Congress last night alongside... well, Pupovac.

It’s all very clear now. Like rowdyowl always says—theory is one thing, but when you look at the deep-state elements running our justice system, you see a completely different reality. Between the Department of Justice, the Republican Party, and the media, we're looking at one of the biggest institutional embarrassments in this country.

Linda Roberts2 said:They’re basically selling out our national interests. It’s all about making concessions to certain member states, handing over generals, dealing with that humiliation in The Hague, racking up massive debt just to meet European Union standards, and enforcing all these arbitrary rules. If the European Union ever falls apart, all those concessions go down the drain, but we’ll still be stuck with the debt. p.s. I think Greece is already importing goods from Bulgaria that don't even meet European Union regulations, just because they're cheaper.

Let’s not forget the possibility of dropping lawsuits, selling off state-owned companies and natural resources, and the endless cycle of borrowing money, too. Honestly, maybe a better title would be "not if," but "when" the European Union collapses. It definitely isn't going to last forever.

For instance, look at how the UK government was branded as traitors after World War II, even though back then, trying to accommodate the Third Reich seemed perfectly normal to some.

The people who will ultimately answer for this are the ones who voted for the parties in the "pro-Europe coalition." That's 85% of the voters.

Linda Roberts2 said:They’re basically selling out our national interests. It’s all about making concessions to certain member states, handing over generals, dealing with that humiliation in The Hague, racking up massive debt just to meet European Union standards, and enforcing all these arbitrary rules. If the European Union ever falls apart, all those concessions go down the drain, but we’ll still be stuck with the debt. p.s. I think Greece is already importing goods from Bulgaria that don't even meet European Union regulations, just because they're cheaper.

Let’s not forget the possibility of dropping lawsuits, selling off state-owned companies and natural resources, and the endless cycle of borrowing money, too. Honestly, maybe a better title would be "not if," but "when" the European Union collapses. It definitely isn't going to last forever.

For instance, look at how the UK government was branded as traitors after World War II, even though back then, trying to accommodate the Third Reich seemed perfectly normal to some.

And what exactly is wrong with the bolded part?
I am practically counting down the days until these state-run corporations are privatized—then maybe some new owners can worry about them using their own cash instead of covering massive losses with my tax dollars.