Gaming Banned in Greece

[Brutus]

In a free country like the U.S. it is up to the individual to give, not for the Gov to make them give.



You can call me selfish, whatever. I work hard for my money and I spend it how I like. If that means giving a homeless person a meal or buying a new pair of shoes that I don't need, it doesn't matter. I earned it therefore it is mine to spend.

[evil_sheep]

Sure, I'll never convince either one of you that what America has done for the world has been for the best, and has been a blessing on the world overall. But then again, that's exactly the point.

I feel exactly the same way, except opposite. It is obvious that there is no point in arguing because I'll never convince either you, Brutus or you Nighthawk. Your statements and views are so ridiculous and blindly pro-American that you can never be convinced beyond anything besides the folly of your own lies, your contradictory statements and your hypocritical actions.



In such a day and age, I find your lack of humanity to be profoundly disturbing and hope it does not reflect the majority of American opinion, but based on the President you have chosen for yourselves, it seems that such hope is a futile action.



As I have said, there is absolutely no more point in arguing because anyone who can possibly write such ludicrous hypocrisy and worse, believe it, is beyond the power of my reasoning. I can only hope that as you grow older your views of the world will change.

Added @ [time="1031000894"]

I know I cannot convince you of the US contempt for international consensus and human compassion, but one reason is because I do not have all the facts. Please at least read this: The United States of America: Human Rights vs Public Relations



Here is a small summary of the facts from the article:

International Court of Justice. Apart from so far failing to take the necessary measures to comply with the ICJ decision on the issue of consular rights and capital defendants, the USA was already one of only two countries to have ignored an ICJ ruling(18) (the other being Iran);

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Aside from ignoring the Commission in relation to the Guantánamo detainees, the USA continues to disregard its call for individual executions to be halted while it examines the prisoners' claims. For example, in 2001, the US government executed federal death row prisoner Juan Raul Garza despite the Commission's finding that the introduction of evidence at Garza's sentencing of his involvement in unsolved crimes for which he had never been tried or convicted had been ''antithetical to the most basic and fundamental judicial guarantees''. The Commission concluded that Garza had been sentenced to death ''in an arbitrary and capricious manner'' and that his execution would be a ''deliberate and egregious violation'' of US obligations under international law. The same thing occurred at the trial of Javier Suárez Medina, but he was killed before the ACHR could examine the facts of his case;

American Convention on Human Rights, which the USA has failed to ratify 25 years after signing it;

Geneva Conventions, as outlined above with respect to the Guantánamo detainees;

Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, in particular as it impacts on foreign nationals in the USA accused of capital crimes;

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. The USA is one of only 23 countries not to have ratified this Convention;

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the USA has ratified, but agreed to be bound by only to the extent that its restrictions on the death penalty and its prohibition on torture or other cruel, inhuman degrading treatment or punishment match its own constitutional constraints;

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. While 145 countries have ratified this treaty, the USA has not, 25 years after signing it;

Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to which the USA attached a number of ''reservations'' and other conditions upon ratification. The Committee Against Torture, the expert body established by the Convention to oversee its implementation, has asked the US Government to withdraw these reservations. The US Government has failed to do so and has ignored other recommendations by the Committee, such as to prohibit the remote-controlled electro-shock stun belt, widely used in the USA;

Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture. This Protocol aimed at providing a system of unannounced visits to places of detention such as police stations and prisons was approved by the UN Economic and Social Council on 24 July 2002 despite US opposition;

Convention on the Rights of the Child. In May 2002, Somalia signed the Convention, and indicated its intention to ratify it. Once it does so, becoming the 192nd state party to the Convention, the USA will be the only country not to have ratified this fundamental treaty.

[Gristy]

they mustve had a vote on something like this

[Brutus]

evil_sheep said: "folly of your own lies, your contradictory statements and your hypocritical actions."



I don't think I have lied, or made any contradictory statements. It is not I that am blinded, it is you. You fail to acknowledge all the good the U.S. has done for many countries, including Denmark. You not being aware of what we have done does not mean it did not happen.



Yes, I am pro-American. Please do not think that will offend any American. We take care of our own, and the rest of the world in the best way that we can without lowering the standards of the people that live in America. Maybe if more countries acted in this responsible manner a number of countries that need help would no longer need it.



By the way, what have you done for the world lately?

[Corinthian]

Brutus wrote..

evil_sheep said: "folly of your own lies, your contradictory statements and your hypocritical actions."



I don't think I have lied, or made any contradictory statements. It is not I that am blinded, it is you. You fail to acknowledge all the good the U.S. has done for many countries, including Denmark. You not being aware of what we have done does not mean it did not happen.



Yes, I am pro-American. Please do not think that will offend any American. We take care of our own, and the rest of the world in the best way that we can without lowering the standards of the people that live in America. Maybe if more countries acted in this responsible manner a number of countries that need help would no longer need it.



By the way, what have you done for the world lately?

I'm afraid your attitude will offend some Americans, perhaps even make them ashamed of you. It is apprarent in the above that you do lie or at least distort the truth... or perhaps just refuse to realize reality, I'm not sure.

