Elerond

Doesn't sound like them being much of refugees if an incoming cold winter and an economic downturn would make them think twice. //edit: They were Iraqis, lol I'm fine if less refugees come to Europe because they think life is hard in the EU...life is harder in the EU than people assume So Elerond and Meshugger if you guys are feeling guilty about Finland creating such a bad impression of the EU....don't feel guilty. People also need to see the negative of the EU that isn't even that severe Finland will create much worse impression in time period from December to February when temperature here is averagely between -10 - -30 degree of Celsius and you see sun only couple hours in day. Culture shock that it causes for people from ME is enormous even when one is prepared to it not to mention people that aren't.

U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Sexual Abuse of Boys by Afghan Allies http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 Same time in US Teen prosecuted as adult for having naked images – of himself – on phone http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/20/teen-prosecuted-naked-images-himself-phone-selfies

Comparable how? Or are you counting your native population birth rate as a collective or your genuine native population. Because last time I looked, the only reason most European countries have a positive birth:death ratio, is because the immigrants have several children and make the overall stats look better. And where did you get 850 million, EU has about 500. I get my numbers from the World Bank and UN websites, as opposed to the time honored tradition of pulling the numbers out of your ass. The UN sets a cautious estimate of the population of EU at 738 million. Source. While other projections are almost a billion when Russia, Turkey and other countries some times affiliated with Europe are counted in, so I went with a nice middle ground. Do you also need help with finding sources on population growth? Your source claims that's the population number for the continent of Europe, not the Union. EU's population is about 500 million.

Article behind link is in Finnish, as I don't have seen any articles about this in English, so I must use this http://yle.fi/uutiset/irakilaiset_varoittavat_toisiaan_somessa_alkaa_tulko_suomeen_taalla_on_kauheaa/8320618?ref=leiki-uu Iraqi refugees in Finland have started to advice other refugees that they should not come in Finland or even Europe because even though there is safe life will be much harder and very humiliating. Also it is mentioned that everything is expensive, toilets are unclean, refugee centers give very small portions of food, refugees can't work. Also it is mentioned that some refugees say in social media that they want to return in home. So what do you think isn't our social paradise on Earth that nice (very likely) or do these people just try make their own situation better in future by dissuading their commorades from coming here (or other places in Europe)?

Obama can be pretty funny. Bad president, but decent comedian. Isn't this old....like 2011 old ? It seems to be that old, it has just resurfaced in social media, probably because it fits so well in current debates.

inorite? The whole setup in Gilded Vale really seemed like it was leading to that. The two should really have been blended together. Josh's argument is logical if you look it from point that they didn't had enough resources to polish every feature in the game and as Stronghold turn out to be much more difficult to implement than they expected, so when they had to look features that they don't polish they probably had bias to look reasons not to polish Stronghold (as they didn't really have resource to do that anyway), which lead them notice anti-stronghold faction much more than they noticed other anti-factions (not including anti-romance) and use that as rationale why it would be wasteful to put resources in the stronghold. Their original concepts for stronghold show that they planned to make it much more interactive than what it become at end. As Tim seemed to have planned whole own mini-game around it. Similarly crafting, skills, resting and cooking become much simpler than what their original plans for them were.

Obama seem to care less and less what people think about him these days https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8TwRmX6zs4

