BruceVC

Yes because there is such a thing as the The Clinton Doctrine of Humanitarian Interventions which justifies USA intervention to prevent things like genocide even if the UNSC doesn't agree to it..which is not uncommon when you consider veto power of the permanent members http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Doctrine

True, it works both ways. However the biggest threat to world peace is clearly NATO. It lives off civil wars and third-world warzones Russia is no global threat, get real. 1,800 operational nukes in the hands of a textbook sociopath say otherwise. Who is this "textbook sociopath" you are talking about ? That would be Putin of course You say NATO is the biggest threat to world peace that the global community faces, I assume you are being serious so can you post links highlighting examples of where NATO has created wars or conflicts that weren't justified or supported by the UNSC? Because that's a serious accusation you are making

Guys seriously, 8/10 is an excellent score. Lets not see it in a negative light or a bad reflection on Gamespot who I personally like

Can you share some details because I am aware of some West involvement in those areas but I wasn't aware this was being done secretly or that the West was denying its involvement like Russia has been doing for months in Ukraine ?

I can't comment definitively, but a lot of educated Africans I've spoken to blame the whole Famine Industry for this. decades of portraying Africans as starving stray dogs hasn't helped. I just find it interesting, because 147 is history book level casualties. Maybe not headlines, but you'd find it written down. A battalion might lose that many in a single fight, and earn a mention. But these weren't soldiers in a war zone. These weren't flyblown kids in a parched land. These were students. Sorry for the late response, I have been really busy socializing over the Easter weekend Anyway people throughout Africa have been commenting and are very concerned about this brutal attack. But this is really a problem that the AU is suppose to resolve and as usual there is no real political will from the AU to resolve its own issues so why should the world be too concerned if the majority of African leaders aren't ? The AU is basically an impotent organisation that lacks real economic and political consensus, for example we still don't have a AU self-funded reactionary force that can be used to address military conflicts on the continent ...like Al-Shabaab and Boko Haram. We rely on funding and support from the UN The issue in Africa is not the people but the lack of leaders who truly want the continent to be transformed economically. We have blocks of countries that are aligned through financial imperative and trade agreements but they are more loyal to there own groups of countries than the continent That's why these types of appalling attacks will continue, the AU doesn't really have the real desire or will to address these problems

Nope, false.. incorrect The Arab Spring was a form of social and political protest that was started in Tunisia and spread throughout the Arab world and had different degrees of success. It was driven by people who lived in these countries and wanted a better life for themselves. The Arab protesters objected to being ruled by families or dictators and wanted a more equitable society http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Spring Please familiarize yourself with what the Arab Spring was and what were the reasons for it The view that the West was responsible has never been accepted or proved and as usual with anti-Western conspiracy theories it makes no sense. For example Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak was an ally of the West and Libya was a member of OPEC and was happily selling oil to support his dictatorial government. So why if the West was behind the Arab Spring would they jeopardize these types of relationships ? So once again its just shows hubris and a myopic view of the Middle East to suggest that in certain countries the actual citizens of those countries wouldn't want a better life for themselves...which is exactly what they wanted and was the reason for the Arab Spring

Yup dictatorships can be "benevolent" as you put it. Forget CNN. Just look at Gaddafi and pre-war socialist Libya. It had the highest standard in North Africa, even a lot higher than that of some eastern European countries like Serbia or Bulgaria. Free healthcare and education and all that. I wish people would stop saying things like " Libya was a great example of a stable economy and government " Gaddafi was a brutal dictator who never had a free and fair election in 40 years, he enriched his own tribe only and looted his countries coffers when it suited him. You cannot say someone is a legitimate ruler of a country if he uses the army and police to stay in power..its a contradiction. If things were so great in Libya why did large parts of his country want political and social change when the Arab Spring started ? But General. Libya was a great example of a stable economy and government. Whether you like that government or not is besides the point. But that's the point you guys keep conveniently missing, there was a massive uprising against the Gaddafi government by his own people. I'll repeat the point " an uprising by his own people " The same thing happened throughout many Arab countries because people were tired of being ruled by families and dictators. They wanted a better and more equal society and frankly they deserve it. This was known as the Arab Spring and was a homegrown process of social unrest driven primarily by people within there own countries Don't try to dismiss the fact that people are capable of wanting a better life for themselves without the West telling them that Vals, it comes across as arrogant

