racketboy.com

Pulsar_t wrote:there's the Peace Corps

They tend to mess things up more than fix. Not to mention their apathy to the volunteers who get injured both physically and mentally while tour.

Edit:
I have a quick question for the more knowledgeable members on international relations. Why doesn't Pakistan recognize Armenia as a country? I can still somewhat understand them not recognizing Israel but Armenia doesn't make sense. I don't think recognizing them would strain Paki-Turkey relations too much.

jvalentine98 wrote:Everyone in the world acts like if all your opinions don't make everyone happy then you are a horrible person. Suicide please. There is literally no thought that can please everyone, and if you express a thought, you are bombed for it. And if you get the best job in the world and you "make it" then so what? A hundred years from now you'll just be another rich guy who died a long time ago. Life certainly is depressing

I was just making fun of the obvious fact that you did not read any of the thread, other than the title (which is why you got it so wrong) and that you are an angst-y teenager.

oxymoron wrote:

Pulsar_t wrote:there's the Peace Corps

They tend to mess things up more than fix. Not to mention their apathy to the volunteers who get injured both physically and mentally while tour.

Aw cripes. I haven't really been with any big NGO's, only small local environmental communities.



I can recommend this book that might help you on your way to etch a meaning from this life. There are also a gazillion other options. All you have to do is look.

jvalentine98 wrote: There is literally no thought that can please everyone...

Nonsense.

"Pizza and oral sex".

And if you don't know the meaning of life, you really should start watching more Monty Python. Also the meaning of life is obvious...It's living.


Back on topic, has North Korea stopped being insane or have we just focused on other areas of whackos?

Luke wrote:Back on topic, has North Korea stopped being insane or have we just focused on other areas of whackos?

No, they're still a bunch of whackos. Currently meth, grave robbing, and high heels are all the rage in North Korea.

That said, two Japanese politicians are making extended visits to Pyongyang right now, so maybe relations between the two nations will improve, which will help us out.

This is how civilized countries treat minorities, they give them an opportunity to express democratically and organized their for self determination. Still it seems it's going to be a very close call, which might create more instability in the future (if no wins by just 1% it's hardly a victory that will make the separatists shut up).

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29126386

I'm not sure how I feel about it though. On the one hand I'm never a fan of nationalism, and I do believe countries coming together based on mutual believes and morals (liberal democracies), helps them influence the world more strongly than as separate entities.

But on the other hand, it's obvious the British government only cares about the financial industry in London and nothing else, and I have gotten tired of the British bitching so much about the EU, but then crying over Scotland wanting to leave them.

Anyway if Scotland votes yes, I hope they will be allowed into NATO and the EU as soon as possible, the people of Scotland don't deserve to be left alone for craving their independence.

ZeroAX wrote:Anyway if Scotland votes yes, I hope they will be allowed into NATO and the EU as soon as possible, the people of Scotland don't deserve to be left alone for craving their independence.

If that is what they want. An independent Scotland may not want NATO or EU membership. We'll have to wait and see what collective decisions they make about their international relations if they do separate. Which, considering how much that BBC article makes the pro-Union guys sound like they're panicking, may just be what is about to happen.

I wonder how Adam feels about the possibility of Elizabeth, Queen of Scots.

Would you classify the relationship with Scotland and England similar to a protectorate relationship that we have with Puerto Rico, Guam, or American Samoa? Putting the cultures aside, that the economic relationship is what holds the smaller of the two countries together? I'd have a hard time believing that Puerto Rico would be in the economic state it is without US backing. It's like a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of moment. I was just curious, I don't know much about the economy of Scotland but I can't imagine it's particularly strong.

Nah, it's supposed to be an equal partnership but obviously England, and specifically as Zero alludes to, London's economy is so great it tips the scale. It's no way near as one sided as the nations you've mentioned. Scotland puts in something like 10% to the overall economy I think. As I said in the Smile/Ticked thread, Britain losing Scotland is more analogous with Texas or California seceding from the US.

Scotland could very easily be independent but the question is would it be able to keep the level of service it has now with regards defence, NHS, schools, tuition fees, etc without being part of the greater British economy?

That is basically what Adam and I argue about.

It must be said that what has happened this week shows how absolutely shamelessly arrogant the Tories are with regards this whole thing and how badly the NO campaign has been run. Idiots.

Sload Soap wrote:It must be said that what has happened this week shows how absolutely shamelessly arrogant the Tories are with regards this whole thing and how badly the NO campaign has been run. Idiots.

This I think is the biggest issue. The entire campaign has been focused on negativity. It's like a husband, who isn't abusive, but also isn't romantic/recognizing the value of his his wife and her effort, saying that she's never going to go through with the divorce because life on her own might be more expensive.

Hardly the words that will keep the union together. And I never understood how a country as large as the UK can be so centrally ran. If I understand correctly you guys didn't have directly elected mayors till 2000?

Really this referendum shouldn't be about Scottish independence from the UK, but British independence from London. I can't think of any other country where one city alone influences the government's policies so much.