I see nobody has mentioned Ed Snowden yet, nor the fact USA spy European people and diplomats, or the potential threat on the common market negotiations between EU and USA, or the even more disgusting fact that he's apparently being manhunt with the help of our (European) governments.
Aquarius wrote:
I see nobody has mentioned Ed Snowden yet, nor the fact USA spy European people and diplomats, or the potential threat on the common market negotiations between EU and USA, or the even more disgusting fact that he's apparently being manhunt with the help of our (European) governments.
This is a very interesting topic, so I feel like joining in even thou your post is already a week old.
Basically from what I gathered after some discussion with my professors:
1) The EU leaders aren't genuinely surprised that NSA spied on them. Pretty sure they knew about it or at least suspected it. But now they have to act bewildered in front of their people, and also because they hope to gain some leverage against the US maybe in negotiations etc.
2) no way they're going to risk the FTA negotiations just because of Snowden. Might get delayed but that's it.
Also my opinion is that no country cares about Snowden at all. It's all about being opposed or allied to the US. Any country in the world would react in the same fashion as the US against someone who leaks secret information. Treatment in custody would vary thou. But when China, Russia and Venezuela are helping Snowden it's because they want to annoy the US a bit. The US would be the first to grant asylum to a Chinese who leaks government information, so it works both ways.
The real interesting part is public opinion though. What do you guys think? Do you support Snowden's actions?
Aquarius wrote:
I see nobody has mentioned Ed Snowden yet, nor the fact USA spy European people and diplomats, or the potential threat on the common market negotiations between EU and USA, or the even more disgusting fact that he's apparently being manhunt with the help of our (European) governments.
This is a very interesting topic, so I feel like joining in even thou your post is already a week old.
Basically from what I gathered after some discussion with my professors:
1) The EU leaders aren't genuinely surprised that NSA spied on them. Pretty sure they knew about it or at least suspected it. But now they have to act bewildered in front of their people, and also because they hope to gain some leverage against the US maybe in negotiations etc.
2) no way they're going to risk the FTA negotiations just because of Snowden. Might get delayed but that's it.
Also my opinion is that no country cares about Snowden at all. It's all about being opposed or allied to the US. Any country in the world would react in the same fashion as the US against someone who leaks secret information. Treatment in custody would vary thou. But when China, Russia and Venezuela are helping Snowden it's because they want to annoy the US a bit. The US would be the first to grant asylum to a Chinese who leaks government information, so it works both ways.
The real interesting part is public opinion though. What do you guys think? Do you support Snowden's actions?
In my opinion, people should know what happens. Spionage is forbidden by US law. If the state does, it should be known in my opinion. All Snowden has done is revealing an illegal fact, which is not illegal. Therefore he should not be sued or punished by West-European countries, who are this hypocrit as well. Anyway, I think its good we know this, but there shouldnt be too many consequences, to evade more problems or even (violent) revolutions. Just stop spying, then everything is solved for me.
Aquarius wrote:
I see nobody has mentioned Ed Snowden yet, nor the fact USA spy European people and diplomats, or the potential threat on the common market negotiations between EU and USA, or the even more disgusting fact that he's apparently being manhunt with the help of our (European) governments.
This is a very interesting topic, so I feel like joining in even thou your post is already a week old.
Basically from what I gathered after some discussion with my professors:
1) The EU leaders aren't genuinely surprised that NSA spied on them. Pretty sure they knew about it or at least suspected it. But now they have to act bewildered in front of their people, and also because they hope to gain some leverage against the US maybe in negotiations etc.
2) no way they're going to risk the FTA negotiations just because of Snowden. Might get delayed but that's it.
Also my opinion is that no country cares about Snowden at all. It's all about being opposed or allied to the US. Any country in the world would react in the same fashion as the US against someone who leaks secret information. Treatment in custody would vary thou. But when China, Russia and Venezuela are helping Snowden it's because they want to annoy the US a bit. The US would be the first to grant asylum to a Chinese who leaks government information, so it works both ways.
The real interesting part is public opinion though. What do you guys think? Do you support Snowden's actions?
In my opinion, people should know what happens. Spionage is forbidden by US law. If the state does, it should be known in my opinion. All Snowden has done is revealing an illegal fact, which is not illegal. Therefore he should not be sued or punished by West-European countries, who are this hypocrit as well. Anyway, I think its good we know this, but there shouldnt be too many consequences, to evade more problems or even (violent) revolutions. Just stop spying, then everything is solved for me.