You have raised some good points about why in many Western counties people are privileged. I agree with most of it but that is also the reason why many SJ initiatives are driven from Western countries. And that is also the reason why we need to keep asking ourselves how we can become a more fair and equitable society...we need to ask ourselves these types of questions introspectively because there are certain areas we are lacking but improving all the time

Yup dictatorships can be "benevolent" as you put it. Forget CNN. Just look at Gaddafi and pre-war socialist Libya. It had the highest standard in North Africa, even a lot higher than that of some eastern European countries like Serbia or Bulgaria. Free healthcare and education and all that. I wish people would stop saying things like " Libya was a great example of a stable economy and government " Gaddafi was a brutal dictator who never had a free and fair election in 40 years, he enriched his own tribe only and looted his countries coffers when it suited him. You cannot say someone is a legitimate ruler of a country if he uses the army and police to stay in power..its a contradiction. If things were so great in Libya why did large parts of his country want political and social change when the Arab Spring started ?

What a long weekend, wowzers I was busy. Drinking, partying, shopping, social events, clubbing, barbeques....you name it I did it Now I'm off to Cape Town for 9 days for work. I am flying at lunch time. I love Cape Town. There are excellent wine farms in Cape Town, beaches, restaurants and of course great outdoor activities I will be working but I will have most of the weekend off to do some site seeing

This is no surprise. I would be also desperate to manipulate public and global opinion if I was involved in the Russian security services. Russia cannot let its citizens know the truth about its actions in places like Ukraine which is exactly why you don't have truly independent media houses in Russia And before we hear the " but the West also manipulates social media ", the West has independent media houses and doesn't deny involvement in places Iraq and its military campaign against ISIS. So the West is much more transparent in its interventionist policies

Nice one, I am excited about getting my shirt

I would imagine that given who Satan is and what he represents that most Christians would object to participating in a Satanic ritual celebrating the marriage of a man and a woman. Most certainly most Christians would object to baking a cake with an upside down cross on it, no matter what it was for. You may as well ask a Jew to bake a cake with a Swastika on it, or a devout Hindu butcher to chop up some cows for you. If you look really hard you might find some that might, but you'd probably find a lot more telling you to bugger off (moreso I would think in the latter scenario). There are many things that a Christian (or anyone else, religious or not) might morally object to and not want any part of. Why marriage is seen as good.... that would take a book to answer fully. Put simply: Marriage is generally seen as good as Christians in general celebrate life (a fundamental reason that in general Christians oppose abortion), and view marriage as the ideal and best manner in which children can be brought into the world and raised. Sex outside of marriage is frowned upon for a variety of reasons. The bond of marriage is a sacred holy bond to many Christians. Christians generally hold the love and bond between a man and woman in high regard. As for Christian views of non-Christians getting married and having kids. Most Christians don't view non-Christians as folks who will necessarily suffer eternal damnation, Certainly there are some who do. Heck there are sects of Christians (of pretty much any religion) that think if one doesn't follow their way one is going to suffer eternally, or in this life. For the most part however, people with such thoughts are not deriving them from their religion, but to their credit, most if not all of those sects do attempt to persuade others to follow their way of life, so in their minds they do try and save those that they see as being on the path to hell. Christians certainly generally do not look at a child of anyone (even Mr. and Mrs. Satan's kid) and think to themselves that the kid is going to hell because of his parents. If anything they'd look at it as a new opportunity to tell someone else of Christ and the Bible. This is part of the reason (though I wouldn't say the primary) that a great deal of missionary and charity work is done all over the world where Christianity is not common, by many Christian churches. Note: I'm not exactly a practicing Christian. I do know a lot about Christianity, as I'm a lifelong student of history, went to a Christian church as a kid, and find the subject of religions and spirituality very interesting. if you want better answers than what I've given, I recommend actually going to one of your local churches and attempting to talk to one of it's clergy or even some of it's members. Clergy in general are happy to talk to people about their religion and answer questions. Even to people not of their religion (this is how I learned quite a bit of what I know of Judaism). Members of course run the spectrum a bit more, from those who will happily talk to you to those who for whatever reason would rather not, and of course some will be more intelligent and knowledgeable on whatever subject you're interested in than others. I myself almost always have interesting conversations with the Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses when they stop by in hopes of converting me. Believe it or not, most of them are pretty smart in my experience and aren't afraid of tough questions. I also have had some interesting conversations with an old priest turned part-time auto salesman who I run into at a local bar on occasion. And by way of a former job know more rabbis than priests at this point in my life. If one is respectful, people often are happy to talk about their religion with you. Morality and discussions about it can be quite complex. Such things are best done in person. @ Vals and Amentep You guys are posting some really interesting perspectives that never occurred to me. I always learn new things on these forums But you both seem to be missing something fundamental, this bill is about the LGBT community not being served in commercial entities like restaurants . Issues like Christians having to serve Satanists is not what this furor is about even if it is valid. I see that as more of a distraction from the real issues of discrimination and homophobia that some people cleverly mask using other issues so there bigotry isn't apparent ..and this obviously doesn't apply to either of you