This discussion is not about the many fine things the US has done. It is not about the many undeniable shitty things the US has done. It's about foreign aid. Wanting me to kiss your ass because you were on the allied side during WW2 (I assume that's what you talk about when you say the US has helped DK) just shows you weak character again.



And remember, it was not you that built the US, you're just lucky to be born into the country.



What I don't get about is how you deny any negative criticism of US policy or mentality. That's just dumb. I will happily admit that many of my actions are motivated by lower instíncts and that I'm no saint. Nor will I deny that my gvmnt makes immoral dicisions at times. Of course, that's only natural and to deny it is to confiirm that one has no control over these aspects of ones person. Sad.



I have to conclude that your unwillingness to face up to reality is caused by you having moral issues with it, which would be understandable I guess.



This will be my last post in this thread, as sheep said one cannot argue with bigots.



And to Americans reading this: as stated before, I have many American friends IRL and because of them I know that people like nighthawk/brutus does not speak for anybody but themselves, no matter how much they would like to. So this critique is not directed towards a group of people, but only towards the 2 posters above and US policy on foreign aid.



Hope to lie on a warm beach in cali sometime soon, again :)



See you in another thread perhaps.

[-Aragorn]

Edited by [user="10696"] @ [time="1031012004"]

I have a few things I would like to go over, and will start with evil_sheep's last post - especially the quote he attached at the end.



Obviously you don't need to officially ratify something to actually practice it. What discrimation do you exactly see against women on a government-wide standpoint? And probably the reason why we didn't sign it is because that would mean we would be forced to open all Combat Operations in the military to women. There are many reasons for this, which I will leave up to you to think about.



Almost everything we didn't sign/ratify is because of one small detail. It doesn't mean we disagree to the ENTIRE basis.



And just because they signed and ratified something on paper, doesn't mean all other are countries are completely following them.



The second issue I would like to bring up is how we don't allow people under 21 to drink. "It go against FREEDOM".



Well, whether you like it or not, when your living under an organization which your paying to look after your interests - you'll have to give up a few things.

There are always going to be stupid people (and even smart people who aren't thinking at the time), who will drink and drive. And when they do that, people die. However, to lessen this risk, we have decided people can actually judge how much to drink and then drive at the age of 21.

You may say, "but we're smart enough!". That may be so, but are you smart enough against peer pressure? Just think of the temptation when it's illegal. Then think of it when it actually IS legal.

In wraping up, your not going to give a mentally unstable person a m16 to murder people just because it's freedom.



And, yes, I would very much enjoy making love and peace, instead of war. But in reality, completely ignoring the thought of war being made even if you got rid of the military and instead used its budget on financial aid is completely niave. Let's say we do that, and try to make friends with everyone.



Whose to say some country, who doesn't share the same viewpoint, looks at an America with a greatly decreased army - and yet with an even better economy.... Hmmm, land... and that means power.. hmmm....



No matter how we evolve as humans, there will always be other people without the same viewpoints (which is made COMPLETELY clear from the arguments in this thread!!). And those different viewpoints also mean there will be power-hungry people, who make power-hungry nations, which will invade countries with weaker militaries to become more powerful from combined economies.



And you say decreasing our military, and using all that money to help out will change that basic fact?



In a perfect world, YES! But, sadly, this isn't a perfect world.



I apologize for the rambling nature of all my posts. I lack the writing skills as a lot of other people in this thread - but I hope you can still understand the basic thought of what I'm saying, and not the specifics.



This probably won't convince Corinthian and evil_sheep in the least, but I at least hope this makes them think.



I find myself in agreement with Brutus, and Nighthawk. I know everyone in this thread, when they go to heaven (or some sort of after-life) will see how the world truely was - and who was right.



I'll be there to say, "I told you so." :P



Oh yeah, also want to point out: that like Nighthawk - I haven't conscienciously insulted anyone on this thread too. Go non-flamers!



And I would like to point out another thing real fast:



Just because someone's opinion differs from yours - realize that they can be just as smart as you; if not more. However, their just "misguided" (in your mind). Don't talk about their "character" unless they just murdered someone.



Keep this in mind, both sides. And in ANY argument, unless it's dead obvious otherwise (as in they just murdered someone and say that "What? Of course it's ok to murder people you nitwit!) this rings true.

[Brutus]

I was talking about how we help Denmark now, for example with the upgrades to their F-16 aircraft, etc.



I am not a bigot, you are more of a bigot then I.



Please point out where I lied in any of my statements.



I am sure that a number of Danes are ashamed of you also, in fact this can be said about anybody in any country. I doubt Americans will be offended by the statement "Take care of your own countrymen before giving resources away to others".

[-:Nighthawk:-]

Well, looks to be about the end of the thread. Aragorn, despite your attacks on your own writing skills, I found your train of thought to be quite easy to understand.



In the end, whether we agree with how things are done or not, they remain as they are. Perhaps things will change with time, perhaps not. There's really not much we can accomplish by making others of differing views angry at us for our views.



And in the final end of us all, I don't think any of our discussing will really matter, other than how we treated one another. And when we all meet at that point in time, hopefully we can look back on such discussions and laugh, because in the end our thoughts probably don't matter that much.



See ya all around. :)

[italianm4fia]