As an American, and as much as I believe Snowden is one of the biggest Patriots since we decided to revolt against lobster coats(sorry ye Brits ).
However, he did sign confidentiality contracts that he would not speak of NSA projects. He was contractually obliged, but he broke contract at risk of his future because of what he believed as wrong regarding our Constitutional rights.
He has yet to leak anything super classified, but he still knows something useful to enemies of the US (basically everybody) that'd make him as useful as a massive army. The NSA is after him in case he flips due to what he knows.
Team Snowden
Edited by bennettWPS on 20-07-2013 12:22
cactus-jack wrote:
What's happening in Egypt is just awefull. More than 300 dead, what is that part of the world coming to?
What happens here is not normal in the transition to democracy. What happened in the 19th century in Western Europe was that the democracy built up slowly. However, Egypt and other countries want democracy too soon, which makes the countrie very sensitive to corruption and little bits of violence. However, the Egyptians even managed to ruin that, which unfortunately resulted in this. I literally have no idea what could be done, but I am pretty sure western countries like the US, UK, Germany etc. can not do anything here.
cactus-jack wrote:
What's happening in Egypt is just awefull. More than 300 dead, what is that part of the world coming to?
A news report today got me thinking: is Egypt going to be the new Syria? After all, it did start like that for them and more importantly, will a western state end it early? Worst part is, if that wont happen, there will be a brutal spiral of one group leading and anthor group getting killed by the leaders.
cactus-jack wrote:
What's happening in Egypt is just awefull. More than 300 dead, what is that part of the world coming to?
What happens here is not normal in the transition to democracy. What happened in the 19th century in Western Europe was that the democracy built up slowly. However, Egypt and other countries want democracy too soon, which makes the countrie very sensitive to corruption and little bits of violence. However, the Egyptians even managed to ruin that, which unfortunately resulted in this. I literally have no idea what could be done, but I am pretty sure western countries like the US, UK, Germany etc. can not do anything here.
Western countries has nothing to do with it, this is problem of Egypt to solve. Problems in these countries are just bigger as soon as USA jumps to import their democrasy. Also, there are states on the planet, which probably cant live in democracy, some states need firm hand of strong leader/dictator to stay at relative peace. I know how it sounds, but look what happens.
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 16-08-2013 07:01
As said above, we've been through more or less the same things in Europe, 200 to 150 years ago.
Becoming a democracy is a bit like turning 18 (or 21 in some countries). You have to act responsibly, or you're going to have lots of trouble. There's no more strong hand or people taking the responsibility of your acts, so you have to find new limits, your own ones.
If you claim the solution is to remain under age forever, we have a disagreement here.
We have indeed, i dont think you can imply the european rules and history on Egypt or any other muslim countries, it has its own specifics and mentality, completely different to ours. Also our nationalist Europe fights in 19th century was not much connected to religion, which is the big case in Egypt. This is not about nation.
It wasn't that much about religion indeed, although to pick the French example, the kings were supposedly God-given.
Let's see, from early 1789 onwards : royalty, revolution, 1st republic, dictatorship (all that still in the revolution), 2nd republic, empire (Napoleon the first), restoration of the royalty, empire again (Napoleon comes back), republic, empire (Napoleon the third), 3rd republic, occupation by the Germans, 4th republic, 5th republic. And I could add continental federalism along the 5th republic.
And I think I've forgotten another come back of the kings somewhere in the process, and the "Commune" too, which was more or less a communist revolution in the mid-19th century.
All that to point out it's not an easy process between some sort of dictatorship to a running democracy or republic. There are probably more simple and more complex examples in other countries, but it's never simple ans easy.
Now, both sides seem to be to blame in Egypt. They abuse their advantages (first the military with Mubarak, then the Muslim Botherhood, now the military again), instead of looking for a global reconciliation or something like that.
It's a very childish behaviour, which led me to comparing them with an under age person.
They might be mostly Muslim, but they're human beings before anything else, they'll figure it out at some point. The revolutions and counter-revolutions have shown that the people there don't seem too friendly with any sort of extremism.
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
What if she really thinks what she said? Politics does not belong to sport, but nobody was so crazy because of famous black glove (in negative way, apart from some racists ofc ). Is that bad just because you guys does not agree with her? Majority of russians has same oppinion btw, it is different world to ours,to some extent.
But sport is what matters, let judge them according to that.
Hejnova was awesome yesterday, nobody was even close to her.
Sorry in advance for the reducto at hitlerum argument, but Germany 1936 was a different country, with most people agreeing or conveniently ignoring what was done to many minorities, which was completely against human rights (which were only proclaimed in 1948 though).
