RB> You understand as well as I do that the treaties provide NO legal RB> method of expelling a member state against it's will.
Oh, I understand that. What I also understand and you don't is that it is irrelevant. What is legal or not is determined in a court of law. Without an independant authority that has the teeth to enforce it, "legal" is a meaningless term. In conflicts between countries, it is the law of the jungle.
If the EU wants a memeber out, then that member will go out. Says the law of the jungle.
MV>> In the case of Greece it would have been quit easy to get rid of MV>> them. Just stop the flow of money. That would leve them no choice.
RB> Of course. And then the Euro and the EU collapse together.
Not all all. The EU can survive without Greece.
RB> And just _who_ would "stop the flow of money"?
Those funding the "loans" to Greece of course.
RB> Germany alone? The IMF alone? France alone? Even if the will were RB> there, and the existing treaties ignored - a thing of impossibility - RB> no government would want to be stigmatized as the gravedigger of the RB> EU.
Irrelevant. The EU will survive without Greece. Greece is still in because the EU wanted to keep them in. No matter what the treaties say.