Not at university level, no - but that's no reason for ad hominems. I think you may be misunderstanding what I meant by "back to the beginnings". Christians believe that Jesus existed as a pacifist preacher who walked around Judea and Samaria (today known as the West Bank) around 30 AD to teach and heal people, and that the first Christian churches were established in line with his teachings shortly after his death. So that's what a "Back to the original teachings!" reformation naturally moves towards in the case of Christianity. Whether Christianity was actually formed in the 4th century and the now-canonical origin story inserted retroactively (a theory held by some historians, and apparently considered a fact by you), is totally irrelevant to that. You would think that is what they would move towards, but if you look reformation movements of Christianity they took more from old testament that they took from teachings of Jesus. They also were quite heavy in punishment of sins where Jesus mostly taught about forgiveness. Also some Christian reformation movements were heavily influenced by states, like in Sweden, Gustav I decided to secede from Catholic Church after disagreement with pope and decided to convert Sweden to Lutheranism (influenced by Lutheran scholar) and used Luther's teaching that Church should not have large treasuries to seize gold, silver and other valuables from Sweden's churches during conversion to enrich his own treasury (which was quite empty after Swedish war of liberation). In England Henry VIII (of Tudors) decided to separate from Rome and Pope and declare himself to Supreme Head of the Church of England, he also seized quite lot of churches treasuries to England's treasury (which had also suffered from previous wars and conflict with Rome and civil unrests in England). These (and other) separations from influence of Rome lead latter on additional conflicts between Rome supporting states and separated states, some of these conflicts were so heavy that they still cause conflicts between people in Europe. Point begin that reformations in Christianity didn't always born or/and spread out because of religious revelations and that many of them didn't focus on teaching of peace, forgiveness and harmony, but repentance of sins, converting killing infidels including other Christians that didn't followed their interpretation of Bible. And they were more often than not used by some state leader as tool to achieve their political goals.

It happened for similar reasons as it has always has, because people have fears (justifiable or unjustified don't matter) and some politician have seen their opportunity to get power in exploiting those fears by promising to solve them. But as we see currently in Finland such promises are much easier to give than keep when it comes to facing realities of world. I am currently quite curios to see if True Finns are capable to keep their support in next elections (of course current crises are well timed for them as they are beginning of current parliament election cycle), but four years is short time when it comes to crises that currently face us. True Finns are just the same manifestiation of the problem as SD in Sweden, Front National in France and so on, which goes back to your original point about politicians prolificating from fears: Are they actually all cynical oppurtunists? That's quite the claim to make. With the same logic, occupy Wall Street was about exploiting the rage of indebted people. When their main agendas surround those fears and how they will prevent those fears never becoming true or at least do their best to fight against them then they are in my opinion opportunist especially when we speak about parties that weren't previously in power. Of course there are always more nuances than any simple explanation can give, but if you look commonalities in those right wing parties you, see that how they speak how immigrants take jobs from original population and how they do more crimes (these are points that play with people's fears [which of course can be justified, but anyway they are aimed towards people's fears]), also with EU they speak how EU dictates things and forces to do things that people don't want (this also plays on people's fears [and again they can be justified, but anyways they are aimed towards something that people fear]), also with Greece they points are how Greece will take all our money (again playing with people's fears [justifiable or not] ). So to me all their main agendas use people's fears to get them motivated to vote them. Opportunist part comes from my opinion that all (at least most) politicians are opportunists that just look ways to motivate people to vote them (For example for governing parties usually motivate people by appeal their habit to dislike any big changes). Occupy Wall Street used people's anger (justified or not, but anger anyways) towards things and it would not had existed without that anger. Of course there may have been some other things that drive them as I did read quite little about it (mostly only about the police brutality cases that got quite lot press time).

This was really never a thing in non-trivial fights, except at the farthest end of optimization. C'mon, man, people are still complaining about that. They were wrong then, and they're wrong now. During early days of beta when large shields gave +30 deflection and and you could put multiple stat enchantments in armor you were able to make such tank fighters that any enemy in beta could not hit them (and if my calculations are correct with those deflection bonuses from beta fighter could have deflection that is over 200 in level 12, meaning that even adra dragon can't really hit them). Yes I know, but in this thread people have said that its ok that classes aren't balanced as game is single player which is why it don't matter that traditional spell casters become so powerful in end game, and by that logic it should not also matter if you give other classes back things that were nerfed away from them to make game more balanced, fun and challenging (I personally liked quite lot when level one chanters were able to kill everything without ever risking themselves as they were able to summon new skeletons and sent them kill enemies to other side of map and kill enemies with attrition).

Maybe devs should bring back immortal fighters and summons that don't vanish after battle, machine gun ciphers and one shot paladins and rogues, so we could get people complain how weak traditional casters are compared to other classes as balance don't matter in SP games. So that everybody can have fun with the game.