We respected the host back then, even though I doubt most people here would have thought it was right, if they had an opinion. Look where it led to...
Oh, and btw, we Europeans (as in EU countries) have constitutionally the Bill of Human Rights as the ideal to reach. Live with it.
As you suggest, you cant use Hitler and his time Germany as a valid argument, i find it as discussion foul.
Also nobody is killing millions of people here and Russia is not only country worldwide to not allow gay marriages, last time i looked.
Part i bolded is another discussion foul from you, there is nothing about people of same sex having right to marry or have children in the Bill of Rights as i know it. And as you speak about Europeans, while i would not rate Russia as the european country much for this purpose. The mentality is different to rest of Europe in major part of Russia.
Btw. i have nothing against gay marriages, i just defended athlete that voiced his oppinion and was called a Putins pupet because of that. And this thread should be about athletics.
1) There's quite a lot of similarities between Russia nowadays and Germany 1933-1938.
- A supposedly democratically elected leader (at least I don't think Hitler cheated the elections).
- A repression of minorities and opponents (gipsies, Jews, communists, thinkers, etc. vs agents of foreign countries, political opponents, journalists, gays, etc.).
- That is or would be with the support of a large fraction of the local people (there have been demonstrations in Russia, not sure there were any in Germany)
- Power hungry regime with global ambition (Putin lives to resurrect a Great Russia, needless to draw the well-known picture of Hitler's territorial ambitions)
So, no, it's not especially different, and though they don't park gays (since it's the example we were talking about), there's a severe repression of them in Russia since Putin has come back in charge. They're getting tracked, beaten, etc. and those who do that don't get punished (like the randoms who murder political journalists, it's just bad luck, probably).
2) The reference to the Bill of Human Rights is the following : Isinbayeva has claimed the Russians respect local traditions when they go abroad.
Whatever IAAF official has stated any viewpoint was valid. Our (EU) official viewpoint is that BHR is our ideal.
So, either we become pupet and serve the glory dreams of the local dictators and somehow prove our ideals are less important than our money, either we shouldn't go there at all given the local conditions, wichi would be the most sensitive thing to do. The Americans didn't go to USSR in 1980, which, I believe, was a right thing to do (at least they stood for their convictions).
We shouldn't have gone to China, nor should we been in Russia now or go back in one year.
One could argue that the sport could help bringing democracy in those places, but I'm still to see a valuable example of that.
Selwink wrote:
In my opinion, people should know what happens. Spionage is forbidden by US law. If the state does, it should be known in my opinion. All Snowden has done is revealing an illegal fact, which is not illegal. Therefore he should not be sued or punished by West-European countries, who are this hypocrit as well. Anyway, I think its good we know this, but there shouldnt be too many consequences, to evade more problems or even (violent) revolutions. Just stop spying, then everything is solved for me.
The way I heard it, they can't spy on US citizens (still do in some sense) but delete some data if it can be with certainty said it's about a US citizen (Thou I imagine they keep it if its necessary in their view).
But torture is against US law too. And is also permitted (like I believe anything some high enough guy deems necessary) by Patriot Act.
Aquarius wrote:
Ok, let's leave this out of the Athletics topic :
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
What if she really thinks what she said? Politics does not belong to sport, but nobody was so crazy because of famous black glove (in negative way, apart from some racists ofc ). Is that bad just because you guys does not agree with her? Majority of russians has same oppinion btw, it is different world to ours,to some extent.
But sport is what matters, let judge them according to that.
Hejnova was awesome yesterday, nobody was even close to her.
Sorry in advance for the reducto at hitlerum argument, but Germany 1936 was a different country, with most people agreeing or conveniently ignoring what was done to many minorities, which was completely against human rights (which were only proclaimed in 1948 though).
We respected the host back then, even though I doubt most people here would have thought it was right, if they had an opinion. Look where it led to...
Oh, and btw, we Europeans (as in EU countries) have constitutionally the Bill of Human Rights as the ideal to reach. Live with it.
As you suggest, you cant use Hitler and his time Germany as a valid argument, i find it as discussion foul.
Also nobody is killing millions of people here and Russia is not only country worldwide to not allow gay marriages, last time i looked.
Part i bolded is another discussion foul from you, there is nothing about people of same sex having right to marry or have children in the Bill of Rights as i know it. And as you speak about Europeans, while i would not rate Russia as the european country much for this purpose. The mentality is different to rest of Europe in major part of Russia.
Btw. i have nothing against gay marriages, i just defended athlete that voiced his oppinion and was called a Putins pupet because of that. And this thread should be about athletics.