But were you born in NZ, I would be surprised if you were because you seem far too personal and persistent with your diatribe against the West Its like you have a real grudge ...like many people from Serbia who dislike the West because of perceived bad treatment. And its not big deal, I am just interested

I understand that people have a certain view of Russia and its actions and anyone is perfectly entitled to believe what they want But other people will dispute this, like me Firstly its not accurate to suggest that sanctions against any country have an equally negative impact to both sides, thats just not true. Yes of course in the case of Russia as the sanctions increase you will see international companies pulling out of the Russian economy or being forced to and this will impact sales as Russia was a excellent market for certain industries. But there are always other markets and the reality is sanctions make it very difficult for any country to operate in the global community so the worst hit people will be Russian businesses who need to operate in the international community As you mentioned Russia is primarily the architect of ifs own economic slowdown as it hasn't diversified its economy and relied on the exports of natural resources to sustain its economy so obviously the falling oil price has had a huge impact But lets not kid ourselves of course the Western sanctions have also had a detrimental effect to the Russian economy..its just silly to suggest anything different For example Russian bonds are now worth junk which makes borrowing more expensive and also certain international fund managers have to pull out of investing in Russia. But the main issue is Russia is now considered a risky investment so you will see and have seen the mass flow of foreign capital ..this is bad for any country The end result of most sanctions is not to undermine Putins power, we know he is very popular. The end result is to get the Russian economy to a point where its so bad it has to start making concessions...so in the interest of economic stability Putin will have to become more serious about a real agreement in Ukraine You may think " what nonsense..sanctions don't work " but that would be a incorrect assumption. Sanctions work but they work slowly and insidiously..look at my own country South Africa and Iran? Sanctions forces both countries to want to negotiate and Russia will be no different

...Have you ever ****ing spoken to an American? I dare say we're the most self-depricating people on Earth, both because we're just humor-loving and because we have every reason to be. (if someone would like to name another candidate, please do because I would love to meet the people of said country) Not all of us of course, since there's truth to all stereotypes and the "MURICA" stereotype is no exception, but I often find myself explaining to foreigners who're curious about America that the USA actually houses two very distinct cultures, and criticism of the USA is very welcome amongst one, still welcome amongst the other for different reasons entirely. Yes actually I have spoken to numerous Americans, I work for a global American software company and travel to the USA at least once a year My point still stands but obviously this applies to certain groups within American culture Despite the amazing patience Americans seem to have with foreigners telling them how to be a better nation criticism and ridicule from a foreigner won't be tolerated for very long...but Noah will know better than to do this all the time....he will use restraint and a level of balance

Exactly..and we don't want a weakened EU in the face of the rise of Russian hegemony and military aggression Sorry Bruce but that's nonsense. Seems you are heavily biased against Russia. Do you know what hegemony is ? It's cultural imperialism. Do you see Russian consumer products anywhere? Please, get real. We have had western hegemony for the last 200 years or so. Wow Luj1, you say I am bias....did you read your last post...I would say you are also inclined to support a certain side in the tension between the West and Russia Its interesting you say Russia are the good guys, I would love to have this debate with you. So lets start with " whats your definition of good guy " in this context?