It happened for similar reasons as it has always has, because people have fears (justifiable or unjustified don't matter) and some politician have seen their opportunity to get power in exploiting those fears by promising to solve them. But as we see currently in Finland such promises are much easier to give than keep when it comes to facing realities of world. I am currently quite curios to see if True Finns are capable to keep their support in next elections (of course current crises are well timed for them as they are beginning of current parliament election cycle), but four years is short time when it comes to crises that currently face us.

"We better not send Achmed to Berlin to blow himself up in a suicide-attack, the trip is simply too dangerous. He might get hurt", yeah, what great rationale. I would guess that they actually mean that there are easier, safer, faster and more reliable methods to get their members in EU than sent them to travel with refugees in those hazardous routes where there are no guarantees that they get even close to any real targets.

Conservatives in US seems also be highly impacted by current wave of "Political Correctness" in US "It was just of hand joke" gives Emily Blunt as her defense as she forced to apologize her joke about GOP debate and US citizenship.

Well, as long as it's not a problem for the US it's cool, the thinking is going I assume, heh. Guys come on, you can't possibly blame the USA for training people who later become there enemies. As far as Islamic extremism is concerned it is this fractured and nebulous movement that often fights within itself. Its not like Islamic extremism is this monolithic group of people who all have the same motives So in other words you cannot predict if some people who are trained by the USA later turn against them, thats just a reality of this type of conflict Look at the training of the Mujaheddin by the CIA in Afghanistan ....look how that turned out Its got nothing to do with ignorance I don't think that he become Islamic extremist, but that he is just man that likes to be at a war, if you look his history you see that he first fought in Chechnya and then in Georgia and then he moved in Syria because he started to have problems with his superiors in Georgia. You can usually find people like him after long wars that just can't stop fighting and because of that they move to seek next conflict where to fight. After WWII we had such people in Finland, who then moved, for example, to USA to join their army to fight in Korea and then Vietnam. One of the world most famous freedom fighter/terrorist Che Guevara had similar personality, he just could not live peaceful life which is why he moved to Congo and then Bolivia after taking over Cuba, instead helping to build Cuba. Although such people are people that extremist movements like to have, as they usually don't care how things are actually run if they only have given opportunity to fight.

Are you serious? I found many on my gog version. Can't believe the bugs only happen on gogs version, shouldnt be that different. Yes, I am serious. I'm on my second playthrough of 2.01 (with WM 1), and I STILL have not encountered any bugs. Period. I would be so presumptuous and say that you haven't just noticed them, as most of them don't have that dramatic effects and it is especially hard to tell when there are missing voice overs or other sounds if you don't know that they should be there in the first place.

In the US Marines "Brigade" is a fluid term. Usually a brigade is a combination of different units from different groups to do a specific thing. The force breakdown of the Marines is 3 Infantry/Armor Regiments active with 1 reserve. 3 Force Service Support Groups with 1 reserve, 3 Marine Air Wings with 1 reserve. I think the total muster of the Corps is around 200K. But GD don't you think what Carly Fiorina is suggesting..50 Marine Brigades is preposterous ? Maybe she just want to make marines become top heavy branch and not actually add more soldiers

Then again, to be fair...Only +2 to Reflex is pretty weak. Maybe bump up the reflex bonus a bit? And usually when you find a pair you have already found better boots for everyone.

Here is background check in conversation before White March expansion, which could have added some new ones. Aristocrat: 8 Artist: 4 Clergyman: 7 (4 unique) Colonist: 9 Dissident: 6 Drifter: 4 Explorer: 9 Hunter: 10 Laborer: 8 Mercenary: 8 Merchant: 11 Mystic: 5 Philosopher: 11 Raider: 11 Scholar: 13 Scientist: 6 Slave: 7

Depends on background, some have quite lot conversation options and some have just couple.

That is quite supremacist article, which quite well reflects current change in political climate. In my opinion article is half assed and even dangerously bad failure of journalism. But everybody is for their own.

