No, the point of it is not cripping EU.

The point of it _was_ to get more countries on board, because at the time, they had no clue how the EU would act and needed insurances.

Now, if a majority does not want this veto anymore, it should be removed. But the minority vetoing it, will hold the majority hostage.

> having the ability to cripple their actions will continue to be indispensable

No, it’s crippling, not indispensable. EU cannot do anything and hence becomes irrelevant internationally, which in turns negates all the benefits of being a member of the EU and countries just leave.

I suggest the other way around: Remove veto, anyone that doesn’t like it leaves and the remaining ones hopefully get a better EU out of it. But it will be painful to get there.

I think you are not getting the problem: If all decisions are vetoed, what happens?

> They can alter it only for themselves in the way I described above.

You are suggesting they leave the EU and create EUv2.

I suggest that if they are the majority, they change EU, and the minority that doesn’t like it leaves (and create another EU if they want).

> looking at the excessively bloody and inadequately smart history of Europe

yeah, and it is getting bloody again and the veto is preventing the EU to have a sound strategy. Just wait, do nothing, watch…

And quoing “I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further." is very misleading. Members of the EU can leave. Leaving the Empire was not really an option.