Java Jive wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:23:57 +0100, "Norman Wells"
wrote:

And my point is that if everone takes that attitude, we're doomed,
because no agreement will ever be reached if everyone is saying:
"No, you must jump first!"

Absolutely. But Britain jumping first will have no effect at all.
That's my point. We're as significant in that respect as the Cayman
Islands or Tuvalu.

That is an absurd comparison.

Is it?

In terms of population we are
comparatively small (though incomparably bigger than the Turks and
Cayman Islands or Tuvalu), but as members of the UN Security Council,
of the EU, the leading member of the Commonwealth, through the
'Special Relationship' with the US, as a post-imperial power, as a
leading financial centre, and as a democratic developed nation with a
(sort of) free press and a large on-line presence in the world's
leading language(1), we have a great deal of world influence beyond
what you suggest.

Oh yeah? Is that why, when we signed up enthusistically to the Kyoto
Protocol on climate change, the USA, China and India conspicuously avoided
doing so?

Is that why, when we enshrine into law reductions in our carbon emissions by
certain dates, absolutely no-one follows us?

Get real. We have little or no influence whatsoever.

1: I'm not talking about numbers of speakers, but the fact that
English is the language of science, international communications, etc.
As an example of which, a map of the last 500 hits of my own small
site ranges from Honolulu in the West to Japan in the East, with
particular clusterings in the US and Europe. Although there are none
at the moment, I've noticed recently activity in places like Iran and
even China where Satellite TV may be the only way for people to get
uncensored news (at least, I'm guessing that's why, I don't really
know). Generally of course, I get most hits from the English speaking
world, but that includes countries like India.

The internet means that anything you or I say in ...

uk.d-i-y, uk.media.tv.misc, uk.tech.digital-tv, uk.tech.broadcast

... can and will be read by others across the globe.

And you think it makes a ha'porth of difference what is said in any of
those?


Are you proud of
your contribution in that light? What sort of message do you think
are sending out?

I am sending out the truth, and of course I'm proud of that.

Are you suggesting that I should lie instead, or at least suppress the
truth? Because, if you are, you need to tread rather carefully. Who then
dictates what should be said and not said, and what is their agenda?


But we are part of the EU, which we *can* influence, and if you ask
anyone who knows anything about modern business, who sets all the
environmental standards that matter, they'll say: "The EU!"

And we are part of 'The World' too, which actually includes China,
India, the USA, Russia and Brazil. So, all we have to do is get
everyone to agree, and then we'll be alright.

This is just mere worthless verbiage. You haven't answered my point
that the EU's environmental standards have a disproportionate
influence because we are the biggest market for high end manufactured
goods, which are therefore built to our standards, including
environmental ones.

That's because we're not and they aren't.

I suggest you stop living in the eighteenth century and get up to speed.