Yep, that was the point. Esp. in context, with his earlier posts, it was "simplified" to the point of being wrong. "Our atmosphere consists of CO2" is also "simplified". It contains CO2 which even plays an important role, but... you get the idea. And I would still dispute that Western intervention in any meaningful sense caused the uprising against Assad. Popular unrest in the Arab states - usually against dictators supported by the West - is nothing new. Even in Syria, slaughtering the populace for rebelling is a good Assad family tradition. In 2011, after Ben Ali surprised everyone by chickening out of Tunisia, and the reform movement in Egypt gained ground, people in other Arab states followed suit. What the West did until that point, apart from supporting a few human rights organisations, was basically just existing, with the clear message "we're rich and democratic and you can, too!" The Arab peoples rose against their leaders *in spite* of Western meddling like the Iraq war, or the support of Israel.Things like sanctions and a few attempts at supporting the opposition mostly came after Assad started shooting people and torturing children. Sure, the situation now is a lot worse. But I'm not convinced that we should therefore just let dictators do their stuff because there might be even bigger idiots around (and I'm not even talking about military intervention, just sanctions and things like that). And I certainly disagree with the line of thought that because our feeble attempts at punishing Assad contributed to preventing him from crushing the rebellion, we're somehow "responsible" for the situation in Syria, and the refugees (yay, topic! ) My point was that you said that claim was completely which is as wrong statement itself Western interventions didn't cause uprising against al-Assad, but they caused that first time to over three decades Syrian rebels had actually power to challenge tyrannic regime of al-Assad's family, and that ISIL/ISIS could gather enough support in Iraq to become force that need to be recognized. This are factors that have heavily influenced things that have driven things to become current refugee crises. By feeble attempts to punish Assad's regime you mean cutting tens of billions from Syria's GDP and nearly cutting all their support lines from neighboring countries. Economical sanctions from "West" are quite devastating even such self depend countries like Russia, Iran and North Korea, for Syria that actually needs to trade to work they were much more devastating, not because they cut their supply lines completely, but because they made everything so much more expensive. There is reason why Assad was so ready to give up their chemical weapons even though there actually was quite small risk that anybody would invade them. Because such losses in their economy al-Assad's regime has not had been able to equip their soldiers or buy ammunition to their heavy weaponry to such point that ISIL/ISIS have start to become better equipped than their soldiers. And I have not argued that West actions in ME weren't justified I have only pointed out that they have now consequences in form of several crises, which most dominant (factored by how much they have direct effect towards West) are current refugee crises. I have also argued that we can't just claim that those crises are caused by ME and we have some sort high horse position where we are just benevolent helpers who selflessly give their riches for poor people who have caused all that misery by themselves.

As western "aggressions and interventions" were partial cause that lead in current situation, meaning that what ktchong wrote was not complete nonsense but too simply put as there is other factors like interventions from Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, governance history of Syria, history of Saddam's regime in Iraq, divination of Muslim faith, history of minority groups in the region, and so on and so forth. Syria works as example how even minor intervention can cause unstable situation to explode much worse crisis, meaning that US supporting Syrian rebel groups together from sanctions from quite lot of nations lead in situation where Syrian government could not prevent ISIL/ISIS to take over large parts of the Syria under their control and when those some of rebel groups that US supported sundered to Al-Qaida it meant that there are now two terrorist groups in Syria that control large areas. I'm not sure why you are still disputing the reality of what caused the Civil War in Syria? It was not caused by Russia or the West. There was only one factor that caused it....the Arab Spring I can't explain this anymore as I'm going for dinner now I must say that I am quite loss how you can put Arab Spring as major/sole reason of anything that is happened in ME, because it just references series of uprisings that were caused by multiple different things. But anyway you have convinced me that actually South Africa is the real reason behind of all these crises

As western "aggressions and interventions" were partial cause that lead in current situation, meaning that what ktchong wrote was not complete nonsense but too simply put as there is other factors like interventions from Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Israel, governance history of Syria, history of Saddam's regime in Iraq, divination of Muslim faith, history of minority groups in the region, and so on and so forth. Syria works as example how even minor intervention can cause unstable situation to explode much worse crisis, meaning that US supporting Syrian rebel groups together from sanctions from quite lot of nations lead in situation where Syrian government could not prevent ISIL/ISIS to take over large parts of the Syria under their control and when those some of rebel groups that US supported sundered to Al-Qaida it meant that there are now two terrorist groups in Syria that control large areas.