1) There's quite a lot of similarities between Russia nowadays and Germany 1933-1938.
- A supposedly democratically elected leader (at least I don't think Hitler cheated the elections).
- A repression of minorities and opponents (gipsies, Jews, communists, thinkers, etc. vs agents of foreign countries, political opponents, journalists, gays, etc.).
- That is or would be with the support of a large fraction of the local people (there have been demonstrations in Russia, not sure there were any in Germany)
- Power hungry regime with global ambition (Putin lives to resurrect a Great Russia, needless to draw the well-known picture of Hitler's territorial ambitions)
So, no, it's not especially different, and though they don't park gays (since it's the example we were talking about), there's a severe repression of them in Russia since Putin has come back in charge. They're getting tracked, beaten, etc. and those who do that don't get punished (like the randoms who murder political journalists, it's just bad luck, probably).
2) The reference to the Bill of Human Rights is the following : Isinbayeva has claimed the Russians respect local traditions when they go abroad.
Whatever IAAF official has stated any viewpoint was valid. Our (EU) official viewpoint is that BHR is our ideal.
So, either we become pupet and serve the glory dreams of the local dictators and somehow prove our ideals are less important than our money, either we shouldn't go there at all given the local conditions, wichi would be the most sensitive thing to do. The Americans didn't go to USSR in 1980, which, I believe, was a right thing to do (at least they stood for their convictions).
We shouldn't have gone to China, nor should we been in Russia now or go back in one year.
One could argue that the sport could help bringing democracy in those places, but I'm still to see a valuable example of that.
I think Aquarius is missing an opportunity, which is to challenge the Avin's assertion "there is nothing about people of same sex having right to marry or have children in the Bill of Rights." Chapter 3 article 20 of the European Charter Fundamental Rights of the European Union says simply "Everyone is equal before the law." Article 21 says discrimination shall be prohibited, and sexual orientation is a classification expressly named by this article. Russia's anti-gay laws are fairly ambiguous, allowing discrimination on a broad basis. For the sake of argument, lets narrowly define the scope of Russia's discriminatory laws so that we only consider the issue of marriage. Marriage is a legal status in Russia, governed by the "Family Code." If gays cannot be married, then they don't have access to the status offered under Russian law. Gays are, therefore, unequal before the law, in violation of article 20. This discrimination is on the basis of sexual orientation, in violation of article 21 section 1. I think marriage isn't really the big issue though, sort of the red herring of this argument where we get lost in the argument for national sovereignty. Russia's violation of human rights with these anti-gay laws are much, much more egregious than the evolving issue of gay marriage. Russia's anti-gay laws fly in the face of articles 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 20, 21, 52, 53 and 54. I'm sure there's a case to be made for few more in there.
I'd like to see a boycott. It's probably not going to happen, at which point I'd like to see the athletes take action at the games. Imagine Russia arresting EU or American athletes for carrying pride flags. Even spectators should get in on the action. Imagine how the international community would react to having large numbers of foreign nationals being imprisoned. Then maybe sports federations would learn their lesson.
Returning to Egypt subject, today the Portuguese ambassador on Egypt said that he didn't believed that there could be a civil war, just because the players didn't had the same strength. Muslim Brotherwood doesn't seem to have the military power to confront both Army and Police who are against them. Unless someone armed them like in most of the conflicts on the last decades. But who? None of the big countries in the world seem to be interested on that. Israel have big reasons to dislike them being in control in Egypt. Assad - with a civil war on Syria and with Iran support - welcomed the fall of Muslim Brotherwood.
IMO the difference between a "liberation war" or "acts of terrorism" are only in the fact that you kill (your own) innocent people and destroy your own territory to achieve your goals. And what you can make media and people in general think about you. If this new government in Egypt can't deal peacefully (or at least silently) with the opposition then they take the risk of not being "liberators" who do "what people want" to be "tyrants" that use terror to achieve their goals.
Meanwhile, people are dying and it's hard to answer that, even with the use of military force.
We had a slight misunderstanding there. I am not saying that Russia is place of great democracy or that Putin is not powerhungry sick bastard, i agree with that and i was also speaking a lot with my friends that boycott would be great (as with China, but everybody is in their pocket because of money).
I was just defending an athlete, when she was described as puppet, while you dont know a thing about what she thinks. She can think and say what she wants, it is only a problem for you, because you have different oppinion. No opinion is good or bad, everyone can have one, that is what you say, isnt it?
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 20-08-2013 08:53
). 
