European Tribune

Display:
My point is precisely the last. only those "not sure" should be taken into consideration. it makes much more sense, don't you agree?

No, I don't.

let me put in another perspective. how many those of said "yes" were assuming that turkish society would change?

the lack of discrimination is valid both ways!

OK. I think where we could agree is that the unqualified question about whether Turkey should be allowed to join the EU is a stupid question. Personally, I think more specific questions should have been asked of everyone (such as: "Allow Turkey to accede if it fulfills all conditions?" "allow to accede once there is deeper integration?" "Do you think Turkey is able to fulfill all conditions... in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years?").

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Sat Feb 16th, 2008 at 03:46:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
so have two different points under discussion (PUD) here:

ONE - which part of the respondents to question 2 (T2Q) should answer to the question of table 3 (T3Q)?

TWO - which question or questions should substitute T2Q?
...........................

there is a connection between the two points, and I think that if we address question II first we may still agree on question I.
so in this post i'll address question II; in a next, parallel, post i'll  address question I. post titles codify this.

PUD-TWO will be discussed bellow
.............................

It seems many different reasons can justify why one opposes or is in favour of Turkey becoming a member of the EU. we have:

Factors extrinsic to Turkey, such as

- is the EU ready to take new members?
 (>> is it mature, in terms of decision processes?
  >> are the new members states already integrated, and so we can continue enlargement under?)
)
- can the EU take any more members at all?
  (>> may there be a limit number of members-states before the decision process colapse? OR
 >> may there be a limit number of member-states after which the founding members cannot obtain the advantages from participating in the association that justifies their financial support to the cohesion of the group?)

- factors specific to the entrance of Turkey
( >> the fact that Turkey is mostly in Asia (96% of its territory
  >> is Turkey a European culture?
  >> is Turkey too big and poor?
  >> was it not Turkey a country which kept SE Europe under its control for hundreads of years?
  >> is the geopolitical agenda of Turkey compatible to the one of major european powers?)

(Resuming) PUD-TWO Main Result:
These are too many questions. they deserve a serious poll on their own.

Corolary a
 you cannot possible discuss the turkish accession problem in detail in this poll.
Corolary b
 therefore the poll should be limitted to T2Q. T2Q is not a bad question. you just cannot elaborate from it.

by findmeaDoorIntoSummer on Sat Feb 16th, 2008 at 06:00:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
only those who responded favourably to T2Q are admitted to T3Q. let's call it the For or Neutral subset to question 2 (fnQ2). the Against (negative) Subset to question 2 - aQ2 - is not represented in T3Q.

In table 4 fnQ2 is mixed with all of of Q2.
therefore the mixture in T4 (no question here) is enriched in fnQ2 and depleted in aQ2.

-------------------------

was this answering style too pompous for you?

by findmeaDoorIntoSummer on Sat Feb 16th, 2008 at 06:25:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
Early Friday Photography Blog No. 62
by LEP - Nov 20
18 comments

The Puritan Edge
by rg - Nov 20
76 comments

Help oppose Sarko's three strike nonsense
by nicta - Nov 20
6 comments

So I met Bill McKibben
by SacredCowTipper - Nov 20
1 comment

LQD: Geoengineering Ranked
by nanne - Nov 19
16 comments

The Purpose of Education
by rdf - Nov 20
1 comment

Trains in Moravia
by DoDo - Nov 16
72 comments

LQD: The real orgasmic Puritans
by Ted Welch - Nov 20
2 comments

Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series