Yeah I agree, it must be a April Fools joke

No, it isn't wrong. Why would you keep playing if it isn't fun anymore? It'd be equivalent to getting to page 600 of a 2000 page epic and going "You know, I've not enjoyed the last 400 pages...but I'm too far in to quit now!". It's just silly. Thats good thinking and logic, I like it

Exactly..and we don't want a weakened EU in the face of the rise of Russian hegemony and military aggression We? Location:Johannesburg, South Africa you funny Oby Yes, despite what some people think in South Africa " we "are aligned to Western ideology So "we " refers to countries that follow Western culture

I usually don't bother replying to you because of your constant, unsubtle trolling. In this case I'm going to make an exception because I don't want anyone reading your lies and buying into the party line for an instant. Yes, (some) macroeconomic figures say Spain has, in 2014, grown as much as Germany. Whoop-de-****ing-do. However, this "improvement" needs to be put in perspective: intensive use of labor means a decrease in productivity in an economy already notoriously unproductive (25% less than Germany's) "growth" in 2014 is actually only bouncing back from the contraction experienced these last few years — for the absolutely most optimistic predictions, it'll take until 2017 to get back to 2008 levels... other economists say we'll never get back to those levels "austerity" measures have accomplished only one thing, distributing wealth upwards. In 2014 the number of people worth more than €1M increased by 24%, with population in poverty increasing, something even the EC has chastised Spain for. after six years of "fiscal consolidation", we still have a deficit of about 6%, only better than Greece's; this is in spite of massive direct and indirect taxes increases and an incresing public debt that is expected to surpass 100% in 2015 the "jobs miracle" is, in true Spanish fashion, a cheap copy of the German model, with 13% of jobs created being for less than 10 hours/mo, and 39% being less than 30 hours/mo. This is in addition to ~40% of contracts being for 30 days or less and new jobs offering paycheck levels from 1995. Yes, 1995. The difference with the German model? The state doesn't make up for the difference between minimum wage and current job salaries. The result of all this? A net increase of less than 200k jobs compared to 2011 levels I could go on, but that should be enough for anyone not otherwise informed to realize that you, quite simply, have no idea what you are talking about. Good day. Thanks for taking the time and responding, I have found that interesting

In the example of the Muslim cartoonist he shouldn't be held liable for not drawing a cartoon of Muhammad, of course this is an extreme example because most of us know that Muslims don't believe that any images of the Prophet are acceptable. So no one would expect a Muslim to do this And I also dont think the other example is particularly valid because there are many Kosher and Halal restaurants that only serve a certain type of food based on religious doctrine and these restaurants are never sued So neither of these examples is relevant to a restaurant refusing to serve members of LGBT community, surly you can see the difference ?

But that is exactly what you saying, you just replaced 'do something against your belief' with 'serve member of LGBT community'.. So to put it plainly, do you think that an orthodox priest should liable for not agreeing to preform a service against his belief? Or a Muslim painter for not agreeing to draw a cartoon of muhammad? No we are not talking about churches or religious organisations. This is commercial businesses, so for example a bakery that refuses to serve members of the LGBT community And this furore is about people being refused service in a shop, like a restaurant, because of there sexual orientation. We are not talking about you forcing a Muslim to draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammad which is against there religious belief

So...I feel guilty, I started playing the fantasy RPG Inquisitor http://store.steampowered.com/app/241620/ ( Not DA:I from Bioware ) And after 25 hours I have lost interest....I feel like I am giving up but the game is becoming laborious. Is it wrong to play a game for so long and then quit?

No one is saying you can't have religious freedom but you can't refuse to serve anyone who comes to your business because they are a member of LGBT community...and its actually simpler than that, you can refuse to serve them but you can and will get sued. This Indiana law would have prevented businesses from being sued as they would have used the "Religious Freedom Law" as a defense from legal action